Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[10ebbor10]

Germany did provoke the US with the zimmerman telegram and the Lusitania sinking. If they didn't want the US to join into the war, they shouldn't have goaded us.

The Lusitania was a legitimate target. It was carrying large supplies of ammunition ( amongst which 90 tons butter and lard destined for the Royal Navy Weapons Testing Establishment in Essex) in deliberate breach of the Cruiser Guidelines.

Hell, there are theories, which I would not as easily dismiss, that the ship was deliberately placed in harms way in order to provoke a Germans submarine attack, as to draw the US into the war. Would explain why it was not diverted from it's course (the subs location was known), why it was not escorted, and some other things.

[Urist McManiac]

Thanks, that mostly explains why the US is so hesitant about military intervention. Although to me it still seems that this time, at least some sort of help is needed to prevent a stalemate along ethno-religious borders.

[misko27]

The militants don't actually have many soldiers mind. I distinctly remember 5000 being said at some point, though I would take that with a grain of salt until I can get actual numbers. But air-strikes are pretty damned helpful, especially given the weapons the militants have captured; and remember that during few day period when it looked like Obama was going to order airstrikes, ISIS was throwing a fit in Syria trying to get all it's stuff underground.

Of course, I think the biggest conditional is the Iraqi government. There army isn't doing so hot (although it seems very likely the troops closer to Baghdad are more loyal. The stories of massive executions of former gov't employees probably helps.), and much of their new strength in recent days has come from Shiite militias (who appear for the most part to be working in tandem with the government). And likely one of the big reasons for the insurgency and the army's failure to stop it is the treatment of Sunnis (most areas captured by the insurgents so far have been Sunni dominated). If Iraq represses them now, it puts pressure on American officials to not help them.

Germany did provoke the US with the zimmerman telegram and the Lusitania sinking. If they didn't want the US to join into the war, they shouldn't have goaded us.

The Lusitania was a legitimate target. It was carrying large supplies of ammunition ( amongst which 90 tons butter and lard destined for the Royal Navy Weapons Testing Establishment in Essex) in deliberate breach of the Cruiser Guidelines.

Hell, there are theories, which I would not as easily dismiss, that the ship was deliberately placed in harms way in order to provoke a Germans submarine attack, as to draw the US into the war. Would explain why it was not diverted from it's course (the subs location was known), why it was not escorted, and some other things.

It wasn't marked as such though. It's like killing random people and finding out they were bad: It doesn't justify the earlier action. It was not a military ship, they were required to warn them before firing.

The Lusitania was not the reason the US intervened though. I mean it pissed Americans off but there was a big two-year gap between that and US intervention. It was the resumption of unrestricted Submarine warfare (and the following sinking of over 5 American merchant ships in rapid succession) and the Zimmerman telegraph at just that moment that finally pushed the public (and Wilson) to intervene.

[10ebbor10]

Yeah, the Iraqi forces vastly outnumbered ISIS, but appeared they're having some serious discipline problems.

Snip

It wasn't marked as such though. It's like killing random people and finding out they were bad: It doesn't justify the earlier action. It was not a military ship, they were required to warn them before firing.

The Lusitania was not the reason the US intervened though. I mean it pissed Americans off but there was a big two-year gap between that and US intervention. It was the resumption of unrestricted Submarine warfare (and the following sinking of over 5 American merchant ships in rapid succession) and the Zimmerman telegraph at just that moment that finally pushed the public (and Wilson) to intervene.

It's not a civilian ship if it's carrying ammunition supplies. Germany had warned the US that they knew the ship was carrying ammunition, had warned them that they would torpedo it, and it turned out they were right.

Besides, the British had been ignoring the Cruiser rules for some time as well.

[Urist McManiac]

Of course, I think the biggest conditional is the Iraqi government. There army isn't doing so hot (although it seems very likely the troops closer to Baghdad are more loyal. The stories of massive executions of former gov't employees probably helps.), and much of their new strength in recent days has come from Shiite militias (who appear for the most part to be working in tandem with the government). And likely one of the big reasons for the insurgency and the army's failure to stop it is the treatment of Sunnis (most areas captured by the insurgents so far have been Sunni dominated). If Iraq represses them now, it puts pressure on American officials to not help them.

I don't think that is very helpful after all. Maliki already alienated the Sunni population of Iraq, and sending Shiite militiamen to combat the militants isn't going to do him a favor either. Even if they can force ISIS to a retreat, it'll only help to deepen the trench between Shia's and Sunni's in Iraq. That's one the reason I'd think a third (neutral) party could be better, even if such an outside intervention brings it's own problems.

[LordSlowpoke]

would you rather have maliki give the guns to sunnis who would probably go ahead and join isis when given a chance?

[XXSockXX]

Mossul was taken by 800 ISIS fighters, while 30000 Iraqi soldiers basically run away. Now many of the deserters might have been Sunnis and it appears that ISIS had the support of the local Baath party- remnants, but still that is very bad.
The troops around Baghdad will probably be a lot more loyal, though I'd question how effective these newly raised Shia militias will be in combat. There are also some Shia commanders returning from Syria, these have experience in guerilla warfare and might make a difference. That might be enough to stop ISIS before Baghdad, but not enough to retake the occupied territories.

[smjjames]

From what I heard, part of the problem of the army running away is that those in the sunni areas didn't want to fight against sunni or something. The whole country is pretty deeply divided, even to the point where the sunni portions of the army don't want to fight against the sunni militants.

Still sad to see the troops that we trained and who outnumber the militants melt away like ice under a heatlamp.

Theres also the question of who replaces Maliki. It will have to be someone who can absolutely be trusted to treat all sides as equals (or at least not alienate them), otherwise it'll just fall into chaos again.

[Loud Whispers]

Still sad to see the troops that we trained and who outnumber the militants melt away like ice under a heatlamp.

Now that the ISIS militants have Iraqi weapons their chances of decisively defeating them are much slimmer, at least without American, British or Iranian help. The current crowd favourite is the 'Bulldozer of Fajulla,' who was firing a 50. DHsK from the shoulder.

Oh yeah, and this happened.
Iraq crisis: Isis jihadists 'seize Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons stockpile'

WWIII HERE WE GO

[10ebbor10]

I thought we'd disposed of that several years ago.

I mean, that was the reason everyone invaded.

Edit: While there appear to be significant quantities of materials still there, but it's usability is unknown.

[LordSlowpoke]

you're saying they'd dispose of a potential casus beili after using it once?

heh

HEH

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Oh yeah, and this happened.
Iraq crisis: Isis jihadists 'seize Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons stockpile'

Repeat after me, mindless floozies: "I am not, nor have I ever been an Iraqi WMD."

[Loud Whispers]

It does beg the question of why if the UN knew of the existence of these weapons, they were not destroyed and were instead tinned and canned for future freshness.

[10ebbor10]

I think they were supposed to be destroyed, but kept there because a secure transport and verification for destruction could not be arranged.

[RedKing]

Oh yeah, and this happened.
Iraq crisis: Isis jihadists 'seize Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons stockpile'

Repeat after me, mindless floozies: "I am not, nor have I ever been an Iraqi WMD."

Apparently five goatherds with an AK are able to do what half a million US troops and the most advanced technology in the world couldn't: Find the WMDs.


On a sidenote, even Fox News is calling BS on Dick Cheney. Although I wouldn't say it qualifies as "grilled". More like "lightly seared, with an aromatic aioli".