Iraq falling apart as militants march towards Baghdad, US begins embassy evacuation

Hey kids! Guess which country is falling apart at the seams again? Iraq!

Al-Qaeda inspired rebels, from a group called ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), have apparently grabbed a large number of cities, and are now marching towards Baghdad. You’ll recognize a number of the cities they’ve taken over in just the past few months, including Mosul, Tikrit and Fallujah.

Things have gotten so bad that the US embassy in Baghdad is moving some of its staff out of the city. The militants are now 60 miles from Baghdad.

Lest you think this is all the US’ fault, Time explains that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has made sectarian tensions worse by alienating Sunnis.  Respected analyst Tony Cordesman, writing with Sam Khazai, has more:

No one within the region can defend against the kind of violent Islamic extremism that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) represents, and the threat it poses to Iraq, Syria, and the wider region is incredibly destabilizing. Unfortunately, Prime Minister Maliki poses an equally destabilizing threat of a different kind. He cannot govern, and he represses and divides. In fact, he threatens to become another Saddam Hussein, albeit one without the same “charm” and effectiveness.

The key problem, however, is that Maliki has corrupted and undermined the army, police, and justice system in his consolidation of power and personal advantage. For years, Maliki has intimidated and driven key Sunni figures out of his government, ignored agreements to create a national unity government, alienated the Kurds, and tried to repress legitimate Sunni opposition in ways that have contributed to steadily rising violence and civilian deaths. These failures in governance by Prime Minister Maliki’s government date back to 2010-2011, long before ISIS captured Fallujah and Ramadi in December 2013, and seized control of Mosul and Tikrit in June of 2014.

He used the Army and police in ways that alienated Sunnis in Iraq’s West and North, used them to attack peaceful protests, and failed to keep his promises to offer jobs and promotions to the Sons of Iraq. He also has corrupted the security forces, using promotions and interim appointments for his own political advantage, and let the army and police steadily deteriorate. Pay and support had riding problems, positions and promotions were for sale, desertions increased and there were more and more ghost soldiers — men listed as present but not actually there.

puppy-iraq
As Jon Stewart notes below, the old Mess-o-Potamia is back.


NOTE FROM JOHN: Please share our content on social media, including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Tumblr, Google+, Pinterest and beyond. When you share our stories, you help bring us visitors, which increases our ad revenue and helps to keep this site afloat. Thanks for your help. JOHN


Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown (1989); and worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, and as a stringer for the Economist. Frequent TV pundit: O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline & Reliable Sources. Bio, .

Share This Post

  • LumberJock

    Not being testy; you have a difficult enough job without gasoline from the choir. But … all I was doing was parroting the trolls. I’ll quit; it’s still a legitimate procedure.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcrEqIpi6sg Moderator4

    Your duplicate comment below was deleted. No need to keep repeating yourself.

  • LumberJock

    Your over-simplified answers and objectives places you in the bandwidth of 15-yo Utopians. Naive, much?

  • Bill_Perdue

    Your attempt to provide excuses for the Democrats mad dog warmongering is best left to the experts at MSNBC.

  • LumberJock

    That’s about where I wanted to go. We can’t be the piggy bank, either!

  • LumberJock

    Your over-simplified answers and objectives places you in the bandwidth of 15-yo Utopians. Naive, much?

  • Badgerite

    There is a middle ground between ‘walk away’ and ‘push the troops off the cliff’. I think that is what is Obama is searching for. We don’t live there. But countries we are allied with and have long standing relationships with do.
    We need to work with them, this time, as opposed to ‘creating our own reality’.
    It isn’t ours. It’s their’s. And we have to be cognizant of that and act accordingly.

  • Butch Darling

    I purposefully didn’t include Turkey in the exclusion zone, just as I omitted Israel, Greece & the Yugoslav Peninsula. This is not our problem. We can’t undo the wrong-headed intervention of the adventurous foreign policy employed by the republi-can’ts; therefore, we should just – walk – away!

  • Badgerite

    Because we have allies there. Like Turkey, Jordan, the Kurds. And they are being affected by this as well. And because the region is the repository of a lot of the worlds oil supply. And that is power that can be exerted on the rest of the world. Josh Marshall also had second thoughts and changed his mind before the invasion. Primarily because he was hearing from sources just how unprepared the Bush people were. Their eyes (ambitions) were bigger than their abilities.
    And as well because there are people there with fear in their eyes because they trusted us. The Kurds come to mind. To let the region sink into a pool of blood is not going to make the region more legitimate or better. Or the world either.

  • Bill_Perdue

    The left.

  • LumberJock

    If the Democrats aren’t an example of supporting democratic issues and values, who is?

  • LumberJock

    Why belittle the suggestion? Why not discuss it?
    We had no business there in the first place. At first I was somewhat, if not grudgingly, willing to endorse the: ” … if not us, who; if not now, when? … “.
    Upon pensive reflection, I realized – before the invasion, actually – that the mid-east is in a spasm of self-determinism, that unlike democracy is still a social search for a type of government acceptable to their religious themed life.
    Their solution is anathema to us which is why the republi-can’ts are bellowing like ruptured elephants.

  • Badgerite

    Uh Huh.

  • Badgerite

    Uh Huh!

  • Bill_Perdue

    The Galapagos Islands!

  • Bill_Perdue

    I proved that Carter was a union buster. You’re in denial.

    There is a crackdown in Russia but has nothing to do with this discussion.

    Focus.

  • Badgerite

    Sure you did. As I recall, and I do, the articles you cited said the exact opposite of what you said they said.

  • Badgerite

    Nigeria.

  • Bill_Perdue

    Are you in Cloud Cuckoo Land. You’ve made some awfully silly comments but that gets the ribbon.

  • Bill_Perdue

    Your agenda is to apologize for wars, union busting and all the rest.

    You’re historically illiterate.

    I proved that here – http://americablog.com/2014/03/putin-wants-finland-baltic-states-says-former-top-adviser.html but you got Carter and Reagan confused. This time try to remember Carter was president before Reagan.

  • Badgerite

    Your agenda is as I said. God only knows why. But I have my suspicions.
    You seem to hate the democratic party and blame them for everything that has ever gone wrong in the US or the world. Even when the connections you make are utterly ridiculous. Like Jimmy Carter being anti union. Utterly absurd.

  • Badgerite

    Well, selling young girls into sexual slavery does not sound all that much like a ‘workers movement’ to me.

  • Bill_Perdue

    You have a right to be in denial. Be my guest.

  • Bill_Perdue

    You’re in denial. And wrong. And not addressing my comments.

  • Badgerite

    The “massive transformation” in the Arab world is radical Islam and Sharia.
    If you look at what is going on in Kenya, Nigeria, Iraq and Syria as the rise of unionism and “workers movements”, you are either lying or completely deluded.

  • Badgerite

    Uh huh. And Dennis Kucinich will one day be President. Your agenda is to support the conflict that is now flaring in Iraq. And nothing more.

  • Badgerite

    The question answers itself. Doesn’t it?. It is not a question but an accusation which I find wholly ridiculous and not worth ‘answering’.

  • Bill_Perdue

    What?

    In my experience only confused people think the Democrat party has any semblance of democracy in it’s policies or it’s internal life.

  • LumberJock

    Mis-spoken?
    Since when is opposing racism or colonialism a cornerstone of republi-can’t advanced foreign policy?
    To have a policy is rhetoric. Republi-can’t policy is always country balanced by their practices. Hence republi-can’ts policy is to oppose, but their practice is to ensure the effects of racism and colonialism line their pockets.
    Calling it Democrat foreign policy calls your perspective into question. In my experience only republi-can’ts and chicken hawk libertarians use that noun incorrectly.

  • KathleenKennettiel

    My Uncle
    Joshua just got an almost new white Kia Rio Hatchback only from working
    part-time off a home computer. try this R­e­x­1­0­.­C­O­M­

  • Bill_Perdue

    You didn’t answer my question.

    What is it about the murderous ayatollahs and mass murdering American empire builders like the Bushes, the Clintons and Obama that attracts the support of people like you?

    The opinions of the right and of people who could work with or for war criminals like Obama or mass murderers like the made ayatollahs are not interesting to me.

  • Bill_Perdue

    My agenda is to advance the cause of socialism and provide reasons to oppose racism and colonialism, the cornerstones of Democrat and Republican foreign policy.

  • Bill_Perdue

    You’re politically and historically illiterate.

  • Badgerite

    God, You’re nuts.

  • Badgerite

    I was being sarcastic.

  • Badgerite

    Good. I don’t think you are a particularly honest enterprise. So I don’t post to change your alleged mind.

  • Bill_Perdue

    You know, I don’t care what you think. The US is the main enemy of the people of the world and I oppose the Obama regime. The mad ayatollahs of Iran have murdered thousands of gays, women, trade unionists and leftists.

    The regime in Baghdad is doomed. It will be another terrible defeat for Obama and the US military war machine. It will further endanger the zionist colony in Palestine.

    Why are you so attracted to imperialists and murderers like Obama and the ayatollahs?

  • Bill_Perdue

    That is very good advice for the right.

  • Bill_Perdue

    You’re wrong. The Arab Spring is a euphemism for the growth of militant union and workers movements from Morocco to Indonesia. That may well frighten you but denial won’t end this massive transformation in the Arab and muslim world.

  • Badgerite

    The Bathists like Saddam and Assad were the ‘wheel chocks’. I don’t know quite how you are determining there was less violence. Except to ignore the Iran/Iraq war and all the casualties on both sides. Women and Christians were certainly more protected under Saddam. Gays as well. So long as it was private. But Shiites were not. And Kurds were not.

  • Badgerite

    There is no Arab ‘spring’. Not even in Egypt. All that brought to power was the religious theocrats of the Muslim Brotherhood and a military coupe ( along the lines of Attaturk. )

  • Badgerite

    Good luck with that.

  • Badgerite

    So , sit back and “watch the spectacle”.

  • Badgerite

    You know, you say you are against the ISIS but you condemn anyone who fights them.
    The US and Iran are the only entities in the world or the region who are likely to be able or willing to do so. So when you condemn Iran for aiding Maliki, you basically are supporting a surrender of all of Iraq to the ISIS. With the exception of maybe the Kurds. And I think you haven’t ‘condemned’ them because you just haven’t thought about them. You do a lot of
    ‘condemning’. But you provide no real options except those offered by Noam Chomsky who said he would sit back and “watch the spectacle.” in Syria. And — the spectacle has spread.
    Hasn’t it?

  • LumberJock

    No one appointed the U.S. the political and governmental police of the planet.

    Just because we were obliquely disgusted with Saddam alTikriti’s human rights record … !

    Close and destroy the embassy. Remove all civilians with government cover or association. Leave them to clean-up their mess. Same for Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Bahrain, Abu Dhabi, Syria, Lebannon, Egypt, Somalia, Libya, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kuwait and the rest of that area. Seal’em off. Ban their oil. Let the world live without their fundamentalism, religious and tribal warfare, oil or sand.

  • lillianhoward

    my Aunty
    Molly recently got an awesome 6 month old Audi A4 by work part-time using a
    laptop. why not try this out

    ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

    ⓦⓞⓡⓚⓢ77.c­o­m

  • KathleenKennettiel

    as Thelma
    explained I cannot believe that a stay at home mom can make $7420 in four weeks
    on the internet . more info here R­e­x­1­0­.­C­O­M­

  • Reasor

    Saddam Hussein’s old army responded to contact with the enemy (us) by throwing down their weapons, taking off their uniforms, and disappearing as quietly as possible. Maliki’s new army responds to contact with the enemy (ISIS) by throwing down their weapons, taking off their uniforms, and disappearing as quietly as possible. Worrying about the state of Iraq’s army before it has a government worth fighting for is putting the cart before the horse.

  • Silver_Witch

    “No identification of self or mission. No interference with the social development of said [country]. No references to [religion] or the fact that there are [better] worlds or civilizations.”

  • MyrddinWilt

    No, thats not true. The Iraqi army was not 100% Sunni. The senior officers were mostly Saddam loyalists from Tikrit but Saddam was trying to pretend sectarian rivalries didn’t exist, not fan the flames.

    Even the Iranians have been telling Maliki not to spend so much time getting revenge on the Sunni population.

  • Indigo

    You probably mean “abroad.” “A broad” is an ungentlemanly expression for a lady.

  • Bill_Perdue

    I disagree.

    The US is directly and solely responsible for the huge upsurge in sectarian and other forms of violence in Iraq, Libya, Bahrain, Palestine, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Pakistan.

    Just as the English were directly and solely responsible for the intercommunal mass murders of 1947.

    The level of violence was much, much lower under the Baathist regime. The Bushes, the Clintons and Obama are directly to blame for the genocide in Iraq and should be investigated by an International War Crimes Tribunal.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    The conflict between Shia and Sunni (and both against any outside, “western” influence) has been going on a lot longer than than the US has even been a country. All we did was kick the temporary wheel chock out from under it, so it could get rolling again. Like the British and French empires before us, it’s easy to blame our pathetic attempts at empire building and imposing our will on other nations, but we didn’t create anything. Their conflict is all their own. How they treat their people is all their own. We’re just the meddlers trying to exploit it for profit.

  • Bill_Perdue

    Here’s part of the statement of the leftist Federation of Workers’ Councils and Unions in Iraq. Mosul and other cities in Iraq are experiencing dramatic, dangerous, and fateful changes.[ISIS fighters in Iraq. … The media, especially that which is allied with the Iraqi government and western states, has been focusing on the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant/Syria (ISIS) … it is also true that Iraqis generally reject ISIS, whether in the central or southern regions of Iraq or in parts of the country that are no longer under government control: the so-called “Sunni” areas or the “Sunni Triangle,” a term that intelligence services, particularly the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), devised as part of a plan to engineer sectarianism in Iraq. At the same time, Iraqis generally reject Maliki’s regime and its policies, built as they are on an ethno-sectarian basis. This is especially the case in urban areas where sectarian discrimination is most concentrated, wherein the government treats ordinary people as political enemies. … The fall of several Iraqi cities in the hands of armed groups does not represent the dreams of the people who live there. Their demands to be rid of sectarianism are clear and direct. … Regional forces that benefit from Iraq’s disintegration—especially Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey—operate in their own way to achieve political gains. All the while the US government—the prime cause of these problems to begin with—prepares to intervene however it chooses. … The working class in Iraq is the common force that exists across the county, from the north of Kurdistan to the furthest points south. It is this force whose very existence and survival depends on the eradication of discrimination and the unification of the Iraqi people. This is the only force that can end fragmentation and division.

    We reject US intervention and protest President Obama’s inappropriate speech in which he expressed concern over oil and not over people. We also stand firmly against the brazen meddling of Iran. … We aim to stand with those who represent the interests of the people and to empower them in the face of this dangerous and reactionary attack. We call for a clear international position to curb the deteriorating situation as well as regional interference, and to support the people of Iraq.

  • Bill_Perdue

    You’re wrong. They went in for the oil and stayed for the profits of the military industrial complex.

    Republican Senator CHARLES HAGEL: “People say we’re not fighting for oil. Of course we are. They talk about America’s national interest. What the hell do you think they’re talking about? We’re not there for figs.” (Speaking at Catholic University, Sept. 24, 2007)

    Former Federal Reserve Chairman ALAN GREENSPAN, in his book The Age of Turbulence; Adventures in a New World: “I’m saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: The Iraq war is largely about oil.”

    Democratic Senator JOHN TESTER: “We’re still fighting a war in Iraq and people who are honest about it will admit we’re there over oil.” (Associated Press, Sept. 24, 2007)

    General JOHN ABIZAID, retired commander of CENTCOM: “Of course it’s about oil, we can’t really deny that.” (Speaking at Stanford University, Oct. 13, 2007)

    In their pursuit of oil hegemony and controlling the profits of gas pipe lines US military commanders deliberately set sunni against shiite, and both against Kurds. It’s why the US armed both sunni police and shiite militia who declared open season on GLBT folks. Scapegoat and divide and rule are the names of their game. Get them distracted fighting each other and killing us and the oil piracy will be that much easier. That’s the common policy
    of the Bushes, the Clintons and Obama.

  • emjayay

    Like the thousands already killed. And then the millions of girls thrown out of school and shoved into walking pup tents when they are allowed to step out the door, accompanied by their brothers.

  • Bill_Perdue

    The US created the sectarian war with the invasion and occupation. The US was never there to enforce peace. When the sunni and shiite police and militias were kidnapping, murdering and torturing hundred of gays the Obama regimes US military command and Hillary Clinton’s State Dept. ignored the gay community’s plea for protection.

  • emjayay

    You know what they say:

    Don’t throw good money after bad.

  • emjayay

    I do not think that is correct, although it was certainly an opportunity to shovel a huge bunch of money to Haliburton etc. in the short term. They simply believed in the miracle of Freedom and Capitalism and American Exceptionalism and Jesus. Shock and Awe, rose petals in the streets, tons of weapons of mass destruction and yellow cake and aluminum tubes immediately discovered, democracy, job over. No need for planning or anything.

  • Bill_Perdue

    What will solve the worst problems in the region is the poorly named ‘Arab
    Spring’. It began as an ad hoc anti-government alliance in Tunisia and Egypt but now, with the islamists moving right and trying to impose Sharia and break unions, it’s composed solely of the growing union movement, the most radical wing of the pro-democracy movement and the anti-colonial movement. The islamists are on their own and doing poorly.

    It began with the upsurge and the mass demonstrations in Iran in 2009-10 and after Manning released documents proving the right wing role of the US it spread to Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Iraq and Turkey. Continued repression keeps it underground but it has an enormous hold on the sympathies of working people. After ordering the judicial murder (ala Obama) of over 200 islamists the Egyptian junta ran Abdel Fattah el-Sisi for president and he received 99.9999% of the 20% of voters who bothered to vote. The rest stayed home. Before becoming president el-Sisi was the most high and exalted Commander-in-Chief of the Egyptian Armed Forces.

    The Arab Spring will eventually amass the forces necessary to eliminate the power of the royalists, ayatollahs and the dictators.

  • ComradeRutherford

    ” If the idiots in the G.W. Bush regime had any knowledge of the region, they would have realized this and left it alone.”

    Bush II were not idiots, they knew exactly what they were doing: setting up perpetual war profiteering for centuries to come.

  • ComradeRutherford

    Yep, your assessment is 100% correct. I would only add that the ISIS army are Syrian-battle-hardened while the Iraqis have not been in any battles (oh, sure, certain individuals had to have been in a few over the years, but the Iraqi army as a whole has not).

    But the Conservatives don’t give a shit about facts when they have unlimited air time on all media to make up the craziest lies about Democrats.

  • Monte Logan

    I knew that the US corrupt involvement with the middle east was before G.W.B got into office but I never realized that it extended THAT far. So this nightmare truly is us reaping what we’ve sewn. We should have never gotten involved with the Middle East. at least in this form. maybe things would have been a lot more peaceful for the citizens in these countries. I already know that the Sunni/Shiite conflict would still continue, but I’m hoping that it wouldn’t have been on this level if we left them alone.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    That certainly didn’t help, but if we had left the army in tact, all it would have done is reverse the power dynamic. Leaving the Sunnis with government power, and leaving the Shiites to be the militants. This civil war was always coming, the second we deposed Saddam Hussein and his sons. Having a secular military strong man, who brutally crushed any opposition, was what was keeping the stability. Not just the presence of a military. They have a ~300k strong military now, that was trained and equipped with billions American dollars. A total waste, as they lay down arms at the first sign of ISIS flags.

  • Monte Logan

    It’s pretty much a damned if we do, damned if we don’t situation then. Ultimately, all of the people who live there and are forced into the middle of this are screwed.

  • http://www.americablog.com/ Naja pallida

    Having us involved would be the worst possible scenario, for us and them. It would cost us a fortune in money and lives, and do nothing but turn the violence on us. Delaying their sectarian conflict until the next time we decide to leave. There is simply no way we can enforce peace at the end of a gun barrel in perpetuity, between factions that have been fighting each other for over a thousand years.

  • Monte Logan

    There needs to be something that can fix this. what would be great is if we end up involved again, it would be a government that just simply wants safety and protection for all of the innocent civilians of Iraq. But unfortunately, we’re not gonna get that any time soon huh?

  • Elijah Shalis

    It is 100% the U.S.’s problem. We were warned not to disband the Iraqi Army when he invaded but we did anyway. That is the reason for the problem today.

  • The_Fixer

    I was not aware of the existence of that recording.

    Which means that these people are even more evil than previously thought. And yet, they appear on the Sunday news shows as “respected statesmen.”

    Evil bastards that are rubbing their hands together with glee, saying “We got away with it!”. Completely disgusting.

  • hoplite_i

    They knew. I heard a recording of Cheney just the other day from the early 90’s saying exactly what would happen if they went to Baghdad and removed Sadam Hussein. He was exactly right. So they knew. They just didn’t care.

    But that’s what the Shock Doctrine is all about. Break things, heist a lot of taxpayer money for your friends while doing it, distract people from your thievery here and a broad by talking about terrorist this, terrorist that… you know the drill.

  • The_Fixer

    Iraq does not want to be a country. If the idiots in the G.W. Bush regime had any knowledge of the region, they would have realized this and left it alone. Instead, all that our invasion accomplished was for the U.S. to become even more hated than we already were for our past interference.

    First, we go in and remove the only unifying force – Saddaam Hussein’s government. By doing so, we threw the entire country into chaos. We gave an opening to any party who wanted control of their resources, except, ironically, the U.S. Sure we got some oil contracts out of the deal, but how long are they going to be practical to exploit? Of course, that’s overlooking the obvious – that we had no business exploiting their resources.

    It’s way past time for us to get our nose out of the Middle East. As painful as it will be for these people, we need to stay out of this. Nothing we have tried to do has done any good, and no future effort will fix that.

  • Bill_Perdue

    Both ISIS and the Baghdad government are more properly islamist states, that is states ruled by religious cliques. Both are reactionary and anti-union, both reject democratic norms and have no sympathy for the idea of civil liberties or secular government.

  • Indigo

    That’s fine. Let them have their sectarian quarrel. It puts me in mind of the Thirty Years War (1616-1648) in Europe. Protestants and Catholics and their quarrels. Now it’s Shia and Sunni and their quarrels. Let them at each other. It’s not about us.

  • Bill_Perdue

    The US war against the Arab and muslim world for control of oil began in earnest under Truman, who aided the zionist attack on Palestine and under Eisenhower, who attacked Iran, overthrowing an elected government opposed by western oil companies. (Shades of Ukraine.)

    Those attacks have been continued by every US regime – Democrat and Republican – since that time and the most consistent part of that attack has been their bankrolling the zionist colony in Palestine, which would quickly collapse without American backing.

    In the intervening years Democrat and Republican regimes attacked Libya. Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Palestine, Bahrain, Yemen, Afghanistan, Sudan and Pakistan and as the material leaked by LGBT and antiwar hero Chelsea Manning proves, they’ve backed military and royal dictatorships from Morocco to Indonesia. Each of these American regimes is guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Each should be hauled before an International War Crimes Tribunal.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijgpKUmvd2Q

    Some think that ISIS will stop and consolidate their regional control in the west and spread to former sunni areas in the south creating three states – Kurdistan, and sunni and shiite regions with no central government.

    I disagree, I think the sunnis will press on and attack the shiites as will forces loyal to the former Baathist regime.

    Obama’s options to intervene are limited and antiwar sentiment will have the same humiliating effect it did when he wanted to attack Syria. In events that closely follow the humiliation Nixon and the American military faced in Vietnam, Obama and the American military were forced to withdraw when the shiite government threatened to file war crimes charges against US military and mercenary forces. They’re in the process of losing in Afghanistan and that will be another big defeat. As the Arab/muslim Spring expands there will be more defeats for the US.

  • Monte Logan

    Oh for fuck’s sake.

    Is there ANY Islamic government leader that can be trusted to NOT continue the age old religious war and piss off a ton of their own people to the point where they decide to go full on Kanye West?.

© 2014 AMERICAblog News. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS