Cyprus-Forum.com

[kurupetos]

you seem to do alright out of it reh pushdui.

In your case it doesn't matter.

[Tim Drayton]

The Iraqi army, supported by Shia fighters, is laying "full siege" to the city of Tikrit where Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) group fighters are now surrounded, according to Iraq's defence minister.

The Iraqi military - backed by at least 20,000 Shia fighters - has been fighting to regain control of Saddam Hussein's hometown of Tikrit, one of several predominantly Sunni towns to fall to ISIL last year.

Operations to recapture Tikrit have been on hold for nearly a week, with Khaled al-Obeidi, the Iraqi defence minister, saying the army was trying to minimise casualties by not rushing the final assault.

"When we see that the time is right for the Tikrit alliance, we will storm in as quickly as possible," he said.

"Tikrit is under full siege. We are taking caution to not take any losses and to protect civilians in the city.

"The terrorists are surrounded inside the city and their morale is low. When the right moment comes, we will storm the city without any resistance or losses."

The Tikrit siege is one of the first major operations in which the US-led coalition is not taking part, with US officials saying they were not asked to participate.

Possible divide

Against the backdrop of the Tikrit siege, the head of a Shia armed group has criticised the Iraqi army, saying it has asked for coalition air strikes to help retake the city.

Hadi al-Ameri's remarks on Sunday pointed to a possible divide between the Iraqi army and Shia units, most of which are made up of fighters.
While the US has been working to train Iraqi military brigades, it has not worked with the Shia groups, since doing so would bring them uncomfortably close to Iran, which offers significant assistance to the groups.

John Brennan, CIA director, said having the leader of Iran's elite Quds Force direct Iraqi forces against ISIL is complicating the US mission.
In an interview with Fox News Sunday, Brennan described General Qassem Soleimani as being "very aggressive and active" in advising the Shia militias, adding that he "wouldn't consider Iran an ally right now inside Iraq".

Iranian advisers have played a prominent role on the front lines of Iraq's Salahuddin province.

If Iraqi forces are unable to push ISIL back and recover lost territory, US President Barack Obama would be faced with a choice of accepting failure in Iraq or committing US combat troops - something both US and Iraqi officials have spoken firmly against.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/03/i ... 36551.html

[Get Real!]

So have you beaten the 30,000 odd rag-tag “bad guys” yet?

[Tim Drayton]

A US general says Iranian-backed Shia militias in Iraq are no longer leading the operation to recapture Tikrit from Islamic State (IS) militants.

Gen Lloyd Austin, head of US Central Command, said the pullback was a precondition for US-led air strikes, which began on Wednesday night.
Iraqi forces then launched a final push to drive IS from the city.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-32074224

An interesting development. The consequences of this being seen as a Shia/Iranian victory could be disastrous in the context of wider events in the region, where there are essentially various proxy battles going on between Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran. If the US appears to be siding with the latter, they could end up alienating the Sunni block.

[Lordo]

these are just empty words by the americans. fact is iran has a force in iraq which is controlled by them. unless they are withdrawn lock stock and barrel from iraq, there is no escape. in trying to control iraq americans managed to hand it over to iran.

[Tim Drayton]

I am not sure if I would like to go out on a limb and predict how this will end. Iran is looking in a stronger position now, but there is also a powerful block of Sunni states, some oil-rich, and they are not going to stand by and watch Iran take over the Levant and Arabian Peninsula.I would look out for Bahrain as the next flash point, though - a country with a majority Shia population, quite a lot of them unemployed, but ruled by Sunnis.

[Lordo]

typical of that part of the world and american order. about time the middle east people were given their human rights and the yanks went home. it is the only way.

[Tim Drayton]

Why the Conflicts in Tikrit and Yemen Signal a New Middle Eastern War

BEIRUT -- With the Iranian involvement against the Islamic State in the assault on Tikrit, and the Saudi invasion of Yemen to stem the tide of Iranian influence, we have entered a new Middle Eastern war.

Tikrit has become something of an augury and symbol of ISIS' prospective fate. The suggestion in much of the commentaries is that the Iranian-directed offensive in Tikrit has stalled. Indeed one can detect a certain pleasurable rubbing of hands at the very prospect of an Iranian setback.

"If this leads to the Iranians forced to concede defeat, that would be a satisfactory outcome," one U.S. defense official told the The Daily Beast. An ISIS victory, then, is "satisfactory" to the U.S.?

In fact, the city of Tikrit, Saddam Hussein's hometown, is surrounded. What is stalling its fall is a dispute between the Iraqi army and Iranian military advisers. It is an issue of tactics. ISIS has rigged the town with explosive booby traps, mines, tripwires and left behind snipers and suicide volunteers. To clear Tikrit of such obstacles is a laborious process. The Iraqi army wants to do it the American way: call in air support and bomb ISIS forces. The Iranian side argues that this will just produce another Fallujah and leave Tikrit's Sunni inhabitants seething with resentment at their destroyed city. The Iranians propose -- based on four years learning from the experience of Syria's fight against jihadi forces -- to mount a siege; to wait, to be patient and then clear Tikrit, street by street. This approach, however, will be more costly in terms of their own casualties -- though undoubtedly will help save ordinary Tikriti lives. As of now, it seems the easier way has been chosen by the Iraqi government.

"If Tikrit was the precursor, then the fall of Aden was the trigger."

Tikrit, and the Iranian involvement in the war on ISIS (now with U.S. air support, ostensibly provided to Iraqi forces) is directly linked to the Saudi-led coalition attacks on the Houthis (Ansar Allah) in Yemen. Saudi Arabia's leadership was already in a state of great alarm at Iran's growing influence -- occasioned by its boots-on-the-ground approach to fighting ISIS in Iraq and Syria -- when the Houthi forces unexpectedly overran Aden in South Yemen, to which ousted President Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi (supported by the Gulf states) had just fled, and named as his "temporary seat of power." Jon Alterman, a former senior U.S. State Department official, has noted that "there is a growing consensus [in the Kingdom and amongst its allies] that this [the Houthi takeover] is the finger of Iran and it needs to be put down decisively."

If Tikrit was the precursor, then the fall of Aden was the trigger.

"The Saudi default position on Yemen," Simon Henderson of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy writes, "can be best described as paranoia." And thus we have a new Middle Eastern war -- one which will complicate the region greatly.

On the one hand, the Gulf states are muttering about withdrawing from the coalition fighting ISIS (owing to Iran's prominence), and Saudi Arabia may be expected, Henderson speculates with regard to Yemen, to deploy "the full Saudi diplomatic toolbox -- money, arms supplies and perhaps even a blind eye to actions that would be described anywhere else as terrorism -- to block Tehran." And on March 20, Henderson writes, "suicide bombings at Houthi mosques in San'a killed 152 people; responsibility was claimed by San'a Province, a Sunni group loyal to Islamic State but previously virtually unknown."

In short, yet again inflamed radical Sunni jihadi groups will become the policy tool of choice in the region. In reality, it is about the only tool which Yemen's fugitive President Hadi and his patrons have available. This will constitute a major reverse to Washington's hope to contain and degrade groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIS.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair- ... 50936.html

[Paphitis]

I was just going to say the other day that a war between Iran and Saudi Arabia is imminent. It's going to be a long a devestating war too as both countries will try to expand their regional influence.

There is nothing we can do about it either.

The only priority we have is to assist the Iraqi Government establish security, law and order within its borders. America can't afford for this to not occur because it will be a blight on them if they failed. It would be a dark chapter in their history and a major defeat and embarrassment. The big concern is the SHIA militias which are supported by Iran. If these militias start attacking Sunnis, then we are up shit creek.

Very messy but we must press on.

[Tim Drayton]

I was just going to say the other day that a war between Iran and Saudi Arabia is imminent. It's going to be a long a devestating war too as both countries will try to expand their regional influence.

There is nothing we can do about it either.

The only priority we have is to assist the Iraqi Government establish security, law and order within its borders. America can't afford for this to not occur because it will be a blight on them if they failed. It would be a dark chapter in their history and a major defeat and embarrassment. The big concern is the SHIA militias which are supported by Iran. If these militias start attacking Sunnis, then we are up shit creek.

Very messy but we must press on.

You don't think it might just continue as a whole set of proxy battles, as now?