Al Jazeera: Iraqi forces battle ISIL for control near Ramadi
ISIL launches suicide attacks as Iraqi troops and allied forces prepare for drawn-out operation in Anbar province.
Iraqi government forces backed by thousands of Shia militias have been sent to the Sunni heartland of Anbar province in a bid to counter the offensive by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) group.
Kareem al-Nouri, a spokesman for the Popular Mobilisation Forces, an umbrella organisation of Shia militiamen, told Al Jazeera it was "hard to predict the timetable" for the battle.
WNU Editor: I have zero confidence that a few thousand irregular Shiite militia fighters will be successful in this "new offensive". The Daily Mail has posted some graphic photos and videos on how bloody some of the battles were for Ramadi, and the defeat of the Iraqi soldiers who decided to stay put and fight .... The bloody battle for Ramadi: Shocking footage shows violent clashes between ISIS and Iraqi forces in corpse-strewn streets of destroyed historic city (Daily Mail).
More News On the Battle For Ramadi
Iraqis launch counterattack against ISIS near Ramadi -- CNN
Shi'ite militias advance on Islamic State insurgents near Iraq's Ramadi -- Reuters
Iraq claws back land from IS near Ramadi -- AFP
Shiite militia, Iraqi army launch counteroffensive at Ramadi -- Washington Post
Iraq militias start fightback against IS in Ramadi -- BBC
Iraq fires back to take land from IS near Ramadi -- News.com.au
ISIS fighters close in on Baghdad after breaching Iraqi defences outside Ramadi -- Daily Mail
5 comments:
At least they have the guts to fight
WNU Editor,
The "narratives" are all over the map.
The Iraqi's ran, it was a strategic withdrawl, the Iraqi's fought, Ramidi isn't strategic, Ramidi is strategic.
Daniel Lazare has some points about why the "narratives" are so "conflicted,
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/05/23/why-islamic-state-is-winning/
So does Gareth Porter,
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/05/23/obama-winks-at-terrorist-gains/
Thank you for the links Jay. Gareth Porter's analysis is interesting, and one that I am in agreement with. As for Daniel Lazare's post .... the neocons have been so discredited in Washington that I sincerely doubt that even President Obama is listening to them even as a last alternative. Rather .... it is within his own tight circle of advisers and associates where he leans on for support and recommendations .... and their priority is to do everything that is necessary to NOT have U.S. combat forces on the ground .... hence the confusing narrative from the White House because everything is being done on the fly to not have that outcome (US ground forces fighting in places like Ramadi or even in Syria itself).
WNU Editor,
Nuland still has her job.
https://news.vice.com/article/why-president-obama-is-a-neocon
Just like with his neo-liberal stance on TPP, Digby snarked that you can take the President out of The Chicago School, but you cant take the Chicago School out of the President.
Both Neo- Con and Neo-Lib are belief systems long disproven by fact, they are not "policies", they are religions.
That's it Jay .... throw Nuland into the mix to get my blood pressure up. But yes .... on some issues it is amazing how our leaders shift their policies and beliefs to push something that we thought they would never support. Case in point .... I never thought that this White House would push TPP. As to all the wars and conflicts that the U.S. is now finding itself in .... during the Bush neo-com era I could count all the conflicts that the U.S. was involved in .... today .... I have no idea. And when I look at how everything has accelerated in the past two years .... we are truly entering a dangerous phase in world history.
Post a Comment