Saipul wrote:KabirKuhi wrote:Saipul wrote:There is a video here of the Iraqi army fleeing from Kirkuk:
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/iraqi ... il-n128501One of the craziest things I've seen, whole divisions afraid of at most a few thousand fighters.
But let's be honest. Unstable situations like this have great risk but also some possible reward. The state of Iraq is weakened and preoccupied, which should allow the KRG to continue and increase oil exports. Peshmerga can move south to secure and fortify Kurdish areas, namely Khanaqin and Kurdish areas around Kirkuk (which they are already doing). Just defend Kurdistan, that's all that matters.
Let the dogs fight.
I don't agree with this, this is a selfish ethnocentric attitude. I'm Kurdish, and I'm loyal to kurds and kurdistan foremost, but I cannot stand innocent people being killed by savage retrograde terrorists(Regardless of their ethnicity). These people who are like monstrous devils, this cancer, they need to be eradicated, regardless of our conflicts with baghdad and nouri al maliki. To indiferently watch while they mercilessly massacre people over disputes, is immoral and ethically warped. Besides even if you're not convinced by moral values and principles, do you think kurdistan can take a endless stream of refugees?(They take more refugees from 1 day, than entire syrian war) What do you think will happen to Kurdistan if Iraq collapses and a civil war happens? Why are people acting like it won't affect Kurdistan? If I wasn't in poor health... I'd have volunteered there to fight ISIS. How many feyli kurds and how many kurds in west haven't they killed? How many shiahs, yezidis, christians, blood do they have on their hands? They'll try to come to kurdistan aswell. They'll leave no area in middle-east unscathed. We cannot pretend they'll not come to kurdish areas. They even have kurdish recuits(traitors) in KRG. It must stop here, we cannot close our doors and build walls, and pretend it's not our problem. The problem will come to kurdistan too, whether we want it or not.
I agree entirely. The problem is, how are you going to defeat the ISIS when they have the support of Sunni Arabs?
They are a few thousand at most, we are hundreds of thousands. We need to push them back out of the surrounding areas first(Kirkuk, Ramadi), survey the area quickly, and conduct night raids quickly, before they have get more recuits(like we did in 2005) and fortify their positions(their forces must have stretched thin, even with the freed prisoners and the volunteers they have, they cannot be that many, they won't have had enough time to ). When they retreat to Mosul. You close the city's highways, the river, and surround the areas, fortify and mine it, blockade the entire area, and maintain surveillance. Then you identify the areas where ISIS on ground troops are located and move. You bombard them(heavy artillery and airstrikes) and conduct frequent night-raids on their positions and neighborhoods. Any sympathizers should be picked up and taken away, and interrogated for information of any stragglers. If we already have secured control over kirkuk and khanaqin and most kurdish regions we didn't have before this time(Nouri al maliki can't do anything about that, and he'll be ingratiated to kurds when we remove ISIS, and if we choose to seperate after this. What will he say? He can't say anything). It's really about time we strike back. These ISIS people are experts on urban guerrilla warfare(They'll use IEDs, fortified postions, relay troop movements, move in civilian clothes, communicate via radios, neighbourhood ambushes, move from house to house, use snipers, car bombs, civilian clothed terrorists) but they haven't faced a real effective counter-insurgency, since the americans left.
Shirko wrote:I see your position on this, isis ste nitvjust mujaheddin or jehadis, they are mistly criminals and many brain washed people. But why should Kurds do everyone's dirty work? If ISIS is a big threat then let them deal with it. I say it's te to tighten security broaden terrory am advance to all the disputed areas and make an advance toward Kassab on the coast.
Really it if you look carefully, you will see that some non Sunni elements are actually fueling and aiding ISIS. Like the Strian regime, ISIS saved then in a way. By stealing the jihadi momentum and directing it against Kurds and other Sunni jihadis in Syria.
Because not only is it the moral thing to do. ISIS won't stop with having a sunni state in iraq. Their ideology is expansionist, like al-aqaeda, they're going to make trouble and problems for kurds too. Because kurds do not accept their ideology and are allies of kuffar(israel, US, europe). While ISIS might not attempt a land invasion, like they did in iraq. They can however, support infilitration in kurdistan, and help foster salafist terrorist movements in kurdistan, like ansar al islam that was lead by mullah krekar. Besides they'll disrupt kurdish interest and will make life harder for kurds in the west. Not mentioning how many refugees, who we can't afford to house in kurdistan, that will come from their war with shiahs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullah_KrekarI have no love for maliki or his government. And we have already gotten our strategic goal(Kirkuk is in kurdish hands, khanaqin soon afterwards, as other kurdish regions). What do we have to win by waiting for ISIS to get stronger and consolidate their position? What do we have to gain by making maliki weaker than he already is? He will never get back kirkuk, and khanaqin. He's in no position to do anything, we could declare independence tommorow, and he'd only be able to fart in his presidential chair. I believe that, if we wait a long time, ISIS will become stronger and a threat not just to the baghdad, but also to KRG. It's not about dirty work, it's about pre-emptive strike against scumbags that will be future trouble. Besides if we destroy ISIS in iraq, YPG can expand their territory in Syria.
