Iraq Unravels

[observor 69]

I have no problem with most of the informed analysis in this thread.
But the one thought that keeps going through my mind is to paraphrase ]Trump.
"If it looks like I am going to lose the Presidency I'll start a war." And as reported in the media this morning:
Earlier this week while on his Mara Largo golf course he told Lindsay Graham he would be doing this strike. As usual, he didn't inform the appropriate Congressional leaders. It was an attack directed by Trump.

 

[The Bread Guy]

... "If it looks like I am going to lose the Presidency I'll start a war." ...

Well, if we take POTUS45 at his word, he seems to have believed at one point that this was an approach (more) ...

 

[Jarnhamar]

The CTS did most of the heavy lifting in Mosul - and FedPol most of the oppression and wanton destruction...

Very much believe it about the FedPol. I can't imagine being a civilian in that country having to deal with police like that.

I've only seen the CTS a few times and they were acting as body guards to high ranking officers. Better weapon optics and comms equipment than Canadians. Black styrofoam in their magazine and grenade pouches to make them look high speed for the pictures they were obsessively taking of themselves (and probably lighter?)
Have a feeling these guys weren't in Mosul.

The question the Iranians are going to be asking themselves is who divulged the location and timing information? Publicly they blame US/Israel, but they have to worry if there is a leak from within, a pissed off Iraqi Shi militia or someone high up in the Iraqi government fed up with Iranian influence?

I was under the belief that Iran knows the US has middle East fatigue and knows if they want the US out of the area then they should leave the US alone. Up to and including giving the milita groups in the area a moratorium on bothering the US forces because they realize what the US reaction will be.

Don't get me wrong. I won't be shedding a tear for either Soleimani or al-Muhandis. They definitely had a major role to play in Iran's aggression in the region but to say the attack was justified because of some 600 American deaths is a bit disingenuous

Couldn't agree more. Some estimates put the civilian death toll over a half million souls.

 

[jeffb]

Very much believe it about the FedPol. I can't imagine being a civilian in that country having to deal with police like that.

I've only seen the CTS a few times and they were acting as body guards to high ranking officers. Better weapon optics and comms equipment than Canadians. Black styrofoam in their magazine and grenade pouches to make them look high speed for the pictures they were obsessively taking of themselves (and probably lighter?)
Have a feeling these guys weren't in Mosul.

I can assure you that not only were CTS in Mosul, they did most of the heavy lifting on the ground. Their casualty figures reflect that as well. Won't comment on your experiences with them other than to say that mine were very impressive.

 

[OldSolduer]

I'm glad this SOB is dead. And his 2 I/C too.

Admiral Yamamoto was killed by American fighters in WW 2. By the comments I've seen posted here I'm guessing this is an equivalent of that.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I definitely must have been seeing the B team then. That's actually good to hear.

When I read the The Bear Went Over the Mountain something that stood out was the author talking about how Russian recon soldiers were better trained and equipped so were constantly used to get the job done, which reflected in their casualty figures and burn out. Recon guys would be used for conventional fighting as well.

I wonder if the Iraq CTS share a similar fate.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I'm glad this SOB is dead. And his 2 I/C too.

Admiral Yamamoto was killed by American fighters in WW 2. By the comments I've seen posted here I'm guessing this is an equivalent of that.

Me too Jim.  I also think this sends a very powerful message to others not to mess with American interests in that region.

I was under the belief that Iran knows the US has middle East fatigue and knows if they want the US out of the area then they should leave the US alone. Up to and including giving the milita groups in the area a moratorium on bothering the US forces because they realize what the US reaction will be.

The US will be fatigued with the Middle East when the oil wells run dry, not before.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

If this had happened on Iranian soil I might have given it a second thought....

 

[PPCLI Guy]

If this had happened on Iranian soil I might have given it a second thought....

I don't understand the distinction. 

So it is okay to launch drone strikes on members of the Iraqi military inside Iraq, but it would be wrong to target members of the Iranian military in Iran?

 

[dimsum]

Admiral Yamamoto was killed by American fighters in WW 2. By the comments I've seen posted here I'm guessing this is an equivalent of that.

I'd say it was the same scale (from the power/influence of the now-deceased) but the results may be different.  US and Japan were formally at war for 2 years by then, while this *may* drag the US and Iran into war.  It's not to the scale of Franz Ferdinand (and we all know how that turned out), but I'd say the situation was closer to that.

 

[Good2Golf]

The US will be fatigued with the Middle East when the oil wells run dry, not before.

Not first-order interest in oil, as US Shale 1.0 with 2.0 in solid reserve, makes the direct value of M.E. oil less that it was pre-Shale.  That said, much of the rest of the world still depends on M.E. oil, so there is impact to be assessed and influence to be effected in the next chapter of the unfolding M.E. story.

Not sure it didn’t happen, but I hope the US gave the Iraqi PM a courtesy heads up (minutes/seconds) before the strike actually happened. If not, I can understand why he’d be pissed.

 

[Good2Golf]

If this had happened on Iranian soil I might have given it a second thought....

Al Muhandis makes this different.

 

[dimsum]

Al Muhandis makes this different.

So let me get this straight - the head of the IRGC and this guy are/were allies?  And that's why the IRGC was let into Iraq? 

I understand that alliances shift like the sands there, but Iran and Iraq teaming up was something I didn't think was ideologically compatible with the whole Shia/Sunni thing...

 

[Good2Golf]

So let me get this straight - the head of the IRGC and this guy are/were allies?  And that's why the IRGC was let into Iraq? 

I understand that alliances shift like the sands there, but Iran and Iraq teaming up was something I didn't think was ideologically compatible with the whole Shia/Sunni thing...

There’s a lot we don’t know about this. If it was as you describe above (less that Soleimani was the Quds Commander, a sub-unit of the IRGC, not the IRGC proper), those are questions to ask, but...still, Al Muhandis was an Iraqi Commander.  OTOH, what if he was meeting Soleimani on the Iraqi PM’s direction as an intermediary to work an issue out between two nations interacting diplomatically? It is not apparent what the interaction was going to be. No matter the interaction, Al Muhandis was a highly-ranked Iraqi Commander, so the issue isn’t a clear-cut ‘anyone associated with evil Iranian guy also deserves to die’ situation.

 

[The Bread Guy]

If this had happened on Iranian soil I might have given it a second thought ....

Iran doesn't seem to be making any such distinctions * ...
"(IRGC Deputy) Commander Warns US: Either Escape or Order Coffins for Troops Stationed in ME"

* - Full text also attached in case you don't want to link to IRN's state news agency web site.

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=Dimsum] 

I understand that alliances shift like the sands there, but Iran and Iraq teaming up was something I didn't think was ideologically compatible with the whole Shia/Sunni thing...
[/quote]

US fatigue.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

So let me get this straight - the head of the IRGC and this guy are/were allies?  And that's why the IRGC was let into Iraq? 

I understand that alliances shift like the sands there, but Iran and Iraq teaming up was something I didn't think was ideologically compatible with the whole Shia/Sunni thing...

So yes, Muhandis and Soleimani were Allies.  Has a lot to do with this:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

And, next up, via Iranian media ...More in link, or in attached PDF in case you don't want to link to an IRN news site.

I bet he avoids any high profile trips to Iraq for the time being.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Not first-order interest in oil, as US Shale 1.0 with 2.0 in solid reserve, makes the direct value of M.E. oil less that it was pre-Shale.  That said, much of the rest of the world still depends on M.E. oil, so there is impact to be assessed and influence to be effected in the next chapter of the unfolding M.E. story.

Not sure it didn’t happen, but I hope the US gave the Iraqi PM a courtesy heads up (minutes/seconds) before the strike actually happened. If not, I can understand why he’d be pissed.

Shale is not the panacea it is made out to be.  It's a short-term solution and the United States needs to be ready to set the conditions for future success going forward.

I think this linked article lays out why:

https://www.mei.edu/publications/shale-oil-and-illusion-us-energy-independence

Middle Eastern Oil is still the cheapest game in town.  If anything, US reliance on Shale for Energy independence puts them in bed even more with the Gulf States.

Why?

Because the Gulf States have the ability, through OPEC, to control the price of oil. ARAMCO would be still making money at $15 per barrel, Shale is reliant on prices remaining high IOT be economically feasible. 

 

[Good2Golf]

Shale is not the panacea it is made out to be.  It's a short-term solution and the United States needs to be ready to set the conditions for future success going forward.

I think this linked article lays out why:

https://www.mei.edu/publications/shale-oil-and-illusion-us-energy-independence

Middle Eastern Oil is still the cheapest game in town.  If anything, US reliance on Shale for Energy independence puts them in bed even more with the Gulf States.

Why?

Because the Gulf States have the ability, through OPEC, to control the price of oil. ARAMCO would be still making money at $15 per barrel, Shale is reliant on prices remaining high IOT be economically feasible.

Interesting piece, and good for critical thinking...however...the author seems to pre-judge that the M.E. is the only significant source of medium and heavy crude to round out the light shale. 

If only there were a source of medium/heavy crude that America could influence that was closer than the M.E. and wasn’t an OPEC member easily influenced by the GCC...

I see that her note of “best estimates” of 5-10 years to Peak for US shale went without a reference...

We’ll see how America’s ‘continuing dependency’ on OPEC oil plays out...

Regards
G2G