Al-Hakim: Iraq will not tolerate violations of its sovereignty and does not need ground forces

[k98nights]

Al-Hakim: Iraq will not tolerate violations of its sovereignty and does not need ground forces

Editor Mustafa Saad. Thursday 9 October 2014 17: 04

Alsumaria News/ Baghdad

Head of the Islamic Supreme Council Ammar al-Hakim, Thursday, that Iraq would not tolerate violations of its sovereignty and does not require any ground forces, called on the Government to speed up the disbursement of a popular mobilization volunteer salaries and infrastructure required to meet the "enemies".

Al-Hakim said in a statement issued on the sidelines of inspecting the forward positions of the Al-Quds Brigades, the popular crowd in the regions of aldabtet and karma and obtained "alsumaria news", "the Iraqi youth unable to liberate their homeland and that Iraq does not need any ground troops from the regional States or from the international community," adding that "Iraqis are will achieve this great accomplishment and sleeves and their will and their confidence High God in themselves."

> Hakim confirmed the Commander of the international coalition to respect the sovereignty of Iraq and the lack of ground forces

> Al-Bolani warned of ominous consequences if ground forces of Iraq

Wise said that "Iraq is capable of great achievements by his sons and would not allow violation of its sovereignty", noting that "the members of the armed forces and the popular crowd capable of restoring security and stability to the country."

Al-Hakim, said that "there is no ldaashi in the land of Iraq and in the region thanks to the youth of the Mujahideen will crowd folk who they will teach daash lesson to be exemplary in the whole history of".

Al-Hakim called on the Government to "speed up the disbursement of salaries of the popular crowd and volunteers provide the infrastructure required to meet the enemies of ammunition and potential and weaponry to achieve future triumphs."

He was Chairman of the Supreme Council, Ammar al-Hakim said, (3 October 2014), Commander of the international coalition against organized "daash" General John Allen, the new US Ambassador Brett mkork need to respect the sovereignty of Iraq and the absence of any ground forces on the ground, with the support of security forces with weapons and intelligence information.

http://www.alsumaria.tv/news/112897/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%8A%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82-%D9%84%D9%86-%D9%8A%D8%B3%D9%85%D8%AD-%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%AA%D9%87%D8%A7%D9%83-%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%AA%D9%87-%D9%88%D9%84%D8%A7/ar

[dantach]

So, was their army trained by the French?

[italiancat]

So, was their army trained by the French?

And if they don't need ground forces, why in the next are the Kurds the only ones winning against those demons? The Iraqi Army can't seem to get it together. JMO.

[trvlr787]

You do have to admit they must have been trained to throw their rifles down and run.

Kind of reminds me of the chest beating Sadam did against the allies before their butts got kicked into next year.

[MyLadiesDaddy]

YEAH , WE DON'T ALLOW NO FOREIGN TROOPS IN IRAQ. ..........

EXCEPT ISIS.

What a bunch of Neanderthal freaks.

PRAY FOR REVIVAL EVERYDAY

another day closer

[Atheist]

Will not allow? Too funny. Like they can stop us if we wanted to come back in.

[new york kevin]

Sure they will. They are now with ISIS! ISIS came in from Syria, so that makes them foreign fighters. They call for help from the world on a daily basis to fight their enemy, ISIS. They are just spoiled oil kids that want their definition of freedom, while they hireout the fight for their freedom.

Pay me with an RV.

[Rayzur]

It might be helpful to refresh our memories about the Iraqi Army to perhaps more accurately analyze what is going on over there...

 

When Paul Bremer went over to Iraq and assumed command in 2003, he essentially made the unilateral decision to eliminate,... dissolve,... get rid of ....the entire Iraqi military infrastructure.... Bremer was not a military man, and those military commanders who were not part of that conversation or planning were basically left stunned trying to figure out what was happening... yet their clear disagreement went unheard as the decision  was implemented the day after Bremer first announced it.... and there was no time for intervention...

 

Bremer overnight put somewhere between 350 to 400 thousand Iraqi military on the streets, sending them home unemployed, with weapons. distrust, and anger at being suddenly unemployed in an already impoverished country.  Many of them were Sunni...The entire military infra structure was dis-assembled overnight...

 

Bremer put the US in the position of having to assume the entire military oversight, as well as thereafter recruiting and training a "new military"....out of a population that was angry, and mistrustful  about the overnight dismissal... And again, most of those fired were Sunni. As a result, those employed early on were mostly Shia... and rose through the ranks to become the Sr. officers serving under Maliki....... who was often blamed for being sectarian, absent the context of why the Iraqi Army was what it was.....(very young, unseasoned, and initially politically assembled versus strategically assembled with a mission statement that changed dramatically over time). .

. 

Because Bremer was not a military man, and didn't seem to feel it important to consult with military Command Officers, his vision of what was needed, and the structures he felt important to implement, were those initially employed, however short-sighted and ill-informed they were....Those false starts and misguided strategic decisions lost valuable years and seasoning of a mature army.  It has taken over a decade to recover from that decision, in terms of building a credible seasoned military structure from scratch... and the very insurgency that senior US military officers warned about, as a result of this dissolution is unfolding predictably before our eyes....

 

Below are just a few articles written back within years of  the decision to dissolve the Iraqi Army and its entire infrastructure..... We are predictably where many Command Officers stated we would be as a result of that decision.... .

 

BAGHDAD -- When President Bush convened a meeting of his National Security Council on May 22, 2003, his special envoy in Iraq made a statement that caught many of the participants by surprise.

 

In a video presentation from Baghdad, L. Paul Bremer III informed the president and his aides that he was about to issue an order formally dissolving Iraq's army.

 

The decree was issued the next day.

 

But with the fifth anniversary of the start of the war approaching, some participants have provided in interviews their first detailed, on-the-record accounts of a decision that is widely seen as one of the most momentous and contentious of the war, assailed by critics as all but ensuring that American forces would face a growing insurgency led by embittered Sunnis who led much of the army.

 

The account that emerges from those interviews, and from access to previously unpublished documents, makes clear that Bremer's decree reversed an earlier plan - one that would have relied on the Iraqi military to help secure and rebuild the country, and had been approved at a White House meeting that Bush convened just 10 weeks earlier.

 

The interviews show that while Bush endorsed Bremer's plan in the May 22 meeting, the decision was made without thorough consultations within government, and without the counsel of the secretary of state or the senior American commander in Iraq, said the commander, Lt. Gen. David D. McKiernan. The decree by Bremer, who is known as Jerry, prompted bitter infighting within the government, with recriminations continuing to this day.

 

Colin L. Powell, the secretary of state and a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he was never asked for advice, and was in Paris when the May 22 meeting was held.

 

Powell, who views the decree as a major blunder, later asked Condoleezza Rice, who was serving as Bush's national security adviser, for an explanation.

 

"I talked to Rice and said, `Condi, what happened?'" he recalled. "And her reaction was `I was surprised, too, but it is a decision that has been made and the president is standing behind Jerry's decision. Jerry is the guy on the ground.' And there was no further debate about it."

 

When Bush convened his top national security aides before the March 2003 invasion, he was presented with a clear American plan on what to do with the Iraqi armed forces. American commanders and Jay Garner, the retired lieutenant general who served as the first American administrator in Iraq, planned to use the Iraqi military to help protect the country and as a national reconstruction force.

 

Republican Guard units, the forces deemed most loyal to Hussein, were to be disarmed, detained and dismantled. But the rest of the army would be retained. Iraqi troops would be used as a reconstruction force to rebuild the nation.

 

The presentation also carried a caution about the risks of dismissing the army in the early months of an American occupation in a nation racked by high unemployment: "Cannot immediately demobilize 250K-300K personnel and put on the street."

 

Col. John Agoglia, who served as a war planner for Gen. Tommy Franks at the U.S. Central Command, said the idea of using the Iraqi army had long been an element of the invasion strategy.

 

After Bremer was chosen in early May 2003 as the civilian administrator in Iraq, he and his senior aide, Walter B. Slocombe, began to consult in Washington with senior Defense Department officials on how to build a new Iraq.

 

"Bremer's original idea was a professional, downsized military," Feith said. "It would not have an internal security mission or be a major factor in domestic politics. Bremer and his colleagues were thinking of how to create a military that would be suitable for a free and secure country.

 

Bremer said he did not recall who first proposed the decree dissolving the Iraqi army.

 

 

 

 

 

 

From Global Security Site:

Iraq: Bremer Dissolves Military, Security Institutions

Baghdad, 23 May 2003 (RFE/RL) -- The U.S. civilian administrator for Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, has abolished several ministries and institutions  and disbanded the Iraqi army, declaring them illegal.

 

The ministries of defense and information are among institutions being dissolved as well as the military and security courts, the Iraqi Olympic Committee, and the Republican Guard units.

 

Bremer's office today said in a statement that plans are afoot to create a new Iraq Corps as the first step toward forming "a national self-defense capability for a free Iraq."

 

The statement said the corps will be "professional, nonpolitical, military effective and representative of all Iraqis."Today's move is apparently aimed to get rid of Ba'athist influences in the military and security institutions. It follows last week's decision to abolish Hussein's Ba'ath party and order the dismissal of party officials from the civil service.

 

It is estimated that about 400,000 people, mostly military personnel, will lose their jobs....

[deniscanada]

Thanx Rayzur That was interesting

[RedTailedHawk]

Rayzur, that's was not only interesting, it was insightful. While I lean socially liberal and fiscally conservative (pretty central), and have my own beefs with our current president, I get irritated by the continual Obama bashing, Iraqi-bashing, and general name-calling (Neanderthal...? Really?) on this site. I've never served in the mitary, but I have family who does... And even I can see what a short-sighted, idiotic decision that was of Bremer's to make and GEORGE BUSH's to support! If and hopefully when this speculative investment pans out and we enjoy the fruits from an RV, it will be with the respectful and responsible awareness that many innocent Americans and Iraqis died or sustained life-altering injuries for our financial boon. I like many others I know here and in dinarland will be looking to how we can give back.

[Rayzur]

Yeah, and its unfortunate that as a society, we get so caught up in having to blame someone politically, that this stuff gets buried, because naturally whoever is being blamed gets defensive, and then there's some stupid inconsequential blame game fight...

 

If we could somehow distance ourselves from the emotion of politics, and putting all that emotional stuff aside, and just focus on the variables, it seems we would have a much better understanding of where we are now.... None of this stuff started yesterday, everything happens in a consequential context, .......and its surprising how many analysts neglect this critical detail and thereafter make stupid assumptions, or statements, or strategic recommendations without an understanding of fundamental lynch pins...

 

Personally, I don't think it's ever a mistake to admit we made a bad call.... and the real mistake is in dispassionately deconstructing it absent blame, in order to learn from it........ And in this case, where we are was predicted by those with Command experience... so I would ask, what do we do to ensure this kind of decision making never happens again, how do we ensure that those with actual expertise have a voice in decision making, and/or what process is in place to intervene in a unilateral decision when the majority of those with expertise object... Of course we can't create this overly burdensome monolith of a process to do that, maybe its as simple as no unilateral decision making... or these kinds of decisions require two, one of whom has Command experience in that theater, etc etc...How was something so critical to ensuring stability as part of our strategic plan, ignored, both before and after the decision.... And what decisions are still ignoring this critical piece....

The region is engaged in heavy warfare. The entire Iraqi army and infra structure is about 8 years old....The military structures surrounding them, including the Kurds are ancient...  What kind of assumptions are we operating with in the decision making as to strategy in current times, and how well do we understand and effectively organize our resources...? 

 

PS I started writing this after Denis' reply and see there was another one since I started... so if this is out of context to that reply... that's why I have to stop getting up and doing things midst reply... lol lol ,

Edited October 10, 2014 by Rayzur

[RedTailedHawk]

I'd vote for you, Rayzur! Great critical/forward-looking thoughts. I'd like to think there is a little more of that going on with folks in power and command these days... But don't really know.

Iraq so needs to be unified and standing on its own accord (I pray there is no need for us to send more ground forces than are already there), and if it can successfully re-make itself into a freemarket, democratically-led country... It could create great change and provide much more stability to the volatile Middle East.

[MyLadiesDaddy]

RedTail

So what do you call politicians who play games while there women and children

are being slaughtered by the worst evil since Hitler, DEMOCRATS?

I thought I was being polite with my, "Neanderthal", commen.

PRAY FOR REVIVAL EVERYDAY

another day closer