WI: Iraq collapsed in 2014?

SirHalifax

SirHalifax

If this is supposed to be in Chat, I’m sorry.

What if, by sheer luck, Iraq completely collapsed into anarchy after ISIS manages to take Baghdad. I don’t want the whole thread to devolve into “this is impossible“. I’m fully aware that this is almost bordering on ASB. I want to know the effects. How does the rest of the Arab world react? Iran? The USA? Russia?
Oh, and also, let’s say ISIS demolishes the Tabqa Dam, so that Iraq (and a good chunk of Syria) plunges into chaos.
 

pricklyBear

Banned
I don't think ISIS is crazy enough like the Khmer Rouge was. They want a pan-Islamic caliphate, which necessitates centralized, authoritarian rule and reflected by their brutal, tight control of places like Mosul. They aren't gonna destroy the Tabqa Dam, they didn't do it when they held it against a Kurdish offensive in 2017. If ISIS takes Baghdad, they will force people to convert to their brand of Sunni Islam or be beheaded, as opposed to wantonly killing people. They want power at the end of the day, not pure killing for the heck of it.
 

Rfl23

A more intensified foreign involvement would happen (the us embassy there would be besieged just like in tehran back 79 but considering the us is prepared this time maybe they will hold out much longer) maybe a un resolution would be declared
 
Gillan1220

Gillan1220

If Iraq collapsed in 2014, the migrant crisis into Europe occurs one year earlier. It would be worse than Yemen IOTL.
 
SirHalifax

SirHalifax

Rfl23 said:
A more intensified foreign involvement would happen (the us embassy there would be besieged just like in tehran back 79 but considering the us is prepared this time maybe they will hold out much longer) maybe a un resolution would be declared
Click to expand...
I think the US embassy would be evacuated as ISIS approaches the city.
 
Gillan1220

Gillan1220

SirHalifax said:
How would this affect the Ukraine situation then? Since Russia and NATO are coordinating?
Click to expand...
Ukraine would be placed on the side for awhile. My guess is some backdoor negotiations are ongoing not to escalate Ukraine as ISIS would be seen as the bigger threat.
 
SirHalifax

SirHalifax

Gillan1220 said:
Ukraine would be placed on the side for awhile. My guess is some backdoor negotiations are ongoing not to escalate Ukraine as ISIS would be seen as the bigger threat.
Click to expand...
Alright, that seems logical. How much longer would you give ISIs after the Russo-NATO intervention. I would say their conventional forces are defeated in a few months, then a long insurgency.

How would Bush. Jr be viewed in this world? IMO he would be viewed as “this guy fucked up big time”
 

Questerr

ISIS taking Baghdad means there’s a very good chance Iran sends its military into Iraq to protect the Shia. I know they already had the IRGC and allied militias, on the ground, but I mean more than just SOF.
 

mial42

Gone Fishin'
SirHalifax said:
Alright, that seems logical. How much longer would you give ISIs after the Russo-NATO intervention. I would say their conventional forces are defeated in a few months, then a long insurgency.

How would Bush. Jr be viewed in this world? IMO he would be viewed as “this guy fucked up big time”
Click to expand...
He's already viewed that way. He might be viewed even worse, but it's hard to get a lower opinion than OTL.

If anything Obama will get a major reputation hit over OTL.
 

Rfl23

SirHalifax said:
I think the US embassy would be evacuated as ISIS approaches the city.
Click to expand...
But what if let say the approach of isis was way faster than anticipated and a good chunk of the staff and personel is left behind? I think it would lead the us to direct its effort into taking baghdad first (no matter how imposibble that is) or maybe a desert claw 2.0 (maybe using that super stol c-130)
 
EnglishCanuck

EnglishCanuck

SirHalifax said:
How would this affect the Ukraine situation then? Since Russia and NATO are coordinating?
Click to expand...
Gillan1220 said:
Ukraine would be placed on the side for awhile. My guess is some backdoor negotiations are ongoing not to escalate Ukraine as ISIS would be seen as the bigger threat.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't necessarily be so sure about that. Iraq would be seen as a distinctly American problem from the Russian perspective, and a greater shift of US focus would more likely embolden them in Ukraine. If the US is diverting resources and air power to monitor Iraq as ISIL advances and Iran needs to openly intervene, there's basically nothing stopping them from openly annexing Crimea and crossing the border openly to give aid to the pro-Russian protests which were popping up all over the place in spring 2014. They didn't intervene directly in Syria until 2015 at the request of the Syrian government. Here I can't really see them passing up the opportunity to extend their influence further in Eastern Europe by trying to carve out a client state in eastern Ukraine more populous and economically viable than the Donetsk region alone.

That might fade by 2015 if ISIL has some greater success in Syria, but taking Baghdad and probably having to deal with an Iranian incursion and heavy US airpower would probably tie up most of their resources in Iraq and give the Assad regime some much needed breathing room. If ISIL manages to hang on and get more powerful into 2015 then I imagine the Russians would basically be given a free hand in Ukraine in exchange for propping up the Syrian regime to prevent the whole region from falling into chaos.
 
TheCoolCucumber

TheCoolCucumber

Rfl23 said:
But what if let say the approach of isis was way faster than anticipated and a good chunk of the staff and personel is left behind? I think it would lead the us to direct its effort into taking baghdad first (no matter how imposibble that is) or maybe a desert claw 2.0 (maybe using that super stol c-130)
Click to expand...
It just isn't going to happen. ISIS isn't superhuman, they aren't just going to show up outside Baghdad one morning. The Americans had plans for the rapid evacuation of diplomats if Baghdad was threatened, centered around amphibious warfare ships in the gulf. If the fall of Baghdad is a possibility most of the embassy staff will be long gone before the time comes for an emergency evacuation anyway.
 

boredviewer1234

TheCoolCucumber said:
It just isn't going to happen. ISIS isn't superhuman, they aren't just going to show up outside Baghdad one morning. The Americans had plans for the rapid evacuation of diplomats if Baghdad was threatened, centered around amphibious warfare ships in the gulf. If the fall of Baghdad is a possibility most of the embassy staff will be long gone before the time comes for an emergency evacuation anyway.
Click to expand...
I would given Daesh are not a issue in Baghdad given the ethnic cleansing.

The more likely thing is people go crazy trying to escape/loot the city and the embassy get's attacked by people wanting hostages/info to bargain their way out for their families.

Less Iran 1979 and more they want a plane to fly them out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top