Iraqi mourners?

This is getting spun, and I don't think the reporting is accurate, at least in respect to the characterization of the protestors. Seems there is credible information this is being pushed by Iran.

Info about Kata'ib Hezbollah

Watched this earlier this morning... The security forces surrounding the green zone were complicit and let them march through. This has been building up for months but of course no coverage.

Iran is has been taking advantage of a weak Iraq but its people have been suffering under US administration and seem to be open and sympathetic to Iran vs USA at this point

These are people from all walks of life and sectors in Iraq marching

Kudos for watching Al Jazeera though... probably only good new source left

It could be pushed by Iran, but Iraq's ethnic and religious demographic is a complex issue. It has a slight majority of Shia muslims, the only other country other than Iran (which has a large Shia majority) which does.

As you can imagine, for those two countries that have been repeatedly hostile towards each-other (and even at war), this leads to some complex relationships.

To give people an idea of how complex it is: The current prime minister, Adil Abdul-Mahdi, has a background as an early supporter of the Sunni-dominated Baath party (aka Saddam Hussein's party) which found itself at hostile odds (and war) with Iran repeatedly. But he has also been a member of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, a Shia-dominated political party that operated out of Iran which opposed to the US-backed governments of Iraq. He was even a Marxist at some point.

Even in the early stages of the Iraq war there were people who thought the war might at some point in the future cause an Iran-Iraq constellation. Now with a Shia-dominated Iraq government which has Iranian support, we see that prediction manifesting. But yeah, where it ends up is a prediction I doubt many serious political scientists would dare make.

So, "Iranian-backed" in reference to this mob might in itself reference a situation which is very complex, very unstable and hard to define.

Do you think Morey sends a tweet about this one?

And makes it easier to manipulate the narrative.

Don't think there is enough money in it.

This is actually completely unfair to Morey. A part of the Morey story that adds context to the whole issue that the US MSM has completely suppressed, because they are dishonest and compromised, is that for some time Morey has been very interested in the socio-political Chinese landscape; both for business reasons because of the all the business interests the Rockets have had in China following drafting Yao Ming, and it appears to have been a hobby interest of his.

So Morey making the pro Hong Kong tweet was not him just taking a random uninformative shot (they way our completely compromised MSM has spun it) but him providing his informed opinion on a topic that he had some knowledge, perspective, and interest in.

Of course Morey himself is clearly under strict gag orders and being directed from above not to defend himself against all the dishonest shots being taken against him, and I learned this information from Bill Simmons, who is a friend of Morey's.

I don't want to derail this thread with Morey's supposed intentions tweeting that while players were actually in China... just saying when the machine wants to run with something they will find a way to bring it into the public consciousness. The fact Iraqis wants USA to gtfo is not something that is going to be a popular story pushed by the media because it doesn't want attn drawn to the situation where reality is revealed.

Yes, it does seem to be a problem that for whatever reason in that part of the world, when democracy is actually allowed to happen, the results are normally really bad.

Iraqis probably do want the USA out, and some significant % of them would prefer Iran to come in and fill the void. But it is hard to imagine any scenario where that happen that wouldn't result in making the situation significantly worse for everyone.

But then again, we elected Donald Trump the President of the United States, so not exactly arguing from a position of strength in this respect.

man..thats such a shitty post and off sketler off point take in the post after this

lol its a great post. everyone is all like zomg China so evillll, look how they are oppressing a SOVEREIGN nation. but USAdaGreat has been oppressing Iraq for like 15 years no and no one says a damn thing.

btw, how many protesters have the Chinese killed? how many Iraqis died from us?

15?

Yeah, agreed - it was unfair. It was intended humorously as a general commentary on punditry, but obviously it missed that mark.

Whenever I see a popular protest nowadays I jokingly think to myself "I hope Moreys not looking at this and he's away from a keyboard" but lets not get into why I think he's a nozzle for that (Ohh lets be fair to morey) so as not to derail the thread further. I agree it should not have been said and does not serve to forward the conversation. I apologize.

What if the USA just announced were pulling out of the Middle East in 6 months ?

World Rejoices? We have our own shale and country to ruin. Of course certain allies would not be cool with that.

Iran/Rs/Turkey have upper hand in region and that is not likely to change probably ever again. Israel and Saudi are still there and we have obligation to them so we cant just leave, yay.

Well, if you like international recessions and destabilizing wars, that's one way to get a few quickly.

Of course, life is not fair. US strategic presence in the middle east is a necessity in part due to past diplomatic and strategic blunders. Though in fairness, there have also been sound decisions made. Of course, the US is a sovereign state and its obligations are just promises, not binding laws, so there isn't much anyone could do about it - that's the good thing about being the biggest player on the field.

I think a better case, if you want that policy, would be to seek a broadly supported bi-partisan policy at home and scale to that goal on a long-term basis. It would suck for many of your partners, but the fallout would be easier to handle. It would undoubtedly cede a lot of strategic influence to others, but you can never have it all.

The only way there would be destabilizing wars worse than those that already exist, is if the we starts pushing pack at the tide, recessionary and economic consequences would be expected when that business is intertwined in our essential economy. With all the soft cards in Iranian hands i doubt a co-gvt option will be amenable. What reason would they have to accept that when the only upside is a promise of lessened and disguised aggression. We have sorta made our case study in the ME and the people on the ground are the ones who will make the decisions they see appropriate (hearts and minds), as unfortunate as that may be. We left the kurds high and dry in syria for reasons unsure and they are now forced to work with others. This will be interesting

I get that Oil was a major reason but do with Canada and Mexico it would be easy to obtain energy independence. Its not like being there has helped. Iran will have nuclear weapons as will Israel.
I get we may be abandoning Israel but they have nukes as well.

I dont think the USA is doing the same type of "imperialization" Brittania and other empires have done inthe past guys. get off your high horse.

has the USA and do they **** up from time and have done so numerous times? yes, absolutely. but lets not exaggerate

This is reaaally big.

Assuming that's true it's guaranteed the U.S and Iran will get involved in some sort of "hot war".

So, Ira(n)...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...92f_story.html

I wonder who was involved with the decision. Did Trump and/or Pompeo instigate this? Or did they okay it after the generals gave them the plan? Seems like there is a high likelyhood of a strong Iranian response. Will they just go after the US? Or Israel too? Scary stuff.

like

wtf

why? why go to this extreme this yearly esc????? wtf