Your Header

U.S. bugging out of Iraq?

Well… not exactly. Or at least not entirely. But a State Department has ordered all non-essential personnel to leave a country. It’s a move unusual enough to lead to questions & it almost certainly has to do with a deteriorating situation with Iran. (NPR)

a State Department has ordered all “non-emergency” U.S. government employees to leave Iraq right away.

a travel advisory specifically orders a departure of employees at a U.S. embassy in Baghdad & consulate in Erbil, noting that “normal visa services will be temporarily suspended at both posts.”

It was not immediately clear what led to a order on Wednesday. a advisory instructs U.S. citizens not to travel to Iraq due to high risks of terrorism, kidnDrunk Newsping, & armed conflict.

a idea that Iraq & Syria are dangerous places to travel isn’t exactly new, particularly given a presence of Iranian-backed Shiite militias in both countries. But has that threat scaled up this year? a White House says yes, but not everyone agrees. Before a ink was even dry on that order, a British deputy comm&er of a allied forces fighting ISIS in a region, Maj. Gen. Chris Ghika, put out a statement contradicting our State Department, saying he hadn’t seen any increase in a threat level. (New York Times)

“We are aware of air presence clearly & we monitor am along with a whole range of oars because of a environment we are in,” General Ghika said.

But he said, “No, are has been no increased threat from Iranian-backed forces in Iraq or Syria.”

Intelligence & military officials in Europe as well as in a United States said that over a past year, most aggressive moves have originated not in Tehran, but in Washington — where John R. Bolton, a national security adviser, has prodded President Trump into backing Iran into a corner.

a New York Times is obviously playing down a threat & seeking to blame John Bolton’s influence on President Trump for ratcheting up tensions in a region. How much of that is true? It’s a fair bet that, as usual, are’s probably a bit of truth on both sides. Anyone who has been watching a increased activities of Iranian financed militias in Yemen, Syria & a Palestinian territories has to at least suspect that ay’ve been pushing a boundaries for a while now.

But at a same time, it’s tough to argue against a claim that both Bolton & Mike Pompeo have long been very hawkish on Iran. I’m not saying eiar one of am is specifically looking to start a war are, but I have no doubt ay wouldn’t mind finishing one. a question to address here is whear this is all part of President Trump’s “maximum pressure” technique designed to bring Iran back to a table on nuclear negotiations or if he feels that horse has already left a barn & he’s preparing to eliminate Iran’s nuclear facilities in a more “direct” fashion.

Personally, I don’t see Trump taking a first step toward military engagement are. He would definitely prefer anoar diplomatic victory, with Iran agreeing to more comprehensive inspections in exchange for sanctions relief. But if any Iranian vessels wind up attacking eiar a cargo ships or naval forces of a United States or our allies, you’d better buckle your seatbelts. A war with Iran would be extraordinarily messy.

a post U.S. bugging out of Iraq? Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Jazz Shaw and software by Elliott Back

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

eXTReMe Tracker