Islamic state offensive taking over Ramadi
- Thread starter dangull
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
glasfryn
cleaning up cat sick
pictures of Iraqi soldiers running off and leaving the city
so all that training we paid for done a lot of good then
so all that training we paid for done a lot of good then
Pogue Mahone
Well-known member
- Apr 30, 2011
- 10,950
Terrifying to think what may be happening there, right now.
RexCathedra
Aurea Mediocritas
OTOH, ISIS were just run out of Palmyra, Syria.
Swings, roundabouts.
Swings, roundabouts.
sydney
tinky ****in winky
absolutely......a waste of ferking billions......all down the tubes now....ffs cameron
OzMike
Well-known member
They have no military history and the 'stand and fight' discipline will not exist.
So it's everyman for himself.
fat old seagull
New member
Well yes and no...they are probably fitter now, so consequently they would have run quicker.
Blue Valkyrie
Not seen such Bravery!
They ran out of ammo didn't they ?
Not surprising they ran off, as they'd just be executed. They'll re-arm and re-take the city I imagine.
daveinprague
New member
I cant imagine that. The only way they would succeed is with Shia militia, and placing them in the capital of Anbar province is not a good or likely scenario i would have thought.
symyjym
Banned
IS's military hierarchy are primarily made up of the old regimes generals and soldiers. The Iraqi army on the other hand are Shia who have just been given uniforms.
Insel affe
HellBilly
Think you might want to blame Blair & Bush before you take a swing at Cameron.
daveinprague
New member
Cant see this ending well.. :-( Anbar is predominantly Sunni, so it will have some edge to it.
GreersElbow
New member
Perhaps they're concentrating on taking Iraq before pushing onto Syria. It makes more logistical sense than to spread that thinly. They've not made huge gains in Syria because they're fighting Assad and other rebel groups.
daveinprague
New member
...and by all accounts, the Iraqi army is an easier proposition.
sydney
tinky ****in winky
No doubt Blair and Bush started the shit fight but Cameron could have withdrawn troops at any time over the last four years......billions of pounds down the crapper.. History shows that the middle east has been at war for thousands of years , the good old U.S of A thought that with a little help from it's allies it could bounce into the region and put it all to rest........most Americans would still put Mosul in the Middle of Algeria if you gave them a blank map.......the fact that Blair was dragged along quite happily with the yanks was a bad error of judgement.......the fact Cameron has not severed the ties is equally bad judgement.........this brings us to the debate of wether we let them " wipe each other out" or intervene at enormous cost , both monetary and culturally......only imho of course old chap.....!
Insel affe
HellBilly
I think Cameron was tied in with commitments that the Blair government had agreed with the Americans, so in many ways the dice had been thrown and his hands have been tied. Why just mention Cameron anyway Clegg was in a position of power aswell. Just a bit more Tory bashing with no foundation. Only in my honest opinion which counts for nothing like yours old chap.
sydney
tinky ****in winky
hardly think a "ffs cameron" amounts to tory bashing old bean....intervention in the middle east has been a cluster**** from start to eventual finish.......it will only be the intervention that finishes , not the permanent state of impending hostility between the clans.
symyjym
Banned
So you want us to send our lads into Iraq and become sitting ducks?
daveinprague
New member
Sending our lads started this shit in the first place didnt it?