Iraq. Militants take back Mosul, Tikrit and march on Baghdad

We shall see.
The US is really not adept at keeping the rest of us comfortable that's for sure.
Personally, I think that the US should leave the ME. It's too far away to affect their trade and alternative oil sources can be found. It's closer to Europe, and I'm quite sure they'd love to show the US how it should be done. Leave the buggers to it.
 
Canadian operations in both training Iraqi forces and in anti-IS activities have been formally suspended.
Canada pauses military operations in Iraq amid escalating U.S.-Iran tensions
The chief of the defence staff, Gen. Jonathan Vance, released a letter on Twitter Tuesday that says Canadian operations in both the NATO training mission and the U.S.-led coalition hunting the remnants of the Islamic State, known as Operation Impact, have been suspended. (...)

"The situation in Iraq is complex and it is best to pause our work there in order to fully concentrate our attention and efforts towards the safety and security of our personnel while the situation develops," Vance wrote.
Some non-essential personnel have been moved out of Iraq to Kuwait.
Speaking Monday on CBC's Power and Politics, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said some non-essential personnel had been moved out of Iraq.

Vance's letter confirmed the move and said they will be relocated to Kuwait.
 
The American actions have put a stop to the NATO training of the Iraqi army to take on and defeat IS. Remember them? The reason we have troops back in the Middle East once again?
For all the Chicken Littles out there anxiously wringing their perspiring hands.

Iran is likely to look at US troop movements in the last 48 hrs and decide that discretion might be the best policy.

There has to be some token Iranian action taken, that is a given. It might however be accompanied by the fact that the US, under this President is not going to “make a money shower” like the last one.

It would be a serious ration of sh*t.
 
For all the Chicken Littles out there anxiously wringing their perspiring hands.

Iran is likely to look at US troop movements in the last 48 hrs and decide that discretion might be the best policy.

There has to be some token Iranian action taken, that is a given. It might however be accompanied by the fact that the US, under this President is not going to “make a money shower” like the last one.

It would be a serious ration of sh*t.
In English?
 
Chicken Little syndrome:- Fearmongering – whether justified or not, sometimes eliciting a societal response called Chicken Little syndrome, whch can be decribed as "inferring catastrophic conclusions resulting in paralysis".
AKA Henny Penny for the civilised bit of the English speaking world
 
I wonder if this may have the effect of causing so much turmoil that the various Sunni countries get their cheque books out for more US hardware & training.

There's plenty of top level budget holders that would love to see the Yanks escalate against their biggest enemy.

I'm waiting for Trump's announcement that he's going to bomb Iran. And make Iran pay for the bombs!
 
According to several anonymous sources in the Canadian government, Canada is not happy with the US over their going out and conducing an air strike assassination in Iraq without consulting their allies.
U.S. should have warned Canada of plan to kill Iranian general, say government sources
Canada should have been warned in advance by the Americans of U.S. President Donald Trump's plan to kill a high-ranking Iranian military general with a drone strike, say two senior government sources.

Ottawa also wants a more thorough explanation from the Trump administration of the thinking behind the attack, according to federal government sources with direct knowledge of the situation.
According to one official it's pretty hard to work as part of a coalition if one member keeps going off and doing their own thing without consulting allies.
One source said that it's hard to work as part of a military coalition, like the one pursuing the remnants of ISIS in Iraq, without solid co-operation among members — and with the most powerful partner in that coalition pursuing a path its allies don't fully grasp.
 
According to several anonymous sources in the Canadian government, Canada is not happy with the US over their going out and conducing an air strike assassination in Iraq without consulting their allies.
U.S. should have warned Canada of plan to kill Iranian general, say government sources


According to one official it's pretty hard to work as part of a coalition if one member keeps going off and doing their own thing without consulting allies.
The likes of you and I will probably never know for sure, but has Canada and the other allies considered the fact that there may not have been time to consult with them, that this may have been a window of opportunity attack. By that I mean that by the time everyone who wanted informed was informed the target would probably be long gone.
 
The likes of you and I will probably never know for sure, but has Canada and the other allies considered the fact that there may not have been time to consult with them, that this may have been a window of opportunity attack. By that I mean that by the time everyone who wanted informed was informed the target would probably be long gone.
Leaks like this aren't made without a purpose. A diplomatic message is being sent from Canada to the US about something, and it is going via the medium of a leak in order to make it real without requiring Ottawa to make it official.

I suspect that Ottawa is sending the message to Washington that if the US is planning on kicking off a war with Iran then without consulting us beforehand, then you'll be doing it without our help.
 
Leaks like this aren't made without a purpose. A diplomatic message is being sent from Canada to the US about something, and it is going via the medium of a leak in order to make it real without requiring Ottawa to make it official.

I suspect that Ottawa is sending the message to Washington that if the US is planning on kicking off a war with Iran then without consulting us beforehand, then you'll be doing it without our help.
As I said, there may not have been time to consult any of the allies without losing the target. The truth is the likes of you and I will never know what really happened but what I have suggest may be closer to the truth than we'll ever know.

And lets be honest here, had he had time to consult they'd still be debating it and wringing their hands about it now.
 
I suspect that Ottawa is sending the message to Washington that if the US is planning on kicking off a war with Iran then without consulting us beforehand, then you'll be doing it without our help.
One other thing, If Canada isn't happy about it then say so through their government rather than relying on leaks to do it like a bunch of panty wetting girly men.
 
As I said, there may not have been time to consult any of the allies without losing the target. The truth is the likes of you and I will never know what really happened but what I have suggest may be closer to the truth than we'll ever know.

And lets be honest here, had he had time to consult they'd still be debating it and wringing their hands about it now.
The point I was making is that is likely isn't about this single incident. It's about what's happening with the situation in the Middle East in general.
 
One other thing, If Canada isn't happy about it then say so through their government rather than relying on leaks to do it like a bunch of panty wetting girly men.
The Whitehouse leaks like a sieve, and I'm talking about the non-approved leaks, not the unofficially official leaks. If Ottawa sent a stiff note to the Whitehouse on this subject on official letterhead somebody with an axe to grind inside the US government would leak a copy of it to the US press and the next day the opposition politicians in Washington would be hopping up and down on their hind legs waving the newspaper headlines about how "Trudeau dumps on Trump". Canada has zero interest in getting dragged into the middle of US politics.

By making it an anonymous leak, the message still gets through to the Whitehouse. But if the US press or US opposition politicians try to make political capital out of it, the Canadian government can simply issue a bland denial of ever having said such a thing and the hot air in that balloon rapidly deflates.

This is why this channel is being used. As I said, leaks like this are made for a reason.
 
The point I was making is that is likely isn't about this single incident. It's about what's happening with the situation in the Middle East in general.
Okay so tell me! Apart from this single incident what else is the US doing that's upsetting Canada and other allies?
 
The Whitehouse leaks like a sieve, and I'm talking about the non-approved leaks, not the unofficially official leaks. If Ottawa sent a stiff note to the Whitehouse on this subject on official letterhead somebody with an axe to grind inside the US government would leak a copy of it to the US press and the next day the opposition politicians in Washington would be hopping up and down on their hind legs waving the newspaper headlines about how "Trudeau dumps on Trump". Canada has zero interest in getting dragged into the middle of US politics.

By making it an anonymous leak, the message still gets through to the Whitehouse. But if the US press or US opposition politicians try to make political capital out of it, the Canadian government can simply issue a bland denial of ever having said such a thing and the hot air in that balloon rapidly deflates.

This is why this channel is being used. As I said, leaks like this are made for a reason.
Terminal, a leak is a leak no matter what kind of leak it is mate and I think we we both know it's going to get out. Even if say Canada were to deny ever saying anything, we both know the opposition party and media is going to try and make capital out of it anyway, that's politics, it's never stopped them before.

Especially when it comes to Trump, the last three years have shown that. If Canada has zero interest in being dragged into US politics then best say nothing or, man up and take the heat that comes with offering any opinions. Canada can't have it both ways.

If Canada isn't happy and has something to say then say it and never mind the under the table politics that will sure as hell get leaked out regardless. The problem with politics these days is that there isn't enough straight talking being done.
 
The Whitehouse leaks like a sieve, and I'm talking about the non-approved leaks, not the unofficially official leaks. If Ottawa sent a stiff note to the Whitehouse on this subject on official letterhead somebody with an axe to grind inside the US government would leak a copy of it to the US press and the next day the opposition politicians in Washington would be hopping up and down on their hind legs waving the newspaper headlines about how "Trudeau dumps on Trump". Canada has zero interest in getting dragged into the middle of US politics.

By making it an anonymous leak, the message still gets through to the Whitehouse. But if the US press or US opposition politicians try to make political capital out of it, the Canadian government can simply issue a bland denial of ever having said such a thing and the hot air in that balloon rapidly deflates.

This is why this channel is being used. As I said, leaks like this are made for a reason.
Washington regards Canada as a puppet state and on some points it is not far from the truth. Why should the Master inform the Puppet?
 
Okay so tell me! Apart from this single incident what else is the US doing that's upsetting Canada and other allies?
Funny you should ask that question.
Why Trump's call for an expanded NATO presence in the Middle East will be a hard sell

Long story short, the US is currently drafting proposals for their plans on how the US is going to pull troops out of the Middle East but have them replaced by troops from the rest of NATO. Trump wants something he calls NATOME - "NATO in the Middle East". This apparently involves the US pulling out and leaving the rest of NATO holding the bag with the US coming back unannounced and at random to bomb the place regardless of anyone's plans.

Meanwhile the US has been doing everything possible to sabotage European policy in the region while apparently being puzzled that those same Europeans aren't enthused about what the US is doing.

The rest of NATO is apparently baffled by the idea that Trump want NATO to play a bigger role (there's already NATO troops there, including some from Canada) in a country which the US originally destabilized through invasion in 2003, in the middle of a new crisis which the US had just created by assassinating Soleimani. In other words, you break it, you clean it up.
A defence expert suggested some alliance countries might be baffled by the notion that Trump now wants NATO to play a larger role in a country originally destabilized by the U.S. invasion in 2003 — and in the midst of a fresh crisis inflamed by his decision to kill Soleimani.

Canada has a few issues with that. One is that any assistance to the US will depend on the US sticking around and not bugging out on everyone else.
A NATO team has been meeting at the U.S. State Department in recent days to draft proposals on what an expanded alliance presence in the Middle East would like.

But Canada's foreign affairs minister says NATO's acceptance of a redefined mission could depend upon how willing the Americans are to stick around — particularly in Iraq.
So Canada is waiting for what comes out of a NATO meeting in Washington before staking out a position. This by the way is why unofficial official leaks are being made, it allows Canada to state an initial position while not being committed to it before we know what is going to get proposed at the meeting.
Trump mused earlier this week that it's time for NATO to take a bigger role in the region beyond the military training mission in Baghdad, currently suspended.

(...) Foreign Affairs Minister François-Philippe Champagne said the Liberal government is waiting for the results of NATO deliberations in Washington before staking out a position.

He noted, however, that an American withdrawal from Iraq — or even a wider U.S. effort to step back from the region — would make an expanded NATO mission and the resumption of the current training mission difficult.
It's not likely there will be any consensus on this, as there's not a lot of enthusiasm for "cleaning up Trump's messes".
"I find hard to believe that a lot of [allied] governments will be able to get enough people on board to agree to do these things," Saideman said, noting that most NATO members require parliamentary votes before deploying troops.

"It's not even just about a matter of cleaning up Trump's messes, and that we've been through this movie before. I just don't think it's very likely to get consensus."
That's especially true as the Iraqi parliament have just passed a resolution demanding the government kick the US out of Iraq altogether, leaving open the question of how the US expects to implement it's new grand plans in the Middle East.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top