world

Departing U.S. Army chief says Iraq may have to be partitioned

54 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2015 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

54 Comments
Login to comment

This, of course, is all Obama's fault. Nothing to do with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, or anyting like that.

Obama. All Obama.

9 ( +12 / -3 )

The headline and the story, once again, are miles apart. This is pretty cheap journalism. But I guess we shouldn't be surprised.

The "may have to be" element implies something quite different from the quotes from this guy.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

My understanding is that China got all the oil contracts there that Cheney expected the U.S. to get. A failure on so many levels.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

This partitioning plan has been in the works for years. It was the whole point of Washington creating and arming ISIS.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Jeff Ogrisseg: This partitioning plan has been in the works for years. It was the whole point of Washington creating and arming ISIS.

Right.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Seems logical to let the three warring factions go their own ways. problem is that a lot of fuss will need to be made about the integrity of borders and nation states and so on before it is allowed to happen. Might make sense in Syria too.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

"in a valedictory news conference he took a pessimistic view about the underlying conflict between Shiites and Sunnis that brought the two communities to brink of civil war in 2006." - article

George AWOL Bush's nation building in full bloom. As America's brave President spoke aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln off the coast of California, in his 'Mission Accomplished' speech of May 1, 2003, AWOL said "With new tactics and precision weapons, we can achieve military objectives without directing violence against civilians."

Today America sees another Bush bravely striding towards the White House and ready to finish the work of his brother to complete the nation building of not one but two nations that will forever fight for freedom in fields knee deep in blood but still fighting and dying for the freedom AWOL Bush created for the next twenty generations of Americans to pay for, one way or another.

So Huzzah Iraq I and Iraq II, that's a Mission Accomplished any way Bubbles Bush wants to slice it, two nations forever at each other's throats bought and paid for by the American Taxpayer based on a series of lies and willful deception. ON to 2016! And the return of the Victors of Iraq to the White House. Huzzah!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

This, of course, is all Obama's fault.

Yup.

Nothing to do with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, or anyting like that.

They take their share of the blame also.

Obama. All Obama.

For the last 7 years, yeah.

My understanding is that China got all the oil contracts there that Cheney expected the U.S. to get. A failure on so many levels.

I'm waiting to see all the countries that got perks from Hillary while she was Secretary of State once a lot of that comes out.

George AWOL Bush's nation building in full bloom. As America's brave President spoke aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln off the coast of California, in his 'Mission Accomplished' speech of May 1, 2003, AWOL said "With new tactics and precision weapons, we can achieve military objectives without directing violence against civilians."

Obama didn't send a single troop in to Syria to save the thousands of Christians that were murdered and beheaded. How do you feel about that? Are you not outraged?

Today America sees another Bush bravely striding towards the White House and ready to finish the work of his brother to complete the nation building of not one but two nations that will forever fight for freedom in fields knee deep in blood but still fighting and dying for the freedom AWOL Bush created for the next twenty generations of Americans to pay for, one way or another.

We will all have a price to pay domestically once Obama has left office and since his foreign policy is such a disaster, we might with a very real possibility that we could see boots on the ground with the next president, since this one is too chicken.. to take ANY action whatsoever.

So Huzzah Iraq I and Iraq II, that's a Mission Accomplished any way Bubbles Bush wants to slice it, two nations forever at each other's throats bought and paid for by the American Taxpayer based on a series of lies and willful deception. ON to 2016! And the return of the Victors of Iraq to the White House. Huzzah!

Don't forget Obama just blew off the recommendations from his top Generals that were advising him, but we all know Obama created the universe, so he knows more than anyone else or so his Harvard degree dictates and thanks to him, we now have a caliphate and another person that was beheaded by a JV team. 453 more days until this madness is behind us.

-14 ( +1 / -15 )

bass: I'm waiting to see all the countries that got perks from Hillary

What about the perks from Condoleeza Rice? All of those are OK??

We will all have a price to pay domestically once Obama has left office

What about the price we are still paying for George Bush?

Don't forget Obama just blew off the recommendations from his top Generals

But what about Dick Cheney's advice?

Obama didn't send a single troop in to Syria to save the thousands of Christians

Oh so THAT's why you don't support Trump???? Amazing....

For the last 7 years, yeah

hahah nice try..... Don't go there. Seriously.

Don't forget Obama

The GOP and their Sainted Anointed Masters of God and Time lie, cheat, and steal and I'll do anything to make sure a Republican never gets into the White House again. Take it from an non-partisan independent patriotic American. I would know since I've written several biographies about everyone above.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

OMG, it looks like it's catching....

SuperLib, odaiji ni....

1 ( +2 / -1 )

"This, of course, is all Obama's fault. Nothing to do with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld"

And, nothing to do, of course, with Mohammed.

"reconciliation between Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq is becoming harder"

Idiots.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Caveat Emperor. The USA election candidates are war hawks, AGAIN, "W" and "Send in the troops" are the proposed solution. What is it about? OIL. Okay, but don't say it is about liberating Religious Group X or Y. A USA Constitutional amendment is needed. "The elected president or vice-president must have served int the military forces and must be 50 (now 35) years old. Yah-hoo!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Partitioning the Middle East 2.0 or is that 3.0. The western imperial powers are busy at work again.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

My understanding is that China got all the oil contracts there that Cheney expected the U.S. to get. A failure on so many levels.

Brent crude is at like $50 a barrel, Iraq's oil is irrelevant.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

What about the perks from Condoleeza Rice? All of those are OK??

Of course not.

What about the price we are still paying for George Bush?

And what about the price we are ALL paying for Barack Hussein Obama?

But what about Dick Cheney's advice?

What about Obama and his unwillingness to engage ISIS?

Oh so THAT's why you don't support Trump???? Amazing....

No, like Obama and Hillary, he's a totally nut job.

hahah nice try..... Don't go there. Seriously.

So now, we are running away once again from the truth? Why on Earth am I not surprised.

What is it about? OIL.

Pretty much everything you use has oil in it. From the shoes you walk on to the tires on your car. We all need it.

Okay, but don't say it is about liberating Religious Group X or Y.

Most of the oil the US gets doesn't come from the ME.

A USA Constitutional amendment is needed. "The elected president or vice-president must have served int the military forces and must be 50 (now 35) years old. Yah-hoo!

That would most certainly disqualify Hillary, Trump and Obama!

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

And, nothing to do, of course, with Mohammed.

Oh tell me about it! These barbaric zealots have been going at it forever. When will they get their acts together?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Partitioning the Middle East 2.0 or is that 3.0. The western imperial powers are busy at work again.

a. If Iraq is partitioned, it will be due to the violent conflicts between religious groups, not Western imperialism. b. Iraq's current geography was already the consequence of imperialism, so it's not as if it's sacred. c. The entire complaint about imperialism's effect on nation geography was that it was arbitrary, so shouldn't you be supporting Iraq's partition along more logical lines?

Honestly your blanket opposition to everything the West does make you sound rather contradictory in cases like this.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Black Sabbath: This, of course, is all Obama's fault.

Bass: Yup.

Black Sabbath: Nothing to do with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, or anyting like that.

Bass: They take their share of the blame also.

Cracking comedy exchange. That actually made me laugh out loud on this train. Stop it!

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Now that the US has cosied up to Iran, the partition option does not look all the bad.

There will be a small Sunni state, turning into Saudi's puppy at the first chance. A Shia state closely allied with Iran, and a Kurdish state, probably close to the Western powers.

The only party unhappy with this scenario will be Turkey, a supposed ally of the west, but then how long can we let Erdogan look both ways.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Cracking comedy exchange. That actually made me laugh out loud on this train. Stop it!

The truth can make you laugh at times.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

@Bass. I'm just confused as to what the truth is. Read this exchange again:

Black Sabbath: This, of course, is all Obama's fault.

Bass: Yup.

Black Sabbath: Nothing to do with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, or anyting like that.

Bass: They take their share of the blame also.

It's all Obama's fault - ok, got that, but Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld also share some of the blame which you said solely belongs to Obama. Please tell me what this truth is.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

It's all Obama's fault - ok, got that, but Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld also share some of the blame which you said solely belongs to Obama. Please tell me what this truth is.

Bass has to own up to it being partly his side's fault/responsibility, in order to stay 'fair and balanced'. But there is verbal skullduggery afoot: since, according to bass, it is all Obama's fault then Bush, Cheney and Rumsfelt's 'share of the blame' comes to 100% (all the blame) - 100% (Obama's share of the blame) = 0% (pure as the driven snow).

True blue conservative calculatin'.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@Bass

What about Obama and his unwillingness to engage ISIS?

You really want to risk US, NATO and ME forces on the ground against IS? You want to see POW's beheaded... or burnt alive? That's what will happen. That's what world leaders are afraid of... the message that would send home to American, British, ME allies' populations. I for one don't want to see UK soldiers coming home in coffins because we followed America into yet another war.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The entire complaint about imperialism's effect on nation geography was that it was arbitrary, so shouldn't you be supporting Iraq's partition along more logical lines?

Ah yes! The logic of fences.

Honestly your blanket opposition to everything the West does make you sound rather contradictory in cases like this.

I am contradictory and it's a fool's logic to believe that differences or contradictions cannot also be commensurable. Then again, I guess some might think that it's just better to segregate or cleanse, though that too makes a bloody mess of things, doesn't US and European history tell us?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Cleo Interesting idea. I'm now approaching it a bit differently. Bass actually said 'they take their share of the blame also' meaning they take it but they actually shouldn't because all of it rightfully belongs to Obama. This seemed plausible until I realized the three headbangers in question haven't actually claimed any of the blame as far as I know ( I'd be happy to be corrected on this ).

My background is in maths and science and I'm a bit of a nerd when it comes to problem solving like this. I hope Bass doesn't spoil it by giving us the answer.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I was in grad school when the Iraq invasion was still being sold by PNAC and its lovably gullible sucker in the White House. There was a petition going around signed by pretty much every realist international politics scholar in the U.S. Imploring that invading Iraq was not in the national interest. Unfortunately for the whole damned world, the views of those "defeatists" did not carry the day. (Gee, ignoring scholars sounds awful familiar)This miserable failure of a foreign policy that has wrecked the standing of the U.S. in the world and caused unimaginable suffering for millions was very much predicted. Sometimes the opinions of those who dedicate their lives to the study of a subject are worth listening to.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Bass has to own up to it being partly his side's fault/responsibility, in order to stay 'fair and balanced'.

No, I was just stating the facts.

But there is verbal skullduggery afoot: since, according to bass, it is all Obama's fault then Bush, Cheney and Rumsfelt's 'share of the blame' comes to 100% (all the blame) - 100% (Obama's share of the blame) = 0% (pure as the driven snow).

Again, just stating the facts. Don't hate the messenger, hate the message.

True blue conservative calculatin

Is that what you libs call it? Lol

You really want to risk US, NATO and ME forces on the ground against IS?

I want to stop ISIS, yes.

You want to see POW's beheaded... or burnt alive? That's what will happen.

So when they do it to other girls nascent, we should just let it happen, stand by and do nothing and watch them advance, claim more land for their caliphate and pray they will just go away?

That's what world leaders are afraid of... the message that would send home to American, British, ME allies' populations. I for one don't want to see UK soldiers coming home in coffins because we followed America into yet another war

I don't want to see that either, but no matter how you look at it, either way, we will go back for sure, that's a given fact. I don't like anymore than you do, but if we don't do anything, the jihad will extend beyond the ME and faster than you can predict and it will spill over, it's just a matter of time and I personally, don't want to see that. Not getting involved will NOT stop their advance, their ambitions and their goals.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Cracking comedy exchange. That actually made me laugh out loud on this train. Stop it!

I'm not sure whether it's sad or funny that he doesn't even see the self-contradiction in the statements.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm not sure whether it's sad or funny that he doesn't even see the self-contradiction in the statements.

I don't see how, if there aren't any.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

My background is in maths and science and I'm a bit of a nerd when it comes to problem solving like this. I hope Bass doesn't spoil it by giving us the answer.

The problem is, you're looking at it like a math question with a solvable answer, when it's actually more like a zen question that is impossible to solve. Or an interview question.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Black Sabbath:

" This, of course, is all Obama's fault. Nothing to do with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, or anyting like that. Obama. All Obama. "

Obama is no innocent bystander in this. Yes, he inherited a mess, but so did Bush. Making wrong decision in the Middle East is not an US party privilege; both parties are guilty of that. It was Obama`s decision to support the Muslim Brotherhood aka Al Quaeda all across the Middle East, to throw the Iraqi Sunnis to the Shiite Maliki government, and to assist the JIhadis in Syria, all of which created ISIS.

It is really tiring reading US commentators trying to turn this into domestic party hick-hack.

In the event, the armee chief is correct. Iraq should be divided according to ethnic lines; remember that Iraq was an artificial construction to start with.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The problem is, you're looking at it like a math question with a solvable answer, when it's actually more like a zen question that is impossible to solve. Or an interview question.

Well, if you have a leader with guts, it's very easy to solve. If you have pacifist hippie wanting to capitulate, then sooner or later you will get hosed, which is the case over the last 7 years. Which will thankfully come to a close sooner rather than later.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Yes, he inherited a mess, but so did Bush.

Bush took a mess, and turned it into absolute destruction.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Partitioning of Iraq is only going to make things worse. I really don't think creating 3 states instead of 1 would spread peace and love among the conflicted parties. It would only make present conflicts visible on the political map of the Middle East. Of course it would be for the benefit of Israel, which is also not pleased by the fact Iran made a nuclear deal. But Israel shouldn't really worry about it - they already have republicans in their pockets. I'm sure they'll figure something out.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, if you have a leader with guts, it's very easy to solve. If you have pacifist hippie wanting to capitulate, then sooner or later you will get hosed, which is the case over the last 7 years. Which will thankfully come to a close sooner rather than later.

Wow, you can't even follow what we were talking about.

Although I shouldn't really be surprised considering what we were talking about.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Willi,

Obama is no innocent bystander in this. Yes, he inherited a mess, but so did Bush.

Are you going for the revisionist of the month award m'boy? Are you running for president too?

Making wrong decision in the Middle East is not an US party privilege; both parties are guilty of that.

Hilarious. You make it sound like a simple decision blunder, rather than the reality of the invasion which had nearly two years of ratcheting up the paranoia, and obviously the lies that took the US into this 8 trillion dollar disaster.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

'The problem is, you're looking at it like a math question with a solvable answer, when it's actually more like a zen question that is impossible to solve. Or an interview question.

Well, if you have a leader with guts, it's very easy to solve. If you have pacifist hippie wanting to capitulate, then sooner or later you will get hosed, which is the case over the last 7 years. Which will thankfully come to a close sooner rather than later.'

What is going on here? Is this the Surrealism Today website? I swear I haven't taken LSD for a very long time.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Bush took a mess, and turned it into absolute destruction.

And Obama is responsible for the rise and expansion of ISIS furthering the disintegration of Iraq, Syria and we don't even want to talk what a F-up job he did with this deal on Iran and launching an arms race in the ME which is going to come back and haunt him.

Wow, you can't even follow what we were talking about. Although I shouldn't really be surprised considering what we were talking about.

No, it's more like, when libs can't articulate a spin, they have to resort back to condescending remarks.

Are you going for the revisionist of the month award m'boy? Are you running for president too?

Oh, only if I could, only if I could! LOL

Hilarious. You make it sound like a simple decision blunder, rather than the reality of the invasion which had nearly two years of ratcheting up the paranoia, and obviously the lies that took the US into this 8 trillion dollar disaster.

8 Trillion, so add to Obama's 8 trillion to the deficit and add to the lives he chose to forfeit because of a campaign promise rather than doing what is morally and ethically right makes it equally as bad.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

@Bass Ok, I'll try again.

Mr. A is 100% to blame for something.

Mr. B, Mr. C and Mr. D are also partly to blame for exactly the same thing.

How is this possible? I don't know the answer to this. Please tell us.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I'm now approaching it a bit differently. Bass actually said 'they take their share of the blame also' meaning they take it but they actually shouldn't because all of it rightfully belongs to Obama.

No, by the way, what is up and libs listening to specifics? If you want to blame Bush for entering in Iraq and if you believe it was a false war, you have the right to take that position, you then must acknowledge and face the fact that Obama was equally as wrong for not clamping down on ISIS and letting himself be taken for a fool by Iran, if you don't then you and everyone else that thinks like that are the ones being partisan.

This seemed plausible until I realized the three headbangers in question haven't actually claimed any of the blame as far as I know ( I'd be happy to be corrected on this ).

I never said that, please stop embellishing what I have stated.

My background is in maths and science and I'm a bit of a nerd when it comes to problem solving like this. I hope Bass doesn't spoil it by giving us the answer.

Wt...as if math had anything to do with what happened in Iraq. If you have a degree in the culinary arts, it means nothing when it comes to Iraq...Geez!

Ok, I'll try again.

Yes, please.

Mr. A is 100% to blame for something.

Bush is to blame 50% Obama 50%

I don't know the answer to this. Please tell us.

I just did. One for going in and the other for going out and leaving it a bigger mess than before.

Hope that helped.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Bush is to blame 50% Obama 50%

And Messrs Cheney and Rumsfelt?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Bush is to blame 50% Obama 50%'

I see.

Black Sabbath: This, of course, is all Obama's fault. Bass: Yup.

Does 'yup' mean 'actually 50%'. Is this the 'American' you speak when you told me you didn't speak English but spoke 'American'? You live and learn. Thanks for clearing that one up.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

And Messrs Cheney and Rumsfelt?

Rumsfeld-Yes. The entire admin.

You live and learn. Thanks for clearing that one up.

Always happy and willing to bring a little sweetness and sunshine to a debate.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@bass4funk

but we all know Obama created the universe

We don't even all know what it would be like to be in the state of mind that would make someone write this kind of neurotic schoolgirl drivel.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Bush is to blame 50% Obama 50%

Rumsfeld-Yes. The entire admin.

One last time. Bush is 50% to blame, Obama is 50% to blame. That's 100% of the blame accounted for. So how much of the remaining 0% is Rummy to blame for? How much is Darth Cheney responsible for? the entire admin?

The truth can make you laugh at times.

Not as much as the obscure twitchings of a strictly fair-and-balanced non-partisan hoist on his own petard.

I feel a bit guilty for enjoying the death throes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

'Always happy and willing to bring a little sweetness and sunshine to a debate.'

Looking at your logic, I think you brought a bottle of moonshine to this debate.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

We don't even all know what it would be like to be in the state of mind that would make someone write this kind of neurotic schoolgirl drivel.

I feel the same way hearing the vitriol from the looney progressive left.

Not as much as the obscure twitchings of a strictly fair-and-balanced non-partisan hoist on his own petard.

Nice try my dear, but sadly, NO smoking cigar. If I were partisan, I wouldn't blame Bush for anything at all or ANY other conservative. But why you and the other one-sided libs fail to acknowledge that is beside me.

I feel a bit guilty for enjoying the death throes.

I feel the same.

Looking at your logic, I think you brought a bottle of moonshine to this debate.

No! I can afford the real stuff. I work.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

'but we all know Obama created the universe'

Be careful, Bass. The rightwingers might disown you for blasphemy. Your use of 'sainted' and 'anointed' might upset them too ( unless, of course, it's applied to Ronnie ).

Watch out for Gog and Magog ; ).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Be careful, Bass. The rightwingers might disown you for blasphemy.

Here is the catch: I would never pass the rightwing purity test, because I'm not a Republican either.

Your use of 'sainted' and 'anointed' might upset them too ( unless, of course, it's applied to Ronnie ).

No, he never believed in working with the opposition and he never thumbed his nose against the Dems or for anyone else really. Also, he would have walked away from this disastrous deal with Iran. You're comparing apples and celery now.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

'Be careful, Bass. The rightwingers might disown you for blasphemy.

Here is the catch: I would never pass the rightwing purity test, because I'm not a Republican either.

Your use of 'sainted' and 'anointed' might upset them too ( unless, of course, it's applied to Ronnie ).

No, he never believed in working with the opposition and he never thumbed his nose against the Dems or for anyone else really. Also, he would have walked away from this disastrous deal with Iran. You're comparing apples and celery now.'

I'm convinced this thread is an episode of the Twilight Zone. My head is spinning. Everything I've posted comes back with mind-bending irrelevance from Bass. I didn't compare anything. Help! I'm going to bed with visions of apples and celery.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

No, he never believed in working with the opposition and he never thumbed his nose against the Dems or for anyone else really. Also, he would have walked away from this disastrous deal with Iran. You're comparing apples and celery now.'

I'm convinced this thread is an episode of the Twilight Zone. My head is spinning. Everything I've posted comes back with mind-bending irrelevance from Bass. I didn't compare anything. Help! I'm going to bed with visions of apples and celery.

Maybe that works for you best. I'm hoping you are happy now.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

What the world needs is some kind of global mediation between the warring religious factions of the Middle East. Saddam was successful in keeping the peace by massacring the opposition. The US was able to do it by literally putting bodies and walls between the two sides.

Any kind of peace you can create now will just be temporary until one side goes after the other again. We need to look at this problem from the top down instead of pretending it has anything to do with nationalism.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Saddam was successful in keeping the peace by massacring the opposition.

But that was acceptable?

The US was able to do it by literally putting bodies and walls between the two sides.

But the majority of the casualty count came from the sectarian violence. Look, if you want to go back and forth making the argument that "IF the US wouldn't have done this or that.... I got it. But dwelling on the past doesn't solve anything. You can blame Bush and his admin. all day, but the fact is, it's finished, it's done and now we have to look forward as to what to do regarding the current situation and walking away is a temporary solution, because like it or not, we WILL be back over there and like Bush said, it will be to fight a bigger, stronger and more radical opponent. So either this president will take some aggressive action or the next, but either way, the problem is not and will not go away just by ignoring it. Probably the best solution would be to have a divided 3 partitioned Iraq because what we used to call Iraq doesn't exist anymore

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Read what I wrote again, bass.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites