حمله آمریکا به مرزبانان در واکنش به رژه حشد و با هدف احیای داعش بود

Spokesman of al-Nujaba:

The American attack on border guards was in response to PMF military parade and was aimed at reviving Daesh

 

Explaining the reasons for the airstrikes carried out by the United States on the positions of the Popular Mobilization Forces on the Iraqi-Syrian border, al-Shammari described the hostile move as a response to the glorious military parade of the Popular Mobilization Forces and was also aimed at reviving ‎the Daesh terrorist group.

 

According to the Communication and Media Affairs Centre of al-‎Nujaba in Iran‎, in an exclusive interview with the Young Journalists Club News Agency, Nasr al-Shammari, the official spokesman of the al-Nujaba Islamic Resistance Movement, deciphered the background of the recent attack by the United States on the border guards of the Popular Mobilization Forces.

al-Shammari called diplomatic negotiations with the arrogant enemy “meaningless” and stressed that the United States only understands the language of weapons and blood.

He noted that the Iraqi security forces were well-equipped to bring stability and calm to the country and predicted that the troops of the United States would withdraw from Iraq and the Middle East in the near future.

The full text of this conversation is as follows:

 

Please talk about the recent attack on the border guards of the Popular Mobilization Forces. What was the objective of the United States in carrying out this action?

In the past, we told those who were optimistic about the election of the current president of the United States that every president who comes to power in the United States is nothing more than a frame for the same ugly picture as before. The aggression of the Popular Mobilization Forces stationed on the borders of Iraq to fight terrorism proves our point.

It also proved that the United States is a world leader in terrorism and therefore vents its anger on those who have stood up to terrorism in the past and present and defeated its project. The most obvious example of this is the “crime of the century,” namely the assassination of the commanders of the fight against terrorism, the martyrs Haj Qasim Soleimani and Haj Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.

Perhaps one of the most obvious goals of the United States is to revive Daesh in Iraq, and for this reason, it targets the Popular Mobilization Forces – the force that is the biggest obstacle to the Daesh project.

Their other objective was to respond to the glorious Popular Mobilization Forces’ military parade in the presence of most security commanders because, after the defeat of the enemy’s plans to create internal sedition among the Iraqi security organizations, the enemy had no choice but to intervene directly in Iraq.

And, perhaps, their other objective is to put pressure on the Iraqi government not to take positive steps regarding the Popular Mobilization Forces and its commanders.

Perhaps there is another motive, and that is to cover up the internal problems and the successive defeats of the enemy in the region.

 

What will be the response of the Islamic Resistance forces to this attack?

After the martyrdom of the victorious commanders (May God be satisfied with them), we are in constant conflict with the enemy. This conflict has not stopped for a single day and it will not stop until the enemy pays the price for all the pure blood they shed on the ground and the destruction he caused in Iraq.

Our field of struggle is expanding day by day, and we are absolutely certain that the enemy does not understand the discourse of negotiation and diplomacy as much as the language of weapons and blood. Therefore, we consider dialogue with the arrogant enemy as meaningless.

The targeting of the forces of the 14th Brigade of the Popular Mobilization Forces demonstrates the arrogant approach of this enemy, who first of all tells the Iraqi government, “I do not respect you and I do not care about your position.”

I would like to add that worthless mercenaries have no value for the enemy and the United States is acting in the interests of its arrogance and that of its only ally, the Zionist regime, in Iraq.

 

Has a decision been made on the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq? And if possible, talk about Iraq’s ability to create and protect its security.

The Iraqi parliament passed an executive law requiring all foreign forces, including the United States, to withdraw from Iraq and end the government’s request for coalition air support to Iraqi forces against Daesh.

But the presence of foreign ground forces on Iraqi soil, whether American or otherwise, is fundamentally illegal, even before the law was passed in parliament because the Iraqi government has not made any request for the entry of ground forces into the country. Moreover, according to the Iraqi constitution, the government does not have the authority to make such a request before the consent of the parliament.

But with regard to Iraq’s ability to establish stability and internal security and protect its borders, we say with complete confidence and clarity that Iraqi security organizations have sufficient power to establish security inside and defend the borders. The only factor that weakens the country’s security is the intervention and pressure of the United States and its embassy in Baghdad and the presence of the occupying forces.

Everyone will see that stability will return to Iraq as soon as the occupying forces withdraw, the influence of the evil American embassy is reduced and its intervention in Iraq is limited.

 

In conclusion, if you consider it necessary to mention something, please go ahead.

We are absolutely certain that the announcement of the defeat of the American occupying forces in Iraq is very close and that all that is happening is the kicking of a dying creature.

They are trying to find a good way out of Iraq to cover up this defeat and they are putting pressure on the Iraqi government in useless negotiations.

It is clear that the United States is seeking a major retreat from the Middle East to meet greater challenges, such as Russia, China and several other Asian-European countries that have stood up to Washington’s policies.