Haider al-Abadi, prime minister of Iraq, went back on his word a few weeks ago. Most don't know it because when he addressed Parliament, the world press ignored it and it was only reported in Iraq.
But one of the things he declared before Parliament was that he would be sending the Popular Mobilization Foces (Shi'ite militias -- long ago outlawed but brought back and brought into the Iraqi forces by Haider) into Nineveh Province in the battle for Mosul.
This has not been a popular decision.
Again, you don't know that because CNN, AP, THE NEW YORK TIMES, et al, won't touch it.
WORLD BULLETIN reports that Haider's facing a rebuke on this decision from the provincial council in Nineveh but he's dismissed and is declaring, "Nobody can stop Iraqis from participating in the liberation of their land."
But clearly someone has.
Mosul's been under the control of the Islamic State since June of 2014.
Haider's been a coward and he's led a bunch of cowards.
Only a failed leader and a coward would allow a city to remain held by a terrorist group for nearly two years.
It's his job to defend Iraq.
And now he wants to use Shi'ite thugs to take a non-Shi'ite city. And after the 'liberation' of Ramadi (most recently), everyone knows what that means: looting, killing civilians and burning down homes.
Meanwhile, Susan Jones (right wing outlet CNS NEWS) reports that US Senator Marco Rubio and Ohio Governor John Kasich -- both vying for the Republican presidential nomination -- declared at last night's GOP debate that, if elected president, they would send more US troops into Iraq.
I haven't watched the Republican debates so I'm just going by what Jones is reporting.
However, I have heard what everyone's heard -- it's a circus, it's this, it's that.
Strange because last night's debate appears to have produced a concrete answer.
As opposed to the Democratic debates which have repeatedly found Hillary insisting she has a three part plan -- which she never explains -- that anyone can find at her website -- but, as we've noted before, what's at her website isn't concrete.
It's also just "I'll do what Barack's doing."
What Barack's doing?
Yep, we're back to the Shi'ite militias. As noted earlier this week in "Well look who the State Dept woke up in bed with this time," the disgraceful State Dept spokesperson John Kirby was singing the praises of the Popular Mobilization Forces -- also know as the Shi'ite thugs who killed Iraqi civilians, British citizens and US soldiers.
He was singing their praises.
On the Shi'ite militias, as we noted in last night's snapshot, they're out in full force in Baghdad -- look at the photos in the snapshot.
Imagine what would happen if non-Shi'ite militias were openly walking through Baghdad?
Lastly, Anders Corr (FORBES) has a strong opinion piece today which opens:
The war in Syria and Iraq is no place for the U.S. We have no clear allies there, leading us to bargain with bad actors who besmirch our good name. In our single-minded fight against the Islamic State (ISIS), we look desperate and ineffective, because we are. Our tunnel vision targeting ISIS has made us blind to the dangers from our allies of convenience there, and the likelihood that they will turn on us in future.
The following community sites updated:
The e-mail address for this site is firstname.lastname@example.org.