IRAQ UPDATE: 6.20.14 - Prophecy Clock Ticks Ahead in Iraq

Prophecy Clock Ticks Ahead in Iraq - Bill Wilson - www.dailyjot.com
 
The White House is beefing up security and evacuating staff from the US embassy in Baghdad as the caliphate-forming Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) advances through Northeastern Syria and Northwestern Iraq. The leader of al Qaeda's ISIS, Abu Duaa, was released by the occupant of the Oval Office in 2009 when he shut down the Bucca prison camp. Since then, Duaa has organized a 7,000-man caliphate army that is sweeping through the area where end time prophecy comes to life in the prophet Ezekiel's 38th and 39th chapters. Whether a type and shadow of the real thing, or the beginnings of the actual end time caliphate used by the anti-Christ or Beast in Revelation remains to be seen.
 
Iran is more involved, eyeing the expansion of its territory. The Daily Jot reported in January that key elements of a new nuclear agreement with Iran contains a secret 30-page side agreement that gave Iran the "right" to continue nuclear research and development. In other words, the US was to pay Iran billions of dollars (in reduced sanctions) to continue its nuclear quest. The US president continued to prepare the way for the emergence of the antichrist by supporting the advance of Islam. Today, we have the convergence of an empowered Iranian state and an al Qaeda-backed Islamic Caliphate--both supplied with Russian arms--coming together in an area that has prophetic end time significance.
 
And it is the current US president whose policies may have accelerated a possible prophetic revival of an end time Caliphate--Islamic states that come against Israel--Ezekiel 38:2-13: Meshech (Turkey); Tubal (Turkey); Persia (Iran); Ethiopia (Sudan); Libya (Libya), Gomer (Turkey), Togarmah (Turkey); Sheba (Saudi Arabia); Dedan (Saudi Arabia): "To take a spoil, and to take a prey." Speaking of Gog, the antichrist, verse 17 says, "Thus says the Lord God; Art you he of whom I have spoken in old time by my servants the prophets of Israel, which prophesied in those days many years that I would bring thee against them?" And as with the prophecy of Ishmael in Genesis 16:12, Ezekiel 38:21 says, "And I will call for a sword against him throughout all my mountains, says the Lord God: every man's sword shall be against his brother."
 
It is disappointing that the US president has been involved in accelerating these events as there are also prophecies of destruction for those nations who come against Jerusalem. Prophecy watchers should keep an eye on Turkey and how it handles this situation. The "antichrist" is alluded to as the Assyrian in Isaiah 10:5,10:24,14:25, 19:23, 30:31, 31:8, Micah 5:5-6, and Hosea 11:5. It is quite possible that the antichrist/the Assyrian will arise from what is now Turkey. Jesus Christ identifies modern Turkey as the seat of Satan. In Revelation 2:12-13, Jesus says to the church in Pergamos: "I know thy works, and where you dwell, even where Satan's seat is..." The events in Iraq may be a foreshadow of things to come.

 

ISIS scores big with Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction - F. Michael Maloof - http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/isis-scores-big-with-iraqi-wmds/?cat_orig=world

 
Saddam's manufacturer also joins terror army
 
The terrorists running amok in Iraq - members of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Sham - may have access to a secret sarin poison gas production facility in northeast Iraq as a result of a new alliance with a top military commander who previously was an aide to executed Sunni Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, WND has learned.
 
And they also may be working with a man who's known for his expertise in making sarin, a manmade toxin that was developed in Germany and can, according to the Centers for Disease Control, produce loss of consciousness, convulsions, paralysis and death in victims who are exposed.
 
The revelations comes as the State Department acknowledged that ISIS has captured a stockpile of old chemical weapons at the Al Muthanna chemical weapons production complex as its fighters sweep through Iraq's Sunni- controlled region.
 
The access to a sarin poison gas production facility, and the man with the expertise to operate it, is the result of a new alliance between the brutal jihadist fighters and Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, who was a top military commander and vice president to the deposed Saddam Hussein.
 
According to sources, Douri heads the Naqshbani Army, which is a coalition of Sunni groups in Mosul, a city which recently was overrun by ISIS. The sources added that representatives of Douri recently met with ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
 
ISIS has swept through Iraq toward Baghdad, which is being defended by troops of the government of Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, in recent days. The coalition of terrorists has included Sunni jihadist groups, and now apparently members of the Naqshbandi Army after an alliance, sources said.
 
The Naqshbandi Army is a resistance group of underground Baathists and Islamist militant insurgency groups in Iraq. It emerged in December 2006 following the execution of Hussein.
 
Douri's alliance gives ISIS' Baghdadi access to a facility that produces sarin nerve gas under the direction of former Iraqi Military Industries Brig. Gen. Adnan al-Dulaimi.
 
Dulaimi was a major player in Saddam's chemical weapons production projects. He has been working in the Sunni-controlled region of northwestern Iraq where the outlawed Baath party is located and produces the sarin.
 
A WND request to the State Department for a response to the revelation that ISIS may already have access to a working sarin poison gas production facility as a result of the Douri alliance with ISIS went unanswered.
 
Similarly, the State Department did not respond to a WND inquiry as to why old chemical weapons stockpiles at the Al-Muthana chemical complex were never destroyed before U.S. troops left Iraq in December 2011.
 
The Iraqi production of poison sarin nerve gas recently was confirmed in a classified document from the U.S. intelligence community's National Ground Intelligence Center, or NGIC.
 
The document was classified Secret/Noforn - "Not for foreign distribution."
 
The document revealed that "AQI" had produced a "bench-scale" form of sarin in Iraq and had transferred it to Turkey.
 
AQI, or al-Qaida in Iraq, was the precursor to the al-Qaida splinter group ISIS, which Baghdadi created after he moved his fighters last year into Syria on the side of the Syrian opposition.
 
However, Baghdadi and his ISIS jihadist fighters quickly fell out of favor with al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri after Baghdadi sought to include another al-Qaida group, the Jabhat al-Nusra, in ISIS.
 
The al-Nusra leadership opposed the merger and fighting ensued between ISIS and al-Nusra, leading Zawahiri to publicly disown ISIS as part of the al-Qaida organization.
 
A U.S. military source told WND that there were a number of interrogations as well as some clan reports as part of what the NGIC document said were "50 general indicators to monitor progress and characterize the state of the ANF/AQI-associated sarin chemical warfare agent developing effort."
 
In May 2013, some of the sarin transferred to Turkey for al-Nusra's use was intercepted and fighters in Turkey were arrested.
 
According to published reports, the sarin coming from Iraq but transported to Turkey allegedly was used in an attack on the Syrian city of Aleppo in March 2013 by Saudi Arabian-backed al-Nusra in its effort to overthrow the government of the Shiite-Alawite Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad.
 
The document further revealed that sarin production had been under way for more than a year.
 
"Future reporting of indicators not previously observed would suggest that the effort continues to advance despite the arrests," the NGIC document said.
 
In acknowledging to the Wall Street Journal that ISIS had taken over the Al-Muthanna chemical weapons, the State Department quickly attempted to minimize the seizure by saying that ISIS wouldn't be able to make use of the materials because it was too old, contaminated and difficult to move.
 
"We do not believe the complex contains CW (chemical weapons) materials of military value and it would be difficult, if not impossible, to safely move the materials," State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told the WSJ.
 
"The majority of the Al-Muthanna complex was bombed during Desert Storm, completely incapacitating Iraq's chemical weapon production capabilities," according to a 2004 Central Intelligence Agency report. "However, large stockpiles of chemical weapons and bulk agent survived."
 
Most of these munitions were later destroyed under supervision of the United Nations. Some of the partially destroyed materials were sealed in two bunkers at Al-Muthanna.
 
U.S. military officials say they never would have left chemical material after the 2011 pullout if it posed a security threat.
 
"The only people who would likely be harmed by these chemical materials would be the people who tried to use or move them," a military spokesman said.
 
However, ISIS' access to a sarin poison gas production facility operated by former members of Saddam Hussein's military may be another story.
 
Sarin actually was used in terror attacks in Japan in 1994 and 1995.

The real threat in Iraq - By Caroline B. Glick -   http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0614/glick062014.php3#.U6RYXulOV9B

 
Watching the undoing, in a week, of victories that US forces won in Iraq at great cost over many years, Americans are asking themselves what, if anything, should be done.
 
 What can prevent the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) - the al-Qaida offshoot that President Barack Obama derided just months ago as a bunch of amateurs - from taking over Iraq? And what is at stake for America - other than national pride - if it does?
 
Muddying the waters is the fact that the main actor that seems interested in fighting ISIS on the ground in Iraq is Iran. Following ISIS's takeover of Mosul and Tikrit last week, the Iranian regime deployed elite troops in Iraq from the Quds Force, its foreign operations division.
 
 The Obama administration, along with Republican Sen. Lindsay Graham, views Iran's deployment of forces in Iraq as an opportunity for the US. The US, they argue should work with Iran to defeat ISIS.
 
 The idea is that since the US and Iran both oppose al-Qaida, Iranian gains against it will redound to America's benefit.
 
 There are two basic, fundamental problems with this idea.
 
 First, there is a mountain of evidence that Iran has no beef with al-Qaida and is happy to work with it.
 
 According to the 9/11 Commission's report, between eight and 10 of the September 11 hijackers traveled through Iran before going to the US. And this was apparently no coincidence.
 
 According to the report, Iran had been providing military training and logistical support for al-Qaida since at least the early 1990s.
 
 After the battle of Tora Bora in December 2001, al-Qaida's leadership scattered. Many senior commanders - including bin Laden's son Said, al-Qaida's chief strategist Saif al-Adel and Suleiman Abu Ghaith - decamped to Iran, where they set up a command center.
 
 From Iran, these men directed the operations of al-Qaida forces in Iraq led by Abu Musab Zarqawi. Zarqawi entered Iraq from Iran and returned to Iran several times during the years he led al-Qaida operations in Iraq.
 
 Iran's cooperation with al-Qaida continues today in Syria.
 
 According to The Wall Street Journal, in directing the defense of Bashar Assad's regime in Syria, Iran has opted to leave ISIS and its al-Qaida brethren in the Nusra Front alone. That is why they have been able to expand their power in northern Syria.
 
 Iran and its allies have concentrated their attacks against the more moderate Free Syrian Army, which they view as a threat.
 
 Given Iran's 20-year record of cooperation with al-Qaida, it is reasonable to assume that it is deploying forces into Iraq to tighten its control over Shi'ite areas, not to fight al-Qaida. The record shows that Iran doesn't believe that its victories and al-Qaida's victories are mutually exclusive.
 
The second problem with the idea of subcontracting America's fight against al-Qaida to Iran is that it assumes that Iranian success in such a war would benefit America. But again, experience tells a different tale.
 
 The US killed Zarqawi in an air strike in 2006.
 
 Reports in the Arab media at the time alleged that Iran had disclosed Zarqawi's location to the US. While the reports were speculative, shortly after Zarqawi was killed, then-secretary of state Condoleezza Rice floated the idea of opening nuclear talks with Iran for the first time.
 
 The Iranians contemptuously rejected her offer. But Rice's willingness to discuss Iran's nuclear weapons program with the regime, even as it was actively engaged in killing US forces in Iraq, ended any serious prospect that the Bush administration would develop a coherent plan for dealing with Iran in a strategic and comprehensive way.
 
 Moreover, Zarqawi was immediately replaced by one of his deputies. And the fight went on.
 
 So if Iran did help the US find Zarqawi, the price the US paid for Iran's assistance was far higher than the benefit it derived from killing Zarqawi.
 
 This brings us to the real threat that the rise of ISIS - and Iran - in Iraq poses to the US. That threat is blowback.
 
 Both Iran and al-Qaida are sworn enemies of the United States, and both have been empowered by events of the past week.
 
 Because they view the US as their mortal foe, their empowerment poses a danger to the US.
 
 But it is hard for people to recognize how events in distant lands can directly impact their lives.
 
 In March 2001, when the Taliban blew up the Bamiyan Buddhas statues in Afghanistan, the world condemned the act. But no one realized that the same destruction would be brought to the US six months later when al-Qaida destroyed the World Trade Center and attacked the Pentagon.
 
 The September 11 attacks were the blowback from the US doing nothing to contain the Taliban and al-Qaida.
 
 North Korea's nuclear and ballistic-missile tests, as well as North Korean proliferation of both nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to rogue regimes, like Iran, that threaten the US, are the beginnings of the blowback from the US decision to reach a nuclear deal with Pyongyang in the 1990s that allowed the regime to keep its nuclear installations.
 
 The blowback from Iran's emergence as a nuclear power is certain to dwarf what the world has seen from North Korea so far.
 
 Yet rather than act in a manner that would reduce the threat of blowback from Iraq's disintegration and takeover by America's worst enemies, the Obama administration gives every indication that it is doubling down on the disastrous policies that led the US to this precarious juncture.
 
The only strategy that the US can safely adopt today is one of double containment. The aim of double containment is to minimize the capacity of Iran and al-Qaida to harm the US and its interests.
 
 But to contain your enemies, you need to understand them. You need to understand their nature, their aims, their support networks and their capabilities.
 
 Unfortunately, in keeping with what has been the general practice of the US government since the September 11 attacks, the US today continues to ignore or misunderstand all of these critical considerations.
 
 Regarding al-Qaida specifically, the US has failed to understand that al-Qaida is a natural progression from the political/religious milieu of Salafist/Wahabist or Islamist Islam, from whence it sprang. As a consequence, anyone who identifies with Islamist religious and political organizations is a potential supporter and recruit for al-Qaida and its sister organizations.
 
 There were two reasons that George W. Bush refused to base US strategy for combating al-Qaida on any cultural context broader than the Taliban.
 
 Bush didn't want to sacrifice the US's close ties with Saudi Arabia, which finances the propagation and spread of Islamism. And he feared being attacked as a bigot by Islamist organizations in the US like the Council on American Islamic Relations and its supporters on the Left.
 
 As for Obama, his speech in Cairo to the Muslim world in June 2009 and his subsequent apology tour through Islamic capitals indicated that, unlike Bush, Obama understands that al-Qaida is not a deviation from otherwise peaceful Islamist culture.
 
 But unlike Bush, Obama blames America for its hostility. Obama's radical sensibilities tell him that America pushed the Islamists to oppose it. As he sees it, he can appease the Islamists into ending their war against America.
 
 To this end, Obama has prohibited federal employees from conducting any discussion or investigation of Islamist doctrine, terrorism, strategy and methods and the threat all pose to the US.
 
 These prohibitions were directly responsible for the FBI's failure to question or arrest the Tsarnaev brothers in 2012 despite the fact that Russian intelligence tipped it off to the fact that the 2013 Boston Marathon bombers were jihadists.
 
 They were also responsible for the army's refusal to notice any of the black flags that Maj. Nidal Hassan raised in the months before his massacre of his fellow soldiers at Fort Hood, or to take any remedial action after the massacre to prevent such atrocities from recurring.
 
 The Muslim Brotherhood is the progenitor of Islamism. It is the organizational, social, political and religious swamp from whence the likes of al-Qaida, Hamas and other terror groups emerged. Whereas Bush pretended the Brotherhood away, Obama embraced it as a strategic partner.
 
 Then there is Iran.
 
 Bush opted to ignore the 9/11 Commission's revelations regarding Iranian collaboration with al-Qaida. Instead, particularly in the later years of his administration, Bush sought to appease Iran both in Iraq and in relation to its illicit nuclear weapons program.
 
 In large part, Bush did not acknowledge, or act on the sure knowledge, that Iran was the man behind the curtain in Iraq, because he believed that the American people would oppose the expansion of the US operations in the war against terror.
 
 Obama's actions toward Iran indicate that he knows that Iran stands behind al-Qaida and that the greatest threat the US faces is Iran's nuclear weapons program. But here as well, Obama opted to follow a policy of appeasement. Rather than prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, or stem its advance in Syria and Iraq, Obama treats Iran as though it poses no threat and is indeed a natural ally. He blames Iran's belligerence on the supposedly unjust policies of his predecessors and the US's regional allies.
 
 For a dual-containment strategy to have any chance of working, the US needs to reverse course. No, it needn't deploy troops to Iraq. But it does need to seal its border to minimize the chance that jihadists will cross over from Mexico.
 
 It doesn't need to clamp down on Muslims in America. But it needs to investigate and take action where necessary against al-Qaida's ideological fellow travelers in Islamist mosques, organizations and the US government. To this end, it needs to end the prohibition on discussion of the Islamist threat by federal government employees.
 
 As for Iran, according to The New York Times, Iran is signaling that the price of cooperation with the Americans in Iraq is American acquiescence to Iran's conditions for signing a nuclear deal. In other words, the Iranians will fight al-Qaida in Iraq in exchange for American facilitation of its nuclear weapons program.
 
 The first step the US must take to minimize the Iranian threat is to walk away from the table and renounce the talks. The next step is to take active measures to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power.
 
 Unfortunately, the Obama administration appears prepared to do none of these things. To the contrary, its pursuit of an alliance with Iran in Iraq indicates that it is doubling down on the most dangerous aspects of its policy of empowering America's worst enemies.
 
 It only took the Taliban six months to move from the Bamiyan Buddhas to the World Trade Center. Al-Qaida is stronger now than ever before. And Iran is on the threshold of a nuclear arsenal.

Isis breach of Iraq-Syria border merges two wars into one 'nightmarish reality' - Ian Black - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/18/isis-iraq-syria-two-wars-one-nightmare

 
Jihadi fighters celebrate advance with slick propaganda, but its enemies are responding on both sides of frontier
 
Under a burning sun, fighters of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isis) sang and waved their automatic weapons and black jihadi flags as they celebrated breaching the lonely desert frontier between Iraq and Syria.
 
To the soundtrack of a haunting Quranic chant, they watched as a bulldozer burst through a sand berm separating Nineveh in Iraq from the neighboring Syrian province of al Hassaka, followed by US-made Jeeps and Humvees with Iraqi army insignia that had been captured in the recent fighting.
 
The slick Isis propaganda machine sent the images out under the Twitter hashtag #SykesPicotOver - a gloating reference to the first world war Anglo-French agreement that secretly carved up the territories of the dying Ottoman Empire into British and French spheres of influence and (among others) new Arab nation states ruled from Baghdad and Damascus.
 
Yet jihadi advances are not only erasing the old borders and allowing Isis to claim it is in reach of its goal of creating a new Muslim caliphate, but also ensuring that the wars for Syria and Iraq have merged into one, each feeding on, affecting and sustaining the other.
 
Control of territory in north-eastern Syria helped Isis capture Mosul, Iraq's third-largest city. Money and arms flow easily. Croatian-made anti-tank weapons sent by Saudi Arabia via Jordan to mainstream rebel forces in southern Syria found their way to Isis fighters in Anbar province in Iraq. Last week convoys of trucks carrying captured Iraqi weapons arrived in Hassaka. Equipment including tanks has been moved to Raqqa in Syria, where Isis has its headquarters.
 
"The Iraq-Syria border is.... increasingly immaterial," commented Charles Lister, a military analyst at the Brookings Doha Centre. "Conflict on both sides of the border has become inherently interconnected." Comparisons are now being made with the way the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan became irrelevant for al-Qaida.
 
The effective erasure of the old border means that Isis can make tactical adjustments and new deployments in line with changing battlefield circumstances. It has acquired new strategic depth and more secure supply lines.
 
Its enemies are already responding - on both sides of the frontier. According to reports from Lebanon, Iraqi Shia fighters who have been fighting in Syria in support of President Bashar al-Assad are heading home again to bolster Nouri al-Maliki, Iraq's prime minister, in his war against Isis and a wider Sunni insurgency.
 
Iraq Shia militiamen deployed to Damascus to guard the revered Sayyida Zeinab shrine - along with Iranian revolutionary guards - are soon likely to be protecting the Shia holy places of Najaf and Karbala from Isis and other Sunni groups seeking to ignite a sectarian civil war. Many are with the Iraqi militia Asaib Ahl al-Haq, (League of the Righteous), an Iranian-backed force that is expected to spearhead the fight back against Isis. Men from the Lebanese Shia movement Hezbollah are filling the vacuum in Syria.
 
In another twist in the fast-moving situation, last weekend the Syrian air force staged its first raids on Isis bases in Raqqa, Hassakeh and Deir al-Zor. That was noteworthy because Assad's enemies have often accused him of tolerating Isis or tacitly cooperating with it in order to split rebel ranks and present himself as a secular bulwark against al-Qaida and jihadi fanaticism.
 
According to reports from Raqqa, Isis fighters inexplicably left their barracks 24 hours before the attack. In Deir al-Zor, planes seemed to fly in and out of Iraqi airspace, perhaps suggesting collaboration with Baghdad.
 
The Syrian National Coalition, the main western-backed opposition group, quickly dismissed the raids as "a ridiculous decoy". Assad, it claimed, "aims through this fake air strike against limited Isis administrative centers to send a message to the international community and to rebuild trust with it, after its close relationship with Isis was exposed".
 
Another more straightforward explanation, however, could be that developments in Iraq have forced the Syrian president to take the jihadis far more seriously than he appears to have done so far.
 
It was hard, though to argue with the coalition leader, Ahmad Jarba, who on Wednesday described "a nightmarish reality threatening the entire region" and warned that the "bloodbath that started in Syria is spreading to Iraq and unfortunately, is just the tip of the iceberg".
 
Isis, meanwhile, continues to reap propaganda benefits from its latest gains in Iraq. According to documents analysed by the US-based Institute for the Study of War, the group produces detailed annual reports on its operations and targets, presented with a clarity that speaks of clear state-building ambitions. It turns out that 2014 has been financially a very successful year, certainly helped by looting hundreds of millions of dollars from banks in Mosul - a haul one alarmed western diplomat described as "an absolute bonanza".
 
Experts caution, however, that it is important to see the weaknesses of Isis as well as its formidable strengths. "While al-Qaida and its affiliates are embracing a more patient, locally focused strategy, Isis manifests a determination for rapid, dramatic results," wrote Lister. "It's certainly just shown these in Iraq. But whether this will prove a more effective long-term strategy remains to be seen."

Small US special ops force offered by Obama will not halt Al Qaeda-Sunni entrenchment in Iraq - http://www.debka.com/article/24021/Will-the-US-halt-the-Al-Qaeda-juggernaut-on-the-move-in-Iraq-

 
President Obama is meeting members of his national security team at the White House Thursday, June 19, to decide if and how to intervene to halt the ISIS advance in Iraq. Baghdad has requested US air support. Washington would prefer to see Nuri al-Maliki step down as prime minister before rendering aid. Is the posting of the USS W.H. Bush opposite Iraq a sign of approaching US military intervention?
 
By dispatching the USS George W.H. Bush to the northern Gulf this week, Obama recalled his tactics at the outset of the Syrian civil war in 2011. He first piled up a menacing armada opposite Syrian shores and told Bashar Assad he must go. But then, he backed away from intervening in the Syrian crisis after all. Is that fro-and-back pattern being repeated in Iraq?
 
How to interpret the posting of a US warship opposite Iraq on June 15 and, for that matter, Barack Obama's comment two days earlier: "We do have a stake in making sure these jihadists are not getting a permanent foothold in either Syria or Iraq."
 
Has he again developed cold feet? The CIA and Pentagon have explained they have not been able to determine the exact makeup of Al Qaeda's ISIS  - the Islamist State in Iraq and the Levant which has swallowed up much of Iraq's Sunni heartland link.
 
According to DEBKA's military and intelligence sources, the Islamists advancing on Baghdad are not one, but two armies: The Al Qaeda element has been joined by a hodgepodge of Sufi groups, Saddam Hussein's old Baath Party guard, and US-trained Sunni Awakening Council tribes.
 
Iraq Wednesday formally requested US air support, including drone strikes and more surveillance, According to some reports, Washington will hold back anything more substantial that a hundred or so military instructors for Iraq's army, or perhaps a small number of Special Operation troops.
 
 Anyway,  Al Qaeda lacks the fixed formations of a professional army, making it an elusive target for pinpointed attacks. So the jihadis' advance may prove unstoppable and even if Baghdad survives, it may be too beleaguered to function as Iraq's capital.
 
Shiite Prime Minister Nuri al Maliki is hardly posed to meet US expectations for setting up a national unity government to heal the strife. The Obama administration would much prefer to see al Maliki step aside and that may be one of its conditions for substantial military aid.
 
As the situation is developing now, Iraq is more likely to break up into pseudo states as a result of the Al Qaeda led Sunni revolt against Maliki's regime. A Kurdish state in the north, a Shiite state in the south, and Al Qaeda and Sunni statelets in western, central and eastern Iraq, up to Baghdad's outskirts.
 
ISIS also has plans to send its heavily indoctrinated foreign recruits back to their own countries primed for terror: "The people in that regime, as well as trying to take territory, are also planning to attack us here at home in the United Kingdom."
 
Al Qaeda's success in the face of Obama's vacillations may infect Iraq's neighbors with an epidemic of instability..
 

PLEASE VISIT MY OTHER WEBSITES:

 

HTTP://PROPHECY-WATCHER-WEEKLY-NEWS.BLOGSPOT.COM

 

HTTP://CREATIONDESIGN2013.BLOGSPOT.COM

 

HTTP://PROPHECY-WATCHER.BLOGSPOT.COM