US getting back into Iraq fight

[Hayabusa Rider]

Like I said in my other post, it's not just about Iraq.

So who will we arm to keep the Kurds stuck to the artificial construct known as Iraq? That was what people like Saddam were useful for. Without that you might as well force the KKK and the Black Panthers to live in peace and harmony.

The region as it is was created by the West for the purposes of the West and the people there could screw themselves. The only stable configuration will be determined by themselves or install another tyrant. Pick one because they aren't going to be reeducated into little Democrats any more than Republicans for Bush. Yeah it's going to suck but that's how it is.

What we should have done was not go in to begin with but failing that obvious fact we should not have tried to make them little Americans but try to organize a least harmful deconstruction. We still haven't learned.

 

[Hugo Drax]

The immediate actions are humanitarian. I don't think the administration is sure what they are going to do past that.

Obama doesn't want another Rwanda on his hands

What is funny is you see no European country lifting a finger to help prevent "Another Rwanda".

They sit back and watch us get sucked into another taxpayer funded excursion to help other people

Europeans should be the one stepping up to the plate.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

This is where you draw the line imo and I agree with Obama's actions on this one. However, he should never had said that he wouldn't put boots on the ground. He should just STFU and leave our options open even if he doesn't intend to put boots on the ground. One would think he would have learned something from his "red line" debacle.

He started off well but then he lost it. I think I first realized it when he tried to bully the world over Snowden, then set that stupid "red line". I think he believes deep inside that the world should just shut up and do what he tells it making him frightenly like the Neocons. The difference so far is that he hasn't committed in advance to a war, he just paints us into corners.

 

[bshole]

He started off well but then he lost it. I think I first realized it when he tried to bully the world over Snowden, then set that stupid "red line". I think he believes deep inside that the world should just shut up and do what he tells it making him frightenly like the Neocons. The difference so far is that he hasn't committed in advance to a war, he just paints us into corners.

Its almost like its a forgone conclusion that America will intervene in every Middle East conflict no matter who is president. The media hypes up some conflict and like a Pavlovian dog, an American president starts dropping bombs.

 

[dawheat]

He started off well but then he lost it. I think I first realized it when he tried to bully the world over Snowden, then set that stupid "red line". I think he believes deep inside that the world should just shut up and do what he tells it making him frightenly like the Neocons. The difference so far is that he hasn't committed in advance to a war, he just paints us into corners.

Not wanting to be in a war is a pretty big difference. The scary thing about neocons is they honestly seem to want any chance to blow shit up.

And anyway Americans don't want troops in combat. We have zero appetite for it. Zilch. I think it was necessary to avoid overreaction domestically and honestly, this is a time I want that line clear. This affects our interests to an extent as well as having humanitarian aspects. This does not affect our national security - so no troops in ground combat. At all.

 

[kage69]

Its almost like its a forgone conclusion that America will intervene in every Middle East conflict no matter who is president. The media hypes up some conflict and like a Pavlovian dog, an American president starts dropping bombs.

You do realize there are Americans in the path of ISIS, right? There is a consulate in Erbil IIRC. As someone who correctly dismissed the Benghazi bullshit as the theater it was, I would have thought you supportive of protecting Americans, protecting the innocents that could be wiped out, not to mention denying the GOP more material to waste money and time over once they inevitably accuse him of either "throwing someone under the bus," or not caring about the safety of American diplomats and workers.

 

[kage69]

What is funny is you see no European country lifting a finger to help prevent "Another Rwanda".

They sit back and watch us get sucked into another taxpayer funded excursion to help other people

Europeans should be the one stepping up to the plate.

I think the reason is Rwanda and Iraq being far from Europe. They care about preventing ethnic cleansing, just not the kind that occurs far away from their borders. They responded to the Balkans.

 

[rudder]

This is where you draw the line imo and I agree with Obama's actions on this one. However, he should never had said that he wouldn't put boots on the ground. He should just STFU and leave our options open even if he doesn't intend to put boots on the ground. One would think he would have learned something from his "red line" debacle.

We have boots on the ground now. not many but there are a number of military advisors and quite a few diplomatic personnel. I agree that there should be no additional boots on the ground and make this strictly an air war. We will need the Iraqi military to step up becuause there is not way and hell U.S. troops could keep the peace.

The U.S. can do quite a bit of damage to ISIS from the air by disrupting their supply lines and keep them scattered.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Not wanting to be in a war is a pretty big difference. The scary thing about neocons is they honestly seem to want any chance to blow shit up.

And anyway Americans don't want troops in combat. We have zero appetite for it. Zilch. I think it was necessary to avoid overreaction domestically and honestly, this is a time I want that line clear. This affects our interests to an extent as well as having humanitarian aspects. This does not affect our national security - so no troops in ground combat. At all.

If you think back a few months Obama was drumming up support by going after Congress to start going after Assad, a move which would have wound up supporting ISIS. Perversely, Putin bailed us out by providing an alternative to war Obama was pushing for.

No, Obama has been lucky in spite of his arrogance and it rarely does much if any good to announce what options you rule out.

 

[squarecut1]

Lots of bitter Syrians today, who were let down by the West, even when the butcher used chemical weapons

 

[hal2kilo]

Not a fan but I do understand. Why are we afraid of the arming the Kurds better? They have proven themselves to be respectable allies? Why are we afraid of a Kurdish state?
Could someone please educate me on the matter?

Just speculation on my part. We want Turkey to remain one of our few non-israeli allies in the region and Turkey hates them as much as the Iraqis and Iranians do.

So providing aid, especially military makes them unhappy.

 

[Strk]

Not a fan but I do understand. Why are we afraid of the arming the Kurds better? They have proven themselves to be respectable allies? Why are we afraid of a Kurdish state?
Could someone please educate me on the matter?

Because Turkey doesn't want them heavily armed.

 

[blankslate]

The U.S. can do quite a bit of damage to ISIS from the air by disrupting their supply lines and keep them scattered.

Agreed. The Kurdish security forces seem able enough to fight ISIS if the heavy weaponry that ISIS has which can be targeted from the air (heavy artillery and such) is actually destroyed.


....

 

[Attic]

The one constant over two decades is our bombing Iraq. Different excuses given, but we always end up doing this.


I'd like to see the US stop arming different causes around the world. We armed ISIS, now we are bombing them. This is evil. We are creating a lot of pain and suffering and obfuscating real intentions in a perverse deception of "peace keeping" or "humanitarian" ideals. I do not buy it.

I don't get Obamas support on this, I have to believe non action is worse, but come on, we are bombing Iraq again and folks are buying another excuse? We armed ISIS FFS.

 

[fskimospy]

The one constant over two decades is our bombing Iraq. Different excuses given, but we always end up doing this.


I'd like to see the US stop arming different causes around the world. We armed ISIS, now we are bombing them. This is evil. We are creating a lot of pain and suffering and obfuscating real intentions in a perverse deception of "peace keeping" or "humanitarian" ideals. I do not buy it.

I don't get Obamas support on this, I have to believe non action is worse, but come on, we are bombing Iraq again and folks are buying another excuse? We armed ISIS FFS.

We did not arm ISIS.

 

[zephyrprime]

I really like the reasoning why we aren't arming the Kurds. Because we fear the Kurds will break away from the Iraqi govt. Earth to the US govt. The country is split into three right now. With the Kurds able to hold off ISIS for now and the Iraqi govt ready to collapse and hand over billions in equipment to ISIS. Not that I support arming either side. But I found that logic defies reality.

Yep. Iraq will inevitably break up into three parts. We should just stop denying reality.

 

[Balt]

Didn't like hearing this until I realized we were helping the Kurds. Completely fine with that.

 

[gotsmack]

If people in the region don't like the Kurds, why don't they just kick them out?

Here is my proposal:
Have the surrounding countries export all of their Kurds to Iraq, then we basically hand over Iraq to the Kurds with the agreement they won't attack other countries. This will solve everyone's problems while increasing our number of allies.

Iraq is a lost cause if we stay out and let things play out like they are now. Best bet is to put in a west friendly strong government in place now.

 

[Strk]

If people in the region don't like the Kurds, why don't they just kick them out?

Here is my proposal:
Have the surrounding countries export all of their Kurds to Iraq, then we basically hand over Iraq to the Kurds with the agreement they won't attack other countries. This will solve everyone's problems while increasing our number of allies.

Iraq is a lost cause if we stay out and let things play out like they are now. Best bet is to put in a west friendly strong government in place now.

Yeah, displacing people is bad. And there are a lot more than I'm guessing you realize.

 

[gotsmack]

Yeah, displacing people is bad. And there are a lot more than I'm guessing you realize.

The only problem for us on that map is getting the Kurds out of Turkey. We aren't friendly with Iran or Syria so it's a non issue.

I think if we fortify the "Kurdish State" in Iraq and get that oil money into their hands we can get some sort of program to push the Kurdish population to settle further south, pushing towards Baghdad.

The Turks have been rounding up Kurds for decades now. I bet they would LOVE to export them to another country and if they were given a place the US says is ok for them to expand in, I bet the Kurds would move there faster than housing could be built.

 

[Phynaz]

Where's all the Libertard outrage about us going to war in Iraq? Oh, there a Democrat in office, nevermind.

 

[Balt]

Where's all the Libertard outrage about us going to war in Iraq? Oh, there a Democrat in office, nevermind.

Are you comparing the 2003 invasion based on false pretenses with us dropping some bombs and food?

 

[kage69]

Where's all the Libertard outrage about us going to war in Iraq? Oh, there a Democrat in office, nevermind.

Settle down Bush voter, might want to read into this a bit more before mouthing off about it. You might notice some not so subtle differences between this and a war if you apply yourself. Give it a shot, thinking isn't that hard.

 

[K1052]

Looks like Obama finally got Maliki to cough up some ammunition for the Kurds and commit to supplying them more. Probably finally realized that if they collapsed he'd be even further up shit creek.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/09/us-iraq-security-usa-ammunition-idUSKBN0G82BP20140809

The official said Iraqi security forces flew a C-130 cargo plane loaded with mostly small-arms ammunition to Arbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, in a move that American officials hope will help the region's Peshmerga fighters keep militants from the Islamic State, an al Qaeda offshoot, at bay.

 

[Phynaz]

Settle down Bush voter, might want to read into this a bit more before mouthing off about it. You might notice some not so subtle differences between this and a war if you apply yourself. Give it a shot, thinking isn't that hard.

If you don't think this is the beginning of a war you're ridiculously uninformed.