Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

IRAQ - Four Years On

Jump to new
George Bush should have finished the job in 2003.

TRUMPETING their victory, Islamic militants have decreed to residents of the Iraqi cities where they have seized control that their brutal Sharia law now applies.
The militants have vowed to continue their march towards Baghdad, and they are being joined by Saddam Hussein loyalists determined to settle old scores.
The Islamic State issued a statement in which it declared it would start implementing its strict version of Sharia law in Mosul and other regions it had overrun. It said women should stay in their homes for modesty reasons, warned it would cut off the hands of thieves, and told residents to attend daily prayers. It said Sunnis in the military and police should abandon their posts and “repent’’ or else “face only death.’’
Iraq’s government appears paralysed with inaction as its US-trained and equipped forces simply melt away head of the advancing militants.
Ethnic minority Kurdish forces have moved into this power vacuum, taking over an air base and other posts abandoned by the military in the ethnically mixed city of Kirkuk. They insist the move was in preparation to defend the region from advancing Islamic extremists.
Click to expand...

http://www.news.com.au/world/middle...ake-baghdad-next/story-fnh81ifq-1226952601574
 
It looks like America will get involved again in this mess. As long as oil is present in the Middle East, this is going to happen over and over.
 
I predicted this would happen when George Bush declared war.
Did we have a terrorist problem with Iraq before this? No.

From right wing commentator Mish today.


Iraq Before and After Bush's Nation Building Effort

Before: Iraq was a functioning country.
After: Iraq is in ruins, much of its infrastructure wiped out

Before: Iraq pumped oil
After: Iraq doesn't and we have paid for that at the pump ever since

Before: Iraq was ruled by a secular leader
After: The US installed a Shiite puppet while verbally fighting Shiites in Iran

Before: Religious freedom was the norm. Catholics, Sunnis, Shiites all got along, not perfectly but acceptably
After: People are killed every day for their religious beliefs. Catholics are persecuted.

Before: Women had relative freedom
After: Women are likely to be shot in some cities if they do not cover their faces

Before: Al Qaeda was not in Iraq. Hussein wanted nothing to do with religious zealots.
After. Al Qaeda is in control of several cities

Before: Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.
After: Quite possibly they exist in Iraq now.

Before: Iraq military was in control.
After: Iraq in open civil war, splintered into several pieces, each controlled by a different faction

Before: Iraq was no terrorist threat.
After: It sure is now.

Before: US has no embassy in Iraq.
After: US's largest embassy in the world is in Iraq
Read more at http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/#dchiKoSCvCEBHYZx.99
 
Yes,the US does not seem to anticipate the ongoing results of their invasions.Obama bragged how he was responsible for the fall of Gadaffi.Apart from the ongoing violence and unrest in Libya,the African mercenaries that Gadaffi had in his army took off with arms and are causing unrest as far as Northern Nigeria-through Mali Niger and Chad.They had useful employment with Gadaffi and now many are unemployed and radicalised.They probably have a singular bad impression of the west and their hypocrisy.They are more than a match for the local troops, as we have seen in northern Nigeria.
 
I can't believe that both Tony Abbott and Bill Shorten are refusing to rule out Australia participating in further involvement in Iraq.:(
Never thought I'd support the Greens, but I do on this.
 
Iraq Before and After Bush's Nation Building Effort

Before: Iraq was a functioning country.
After: Iraq is in ruins, much of its infrastructure wiped out

Before: Iraq pumped oil
After: Iraq doesn't and we have paid for that at the pump ever since

Before: Iraq was ruled by a secular leader
After: The US installed a Shiite puppet while verbally fighting Shiites in Iran

Before: Religious freedom was the norm. Catholics, Sunnis, Shiites all got along, not perfectly but acceptably
After: People are killed every day for their religious beliefs. Catholics are persecuted.

Before: Women had relative freedom
After: Women are likely to be shot in some cities if they do not cover their faces

Before: Al Qaeda was not in Iraq. Hussein wanted nothing to do with religious zealots.
After. Al Qaeda is in control of several cities

Before: Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.
After: Quite possibly they exist in Iraq now.

Before: Iraq military was in control.
After: Iraq in open civil war, splintered into several pieces, each controlled by a different faction

Before: Iraq was no terrorist threat.
After: It sure is now.

Before: US has no embassy in Iraq.
After: US's largest embassy in the world is in Iraq
Read more at http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogsp...oSCvCEBHYZx.99
Click to expand...

Before: Saddam Hussein gassed 10,000's Kurds and committed countless other atrocities
After : Knobby and others conveniently forget about this

It looks like America will get involved again in this mess. As long as oil is present in the Middle East, this is going to happen over and over.
Click to expand...
This argument is becoming rapidly outdated as USA will be energy independent in the near future.

I can't believe that both Tony Abbott and Bill Shorten are refusing to rule out Australia participating in further involvement in Iraq.
Never thought I'd support the Greens, but I do on this.
Click to expand...
With the continual degradation of our defence capabilities we are more reliant than ever on USA. I would look at it more from a pragmatic perspective.
 
waza1960 said:
Before: Saddam Hussein gassed 10,000's Kurds and committed countless other atrocities
After : Knobby and others conveniently forget about this


This argument is becoming rapidly outdated as USA will be energy independent in the near future.


With the continual degradation of our defence capabilities we are more reliant than ever on USA. I would look at it more from a pragmatic perspective.
Click to expand...

The USA will likely NEVER be energy independent unless it's able to massively reduce it oil and gas use. Bloomberg (IRC) did a recent look at oil shale companies in the USA and found that over the last 4 years for ~60 companies debt had increased by 100% and profits by 5%. I'd love to see you spin how that is a path to energy independence when quite likely the majority of those companies wont be around in another 4 years.

The fact is the second Iraq war shouldn't have happened. If the resources and commitment had been continued in Afghanistan for a few more years, we'd be looking at a very different situation compared to what is now a devolving middle east towards secular violence and outright extremist Governments publicly supporting terrorist organisations within their borders, with the petro dollars to ably support it. Instead we had a war that couldn't be won thrust upon us based on lies and evidence that never existed.

Even when millions marched against sending Aussie troops Howard felt he knew better. That decision definitely deserved a royal commission into who knew what and when and what the intelligence reports were actually saying.

Estimates are the USA has paid around $2T for their middle east wars. I wonder what kind of oil free tech that kind of R&D funding could have achieved? The interest bill another $260B and counting. When you add in the long term care for wounded soldiers, and more and more are surviving due to body armour, estimates are the end cost will be $6T.

Australia has spent over $5B on the Iraq war, and that doesn't factor in the long term cost of lives destroyed for returning soldiers who have seen things no one should see. That's what makes me most angry. The lack of understanding that even if you don't have deaths, lives are forever changed. I remember my great grand father and the look on his face on the few times I asked about the great wars. 40+ years later and still the dark memories can haunt.

Maybe all those politicians who vote to send our troops over should contribute their first born to the effort, or go themselves if that's not an option. Might help to bring clarity to their decision making.

Hopefully even dubya has realised mission accomplished never happened.
 
waza1960 said:
Before: Saddam Hussein gassed 10,000's Kurds and committed countless other atrocities
After : Knobby and others conveniently forget about this
Click to expand...

Err...I don't think anyone disagrees that Saddam was a monster, but if Iraq war was carried out to protect the West from "rogue states" and WMD's, then we were far safer with Saddam than without him...

Saddam gassed those Kurds in 1988. The allies could have marched into Baghdad unopposed in 1991, but they didn't. No one cared about the Kurds then, and no one did in 2003.

Australia should keep its nose out of anything to do with the Middle East.
 
McLovin said:
Err...I don't think anyone disagrees that Saddam was a monster, but if Iraq war was carried out to protect the West from "rogue states" and WMD's, then we were far safer with Saddam than without him...

Saddam gassed those Kurds in 1988. The allies could have marched into Baghdad unopposed in 1991, but they didn't. No one cared about the Kurds then, and no one did in 2003.

Australia should keep its nose out of anything to do with the Middle East.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

Since the US invasion 500,000 people have died in Iraq.

Sure Saddam led with an iron fist and slaughtered 10,000. Cheap (with respect) compared to the Bush supported by Howard result.

George Bush senior did deals with and worked with the former regime. It was only when Iraq began trading away from the US petro dollar did they come down on them.

And in fact the alleged culprits for the 7/11 bombing had nothing to do with Iraq. But having supported that group recently in Cyria we find they are the main thrust behind the new threats in Iraq. And so one could go on to show just how money hungry and corrupt the whole US western alliance now is.
 
sydboy007 said:
Australia has spent over $5B on the Iraq war, and that doesn't factor in the long term cost of lives destroyed for returning soldiers who have seen things no one should see. That's what makes me most angry. The lack of understanding that even if you don't have deaths, lives are forever changed. I remember my great grand father and the look on his face on the few times I asked about the great wars. 40+ years later and still the dark memories can haunt.
Click to expand...

Hotefully the Australian Islamist volunteers fighting for the ISIS terrorists in Syria and now in Iraq will return home without these dark memories. Militant Islamists seem to be immune from PTSD. That's how they can enjoy this type of activity;

The UN says hundreds have been killed - with militants carrying out summary executions of civilians in Mosul, including 17 civilians in one street.
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27828595

You can rest assured that neither Abbott (nor Obama) would be silly enough to commit any ground forces to Iraq. What's done cannot be undone. America's decision to intervene on the wrong sides in Iraq and Syria is now reaching its inevitable conclusion.
 
explod said:
Since the US invasion 500,000 people have died in Iraq.

Sure Saddam led with an iron fist and slaughtered 10,000. Cheap (with respect) compared to the Bush supported by Howard result.
Click to expand...

You surely don't think saddam only slaughtered 10,000 people? You're forgetting the half a million iraq's who died during saddams invasion of iran in the 80's. You're forgetting the 100,000 kurds he wiped out with chemical weapons. You're magically leaving out the the 600,000 public executions of civilians. It is estimated during his time an average of 75 people where killed daily.

America's invasion of iraq was in my opinion ill planned and a lot of people needlessly where killed. However, of that 500,000 that where killed during the war, how many of them where iraqies killing iraqies. That doesn't excuse america, but let's put things in perspective before blindly blaming the yanks for all things wrong in the gulf states.
 
Australia should keep its nose out of anything to do with the Middle East.
Click to expand...

Also agree. We should also not change "terminology" that upsets others.

Waza,

This argument is becoming rapidly outdated as USA will be energy independent in the near future.
Click to expand...

This is the second time in the last few days that I have read this on this forum. It will eventually happen, but not for the reasons people think.

Currently the US imports over 7m bbls/day. Of their recent increase in production, they count 1.3m bbls/day refinery gain as their own increase in production. This refinery gain is mostly happening from the imported crude that has become 'heavier' over recent years (because light crude, the good stuff, is becoming scarcer). Also the "tight oil" phenomena of recent years is likely to slow down much earlier than expected as these wells have rapid depletion rates.
 
McLovin said:
Australia should keep its nose out of anything to do with the Middle East.
Click to expand...

+101

If Islamis want to kill Islamis that's none of our business. Every time the West intervenes in the Middle East or Afghanistan we end up pulling out and leaving the situation worse than when we went in; the same applied in Vietnam.

Factional Islami wars have been going on for centuries like tribal wars in Africa. Of course they kill millions, but Europeans and Americans have been been killing each other off in scores of millions, over the centuries.

Thankfully cliches like; "Today we are standing shoulder to shoulder against terrorism," are just meaningless jargon.
 
waza1960 said:
This argument is becoming rapidly outdated as USA will be energy independent in the near future.
Click to expand...
Not from domestic production they won't, at least not based on their own official forecasts. At least not without a huge drop in consumption.

I seriously doubt that we'd be having anywhere near as much trouble in the ME if it wasn't for oil. The sooner we get off this addiction, and an addiction is exactly what it is, the better off we'll all be.

I can't see it happening until forced however, the question being when that occurs? I mean seriously, does anyone really expect that there isn't going to be a major disruption to oil supply coming out of the ME at some point? It's only a matter of time, then things will get really interesting real quick and not in a good way. :2twocents
 
waza1960 said:
Before: Saddam Hussein gassed 10,000's Kurds and committed countless other atrocities
After : Knobby and others conveniently forget about this


This argument is becoming rapidly outdated as USA will be energy independent in the near future.


With the continual degradation of our defence capabilities we are more reliant than ever on USA. I would look at it more from a pragmatic perspective.
Click to expand...

Shale oil is not going to have any meaningful impact. The U.S consumes about 18.89 million barrels everyday. The U.S will produce (hopefully) 9 million barrels in 2015. About 9 million barrels are still going to be imported from the rest of the world.

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=16591

The U.S is never going to be truly energy independent. Shale oil or tight oil is not going to flood the world as the oil industry would like people to believe. It has high decline rates and lots of capital required. Other than the oil servicing companies (Baker Hughes, Halliburton), nobody is making money.


I would like to add that there is a huge difference between shale and tight oil. Tight oil is what most are referring to and this is not a new source of oil.

Shale oil is actually kerogen which is heated to 500 C for it to be converted to synthetic crude. It's too energy intensive and this found in dry states like Colorado.


From Bloomberg:

The output of shale wells drops faster, too, falling by 60 to 70 percent in the first year alone, according to Austin, Texas-based Drillinginfo Inc. Traditional wells take two years to fall by about 55 percent before flattening out. That forces companies to keep drilling new wells to make up for lost productivity.

“You keep having to drill more and you keep having to spend more,” said Mark Young, an analyst with London-based Evaluate Energy, which tracks production and its costs.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...l-independence-slams-against-shale-costs.html
 
brty said:
Also agree. We should also not change "terminology" that upsets others.
Click to expand...

Yeah absolutely. I'm not even sure why the AG is wasting time on things like how to refer to East Jerusalem. Aren't there more important things than worrying about the nomenclature of troubled areas in the Levant?
 
ABOUT 150 Australians are, or have been, fighting with Arab insurgents in Syria and Iraq and pose a security threat if they return home, says Julie Bishop.

The Foreign Minister’s warning came amid evidence convicted terrorist Khaled Sharrouf, who fled Australia earlier this year, has joined the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham’s uprising in northern Iraq
Click to expand...
.

I would have thought that's an easy one to fix...just cancell their passports. If they are allowed back, that makes Border Protection a farce.
 
Australia now has more combatants in Syria and Iraq than we have in Afghanistan. The problem is that they are all Jihardist terrorists.

The last combat troops were withdrawn on 15 December 2013; however, approximately 400 personnel remain in Afghanistan as trainers and advisers, and are stationed in Kandahar and Kabul
Click to expand...
(Wikipedia)

As we have seen in Iraq local Defence Force troops trained by Americans and Australians were a complete failure. At the first sight of the ISIS Jihardists three divisions of these gutless wonders threw down their weapons, stripped off their uniforms and scarpered, leaving behind a huge arsenal of American equipment for the invaders, and the road open to Baghdad.

It's just a waste of time training locals for defence when their hearts are not in it and their governments are corrupt. We saw the same thing in Vietnam.
 
Top