Talk:Iraqi Ground Forces

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 21:01, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: The .army-guide.com/eng/product2736.html link here says that Iraq had ordered some Doosan Barracuda APCs? Can I put it in the equipment section? Ominae (talk) 08:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: South Korean Doosan Barracuda APC question?

message: This article in a few places implies that the "Iraq War" finished in 03 and whats happening now is post war action. For fucks sake.Terrasidius (talk) 02:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Major military operations have long finished in Iraq. This IS post war. --213.202.189.94 (talk) 12:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: your comment seems very ignorant. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: WTF?

message: Hi, just think that someone should expand on the performance and structure of the IA during the 2003 invasion. I think someone other than me would be interested in the history of the IA in this period...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lawrencema (talk • contribs) 13:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion of history of IA at the start/during OIF-1 

message: It is important to list the current Iraqi Army Generals as this is very critical in the current transition of power in Iraq. 
The Iraqi Government decreasing it's utilization of US forces and using their own confident and combat proven soldiers.
Such as Brigadier General Nassir al-Hiti the commander of Muthanna 3rd Brigade 6th Division. He was noted by visiting Scholar at the Hudson Institute in Washington DC, and he writes a weekly column on the Middle East for the New York Sun, and a monthly column for the Prospect Magazine (UK) Nibras Kazimi, "There’s no shortage of troops for Baghdad, a place much easier for the Iraqi military to patrol. And many of these troops are actually pretty darn good. I would cite the example of an officer such as Brig. Gen. Nassir al-Hiti of the Muthana Brigade in Abu Ghraib. I would put him up against the best Brig. Gen. in any NATO army, including America’s. But there are certain pockets of Abu Ghraib that he is not allowed to patrol because the US military has struck deals with local CLC commanders who were active in the Islamic Army or the 1920 Revolution Brigades. Problem is, these CLCs are not, in fact, keeping a tight lid on soft-insurgent actions (…such as lobbing mortars) or organized crime networks as well as Gen. al-Hiti is doing. Why continue subsidizing what’s failing (the ex-insurgents, who can barely stay ahead of Al-Qaeda’s assassins) and not using what’s succeeding (the Iraqi Army)? commented by Nibras Kazimi نبراس الكاظمي a visiting Scholar at the Hudson Institute in Washington DC, and he writes a weekly column on the Middle East for the New York Sun, and a monthly column for the Prospect Magazine (UK).Mistrust as Iraqi Troops Encounter New U.S. AlliesBnguyen (talk) 11:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Current Iraqi Army Generals

message: According to this MNF-I press conference here, the Iraqi Army has nearly 3200 up-armored HMMWVs, whereas this article has only 713 M1114s. What explains the discrepancy? Is it simply out of date? Lawrencema (talk) 02:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Most likely. It's also possible that some of their vehicles are loaners from the US and thus not 'officially' theirs. More documentation is required. Jtrainor (talk) 12:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of Iraqi Humvees 

message: Would it be an idea to do wiki articles on the pre-Iraqi Army small arms?
Tabuk rifles - Based on M70 rifles by Zastava
Al Quds - Zastava M72 LMG
Tariq pistols - Various Beretta 
I'm not sure on Al-Kadesiah, but I'll probably do research on its connection on the Al-Qadissiya Establishments with some article research. Hard to get info on this. Ominae (talk) 10:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Question on Iraqi small arms

message: This is an automated message regarding an image used on this page. The image :File:7th Division Iraqi Army.png, found on :Iraqi Army, has been nominated for deletion because it does not meet Wikipedia image policy. Please see the image description page for more details. If this message was sent in error (that is, the image is not up for deletion, or was left on the wrong talk page), please contact this bot's operator.  STBotI (talk) 00:11, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: An image on this page may be deleted

message: Something mentioned here, and I saw when I was in Iraq, are the ranks of "Staff Brigadier General", "Staff Major General", etc.  I assume they are really just BGs and MGs, but where does the "staff" part come from?  What is the history behind it? 70.109.61.103 (talk) 01:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Staff title means they've gone to Staff College - they also wear British style red staff tabs.  Buckshot06 (talk) 23:02, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is a staff general? 

message: Someone seemed to have editted the light weapons loadout of the Iraqi army to include K98Ks, Mosin-Nagant Rifles and Lee-Enfield SMLEs. I don't know the reason or intention behind it, but this is obviously ridiculous - even for a horrendously badly-armed military force like the IA. The cheapest, most standard rifles there are AKM's and Chinese 56 Variants, so that's why I am gonna change it. I am not getting any messages from here, so pleasereply to my user-page so i can get back to you ASAP. Cheers all. Pink Princess (talk) 14:22, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  WW2 Equipment. 

message: This article is creeping up on the 100kb (currently at 76kb).  Wikipedia guidelines generally recommend that an article be split at about 60kb unless there's a good reason not to split it (See WP:SPLIT).  Looking at the article, there are several obvious sections that could be spun off into their own articles.  Most other national military pages, for example, have a dedicated history section.  Equipment sections are also frequently spun off into their own sections.  Timelines often have their own articles as well. The Criticism and Challenges section could probably be moved to its own article. All, or any combination of these new pages would help improve the readability and streamline the article. - Jonathon A H (talk) 17:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree this might need to be split, but the proposed split division is bad. Wikipedia articles should not have separate criticism sections - they need to be wound in to the main article. History is OK, but really there's no need to split as yet, as 76 kb is only a small amount over the limit and we have a very large number of articles over that size. There's no real urgency; better to rewrite the article to make it more coherent, and then reconsider. 203.97.106.191 (talk) 03:54, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Like I said, any combination of splits - it doesn't have to be all of them. Those were simply proposed, logical splitting points. - Jonathon A H (talk) 05:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What's going to happen is that I'm going to split off Iraqi Ground Forces Command and most of the detailed order of battle to that article. That will reduce the size. Buckshot06 (talk) 05:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article length and general clean up 

message: "The 1st Division was originally formed from the battalions of the Iraqi Intervention Force. The 2nd Division’s battalions are former Iraqi National Guard (ING) units, and most are manned predominately by Kurdish troops, some being former Peshmerga militia units. The 3rd Division’s brigade headquarters and battalions are from the original 3-division NIA. The 4th Division’s battalions are former ING units, recruited locally. It is ethnically diverse and has operational control of a number of Strategic Infrastructure Battalions protecting oil pipelines. The 5th Division’s brigade headquarters and battalions were components of the NIA.
While most of the 6th Division’s battalions are former ING units, some with their origins in the ING’s predecessor, the ICDC, the division headquarters was not formed until August 2005. The 7th Division was raised in early 2005 to replace disbanded Sunni-dominated ING units
which proved unreliable. The 8th Division is composed of former ING units, some of which were formed as early as 2004, but the division headquarters did not assume control of its area of operations until January 2006. The 9th (Mechanized) Division has the entire IA armored
(tank) capability. It is ethnically diverse. Some of the battalions of the 10th Division are manned by Shi’a militia.67"
Source: House Armed Services Committee, "THE CONTINUING CHALLENGE OF BUILDING THE IRAQI SECURITY FORCES," http://armedservices.house.gov/pdfs/OI_ISFreport062707/OI_Report_FINAL.pdf, 27 June 2007, page 98
"It is important to note that in the initial fielding plan, five army divisions would be tied to the regions from where they were recruited and the other five would be deployable throughout Iraq. This was partially due to the legacy of some army divisions being formed from the National Guard units and has caused some complications in terms of making these forces available for operations in all areas of Iraq, and the military becoming a truly national, non-sectarian force." HASC report, note 53, page 120. Buckshot06 (talk) 05:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Article sandbox/workspace

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 11 September 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:44, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:T-55 Iraq 2.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Section , paragraph 4 begins The exact number of Iraqi combat casualties is unknown, but known to be heavy. "unknown, but known" seems inelegant, but I'm stumped to come up with anything better. Any ideas? Offtherails (talk) 09:14, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a swing at it, what do you think?  Also, I don't have access to the source, but the paragraph here seems to mix "casualties" and "fatalities", which are more properly distinct figures...do you know if they are used interchangeably in the source?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hammurobert (talk • contribs) 07:52, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Would love to make an edit, but my cummand of the english langauge fa1|z m3. 

message: The IA entry is 3 years out of date and lists the Joint Operational Commands as part of the IA.
They never were - they are joint IA/FP/IP/DBE/etc headquarters and they are in the process of restructuring ATT.
There have been many other changes since 2009.
I update the ISF OOB monthly at this location:
http://home.comcast.net/~djyae/site/?/page/Iraq_Order_of_Battle/
That includes appendixs with source cites...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.245.11.15 (talk) 03:12, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  current ISF OOB {updated monthly] 

message: When reading the article, I noticed that in the "Armored Vehicles Tanks" section, as badly titled as it is, had quite the diversity of vehicles, including the French AMX-56 Leclerc, Russian T-90, and experimental Altay MBT being present on the list. I have removed the said tanks from the list, until references become available regarding their service in the Iraqi Army (which I believe there is none).
AloDurranium (talk) 17:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iraqi Tanks 

message: 800k is too big found more realistic estimate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.203.140.28 (talk) 10:48, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  800k personal common? 

message: Most the section is far from current, due to recent developments. I guess the easy way to start is to get rid of matters from before about 2010. Jim.henderson (talk) 23:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Especially considering the 2018 formal induction of militias Bgrus22 (talk) 05:10, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Status 

message: The Iraqi Army was entirely disbanded after the 2003 invasion. This was a major point of disagreement between the USA and the UK. The UK knew that the Iraqi army needed to be kept intact for security reasons. The USA thought that an entirely new army was needed. If the UK had won that discussion the current statement that the army was "rebuilt" after the 2003 invasion would have been correct. As it happens a new Iraqi Army was created after 2003 There is a major difference.Royalcourtier (talk) 20:53, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rebuilt after 2003 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Iraqi Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081201131311/http://www.mca-marines.org/Gazette/06rohr.asp to http://www.mca-marines.org/GAZETTE/06rohr.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:34, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Seem like the CH-4B drones should be listed here or if it under the Air Force there.
*http://www.janes.com/article/55240/iraq-unveils-ch-4-uavs
*http://defencetalk.net/threads/iraqi-air-force-has-bought-chinese-ch-4-drone.7443/
-MarsRover (talk) 16:51, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doesn't the Iraq Army now have Chinese drones? 

message: Howzit all.
I'm proposing we get rid of the sections entitled Iraqi Army Aviation, Armor, and Arms, as they essentially mirror List of current equipment of the Iraqi Army and List of former equipment of the Iraqi Army, respectively. These pages were formed to avoid hardware clutter like this on the main article. I've marked the overall section with an overlap tag accordingly.
Thanks, --Katangais (talk) 00:32, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Right. I've binned both sections in the absence of any response or objection to my proposal here. Feel free to reopen the discussion as needed. --Katangais (talk) 18:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I see the sections have been re-added for no apparent reason. I've tagged the actual lists of hardware (as opposed to the basic equipment overview section, which is fine) for overlapping content. --Katangais (talk) 17:44, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose - I think some basic info of these tables gives the reader a simplified break-down of Iraqi equipment - FOX 52 (talk) 03:37, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

text: Support - We're not a gallery for the weapons that the Iraqi Army have used over the years. A overview textual paragraph with sources; fine; huge photo-supported charts - take it to the other article. I do not believe the section should have been readded while the discussion was ongoing. Thoughts, ? Buckshot06 (talk) 03:38, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  the purpose of that section's written paragraphs is to give the reader a simplified break-down of Iraqi equipment. The tables concerning the exact type and quantity of weapons being used belongs on the other article which exists explicitly for that purpose. Putting the tables here simply duplicates the information already covered there. --Katangais (talk) 05:37, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bin the sections on Iraqi Army Aviation, Armor, and Arms 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Iraqi Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927021806/http://www.csbaonline.org/4Publications/Archive/O.20060711.Send_In_The_Advisers/O.20060711.Send_In_The_Advisers.pdf to http://www.csbaonline.org/4Publications/Archive/O.20060711.Send_In_The_Advisers/O.20060711.Send_In_The_Advisers.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=1034590&C=europe
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110608205037/http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?col=§ion=middleeast&xfile=data%2Fmiddleeast%2F2009%2FFebruary%2Fmiddleeast_February246.xml to http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?col=§ion=middleeast&xfile=data%2Fmiddleeast%2F2009%2FFebruary%2Fmiddleeast_February246.xml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100222014506/http://www.sigir.mil/reports/quarterlyreports/Default.aspx to http://www.sigir.mil/reports/quarterlyreports/default.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:14, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Shko01 (talk) 21:39, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 October 2021 

message: Serbazeki-sarkiş (talk) 16:04, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:07, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2021 

message: HeartMedical (talk) 18:18, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 18:37, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2022 

message: HeartMedical (talk) 08:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 09:26, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 

message: Please add the name in Kurdish concidering kurdish is official at state level.Greek moussaka (talk) 18:44, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name in Kurdish