2
2
0
I have seen several articles about this. This really seems like a paradigm shift to me. Iran sees the bad in ISIS and Al Qaeda just as Saddam did. They know that if Iraq falls they may be next. Whether we like it or not both Iran and the US have a vested interest in this conflict.
What do you think may result in such a triad of US-Iraq-Iran teaming up to take on ISIS?
I am really unsure what may result on this as Iran may turn into an ally in the GWOT but still be a foe.
What do you think may result in such a triad of US-Iraq-Iran teaming up to take on ISIS?
I am really unsure what may result on this as Iran may turn into an ally in the GWOT but still be a foe.
Iraq
Iran
GWOT
United States
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 9
4
4
0
1
1
0
Beware of the Trojan horse! I don't believe ISIS just popped from nowhere one day. This is a well-organized terrorist group that has been nurtured in Irak, Syria, Turkey and maybe Iran for years. If we know what the Hezbollah thinks about ISIS, then we will probably know what Iran's angles are.
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
ISIS was nothing new. It used to be call Al Qaeda in Iraq or AQI. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was the founder of AQI. He was not really welcomed by Al Qaeda. Bin Liden reprimanded him killing other Muslims but he didn't care. Al Baghdadi took other later and hi-jacked a lot of the Syria Al Qaeda groups and rebranded them. He pretty much just organized the armies already there. Al Bagdadi was even in US custody in the past. By use leaving Iraq we pretty much let it gain power unopposed.
Iran is fearing an invasion if Iraq fails. IS is Sunni and is attacking any and all Shites. There are primarily two countries out there Iraq and Iran. Once Iraq fails they know they are next. They are fighting as much as they can to prevent that.
Iran is fearing an invasion if Iraq fails. IS is Sunni and is attacking any and all Shites. There are primarily two countries out there Iraq and Iran. Once Iraq fails they know they are next. They are fighting as much as they can to prevent that.
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
الدولة الإسلامية في العراق والشامad-Dawlah al-Islāmiyah fī 'l-ʿIrāq wa-sh-ShāmParticipant in the Syrian Civil War, Iraq War (2003–2011), Iraqi insurgency, Iraq War (2014–present), Second Libyan Civil War, Boko Haram insurgency, War in North-West Pakistan, War in Afghanistan, Yemeni Civil War, and other conflicts
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
Politics does make for some strange bedfellows. always does and always will also over time our relationships with all countries change. I don't ever believe Iran will get warm and fuzzy over us but I can see occasionally when their and our goals are the same. I see this though as very similar to what when on during the cold war. US and USSR couldn't fight directly so we fought through third party countries. Same thing is going on here but instead of Political this is more about Theology Saudi Arabian Sunni based Faith against Iran/Iraq Shia based Faith. Very similar to the Protestant Reformation Wars in Europe 1/2 a millennium ago.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/03/02/iraq-operation-tikrit/24246965/
I think we just found out...
We had some theories when I was in Iraq in '03 - '04. After al Sadr took off to Iran for asylum, the guys I worked with all agreed that he was forging bonds within the Iranian regime to be able to assist him and his forces, the Mahdi Army, upon his return to Iraq. With his new-found relations, he would make a power grab for the Presidency of Iraq. Once in control, Iraq and Iran would become a United Islamic Nation (or something along those lines). Far-fetched, maybe. Then again, maybe not.
The start of it all: The Coalition went ahead and got al Sadr into Parliament upon his return.
Granted, this was during a time when the Government was more concerned about how the world 'perceived' the US Forces and our actions. Our hands were tied with updated ROE and less and less use of force. Initially, we had the green light to engage anyone with a green armband (that signified allegiance to al Sadr). That lasted a hot minute. It got to the point where we were ordered not to fire 'Unless fired upon'. So much for protection from imminent threat.
Since our hands were tied, al Sadr's militia became a powerhouse (so to speak) within Baghdad and some of the surrounding areas. It was not a good time to be operating within Baghdad. RTE Irish was a bloody gauntlet; IEDs and roadside ambushes were a daily (sometimes multiple attacks within hours of each other, at the same spot!) occurrence, and all the time we would see the green armband on the 'witnesses' of the attacks. And all the while, all we could do was watch. So now that Iran is willing to assist the Iraqi Forces, what will we see next? Small Iranian outposts on Iraqi soil? Maybe a Joint Iranian/ Iraqi Task Force? Only time will tell.
I think we just found out...
We had some theories when I was in Iraq in '03 - '04. After al Sadr took off to Iran for asylum, the guys I worked with all agreed that he was forging bonds within the Iranian regime to be able to assist him and his forces, the Mahdi Army, upon his return to Iraq. With his new-found relations, he would make a power grab for the Presidency of Iraq. Once in control, Iraq and Iran would become a United Islamic Nation (or something along those lines). Far-fetched, maybe. Then again, maybe not.
The start of it all: The Coalition went ahead and got al Sadr into Parliament upon his return.
Granted, this was during a time when the Government was more concerned about how the world 'perceived' the US Forces and our actions. Our hands were tied with updated ROE and less and less use of force. Initially, we had the green light to engage anyone with a green armband (that signified allegiance to al Sadr). That lasted a hot minute. It got to the point where we were ordered not to fire 'Unless fired upon'. So much for protection from imminent threat.
Since our hands were tied, al Sadr's militia became a powerhouse (so to speak) within Baghdad and some of the surrounding areas. It was not a good time to be operating within Baghdad. RTE Irish was a bloody gauntlet; IEDs and roadside ambushes were a daily (sometimes multiple attacks within hours of each other, at the same spot!) occurrence, and all the time we would see the green armband on the 'witnesses' of the attacks. And all the while, all we could do was watch. So now that Iran is willing to assist the Iraqi Forces, what will we see next? Small Iranian outposts on Iraqi soil? Maybe a Joint Iranian/ Iraqi Task Force? Only time will tell.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Maybe, CPT (Join to see), but look at what I saw when I first saw your post. Allies? Maybe ... Maybe not.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
That is funny but they are also heavily involved in the fight with IS. I just view that as posturing.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
I would really like to see if we could moderate Iran and help them to be a more open government through trade and security cooperation the same way we did in China. Had we not overthrown the democratically elected president and installed the Shah of Iran in his place, Iran might be as secular as Turkey is today.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I grow ever more leery when thinking of our "alphabet agencies" dealings and our penchant for poor foreign policy decisions... How much blood and money is this going to cost us?
I also doubt Iranian interest is as simple as "just helping out".
I also doubt Iranian interest is as simple as "just helping out".
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
No. Perhaps co-belligerents with temporary common cause. Maybe. Conceivably, I guess.
Allies implies a shared and compatible long-term vision.
Allies implies a shared and compatible long-term vision.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Hi 1Lt Eric,
If there is a vested interest between the people of Iran and the American people, then I would like to see it up close and personal.
Vote on it by both peoples of Iran and America.
What do I think? I am thinking of capacity building; building relationships.
So far, I see a virtual US Embassy online for Iranian-American people. This website promotes the electronic dialog between the peoples of both countries. It is a US Dept of State website and enterprise. This is good.
What do I think may result in such a triad of US-Iraq-Iran teaming up to take on ISIS?
The US Embassy in Tehran would probably be physically re-established.
Iranian Ambassador to the UN would probably be granted a visa to the US.
The electronic curtain of technology would be lifted.
Iranians would see and interact with the world online.
Retrieved from website: http://iran.usembassy.gov/about-us.html
If there is a vested interest between the people of Iran and the American people, then I would like to see it up close and personal.
Vote on it by both peoples of Iran and America.
What do I think? I am thinking of capacity building; building relationships.
So far, I see a virtual US Embassy online for Iranian-American people. This website promotes the electronic dialog between the peoples of both countries. It is a US Dept of State website and enterprise. This is good.
What do I think may result in such a triad of US-Iraq-Iran teaming up to take on ISIS?
The US Embassy in Tehran would probably be physically re-established.
Iranian Ambassador to the UN would probably be granted a visa to the US.
The electronic curtain of technology would be lifted.
Iranians would see and interact with the world online.
Retrieved from website: http://iran.usembassy.gov/about-us.html
About Us | Tehran, Iran - Virtual Embassy of the United States
The events of 1979 are well-known: the Islamic Revolution, the storming of the U.S. mission and the taking of U.S. diplomats as hostages have all been recounted on film and in print. While the world knows that the United States lost an Embassy in Iran, in fact, we lost more: we were deprived of a relationship with the Iranian people, access to Iranian society, and thousands of daily interactions between American and Iranian citizens....
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I think they are doing this out of necessity. Iran knows they would be targeted due to their country mostly being Shia. ISIS would take Iraq and use it for a base of operations to attack Iran and finish off Syria. I am not so convinced they are willing to join as a true partner with the US yet.
(1)
(0)
SSG Mike Angelo
1Lt Eric,
Looking at the US-Iraq-Iran vision, is to fight and destroy the Sunni in Iraq. Am I correct? This would be the crusade path. Ok, what are the alternatives? Opposite model of the crusade is the quagmire, or nation-building or redrawing the Iraq borders. Militarily, how does the US profit from this path?
Other solution sets other than the military would be the dissent path or diplomatic or soft power approach.
Today as with yesterday, Sunni's do not deal favorably with dissent. What are the limits and boundaries of the Shia's dissent practices; Ayatollah Kameini? Can the US trust the Shia business practices of both Iraq and Iran? Is Syria a dissent player? To what extent.
How much can we as Americans live with? What would be our cost in this triad relationship?
I would take this issue to the people. In the US the primary elections here and around the corner is the November ballot.
What about the people of Iraq and the people of Iran? What do they say?
Personally? I would have to agree with you. Leaders on all three sides do not share the same vision. So, for today...if all three sides execute their strategic plans, already there is a broken vision.
The crusade would be over before it started and the US would be experiencing a quagmire; civil war middle man.
Reference
Tierney, Dominic. (2010). How we fight; crusades, quagmires, and the American way of War. Little, Brown Company, New York.
Looking at the US-Iraq-Iran vision, is to fight and destroy the Sunni in Iraq. Am I correct? This would be the crusade path. Ok, what are the alternatives? Opposite model of the crusade is the quagmire, or nation-building or redrawing the Iraq borders. Militarily, how does the US profit from this path?
Other solution sets other than the military would be the dissent path or diplomatic or soft power approach.
Today as with yesterday, Sunni's do not deal favorably with dissent. What are the limits and boundaries of the Shia's dissent practices; Ayatollah Kameini? Can the US trust the Shia business practices of both Iraq and Iran? Is Syria a dissent player? To what extent.
How much can we as Americans live with? What would be our cost in this triad relationship?
I would take this issue to the people. In the US the primary elections here and around the corner is the November ballot.
What about the people of Iraq and the people of Iran? What do they say?
Personally? I would have to agree with you. Leaders on all three sides do not share the same vision. So, for today...if all three sides execute their strategic plans, already there is a broken vision.
The crusade would be over before it started and the US would be experiencing a quagmire; civil war middle man.
Reference
Tierney, Dominic. (2010). How we fight; crusades, quagmires, and the American way of War. Little, Brown Company, New York.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google