Iraq Reverts

[heironymouspasparagus]

I still say "stay out of it".  What is our interest there? It's not lives lost because that mantle would go to a lot of other African country conflicts. Why aren't the Chinese in there spending millions to launch drones and rockets? The Russians, the Europeans (it's right on their border and they could be taking the lead if they wanted), or heck leave it to those in the direct neighborhood.  Why do we seem to be more concerned about it than the rest?

I'm with you... we got no business putting our kids into this mess!



What is pretty amazing to me is how half the people in this country listen to the flat-out lies and distortions spewed by the powers that be and sit on the sidelines and snipe about what is going on with NO input on to what should go on.

Just the fact that we have not rushed in all "gung-ho" John Wayne has not only made it possible, but has forced others with a vested interest to stand up and do something - THEY are putting 'boots on the ground'.  Whether intentional or not - I don't care - it has resulted in a brilliant way to respond.   Several entities are now involved who previously would have just sat on their thumbs (sounds like O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity, doesn't it?) - actually doing the fighting required to attempt to save their situation.  Jordan, Syria - both sides...govt and rebels, Egypt, Kurds, and even Iran!

Couple of big missing components to this are Saudi - no surprise, since it is their power structure that is funding/fomenting all this. 

And Turkey - regardless of their issues with the Kurds, they should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for not getting into this in a bigger way, even if it is another area besides northern Iraq.  I understand that they want to let the Kurds wear themselves down against ISIS - they would be thrilled if all Kurds were killed in the process.  We, too should be ashamed for not helping those guys more - bigger/better/more arms - but that would affect our relationship with Turkey, and we might lose base access for making war in the area.  Kurds have been the most effective ground force against ISIS so far with not much more than AK's for weapons.   It is a dilemma...


Another area the Perpetual Whiner's Society (PWS) is going on about is Ukraine.  What a stinking mess that is...the recent Ukrainian govts are corrupt, putrid, boils on the butt of the region, while Russia is even worse.  It would be good if Ukraine could be brought into western European society, but it is so bad, they can't even mobilize their own defense.  If Russia is successful, there is another piece of the USSR stitched back together.  We are tweaking them kinda like we did in Afghanistan using different tools - sanctions and the price of oil.  Another good idea, no matter whether intentional or not.


The biggest disappointment to our response, in my opinion is how half this country can't see 7" beyond it's collective nose to understand that this approach is actually working fairly well.  And we are NOT on track to kill another 5,000 of our kids with misbegotten imperialistic voyeurism like in Iraq!  Almost half of this country has the attention span and ability to learn from history of a large bowl of bread dough!!

[Gaspar]

The entire Middle East, as well as most of Eastern Europe are simply pretend countries, propped up through US, Chinese, or Russian intervention.  None would exist without assistance and they will crumble without it.

As a Libertarian I'm torn on this.

If we continue our policies of intervention, we continue to build deeper dependencies that ultimately lead to the need for more intervention.  We also find ourselves propping-up a growing number of economies, and artificially distorting markets.

If we pull back, and only intervene when the national security of the United States is at risk, we guarantee the destruction and murder of millions, and foster the growth of organizations, economies, and ideologies that seek to destroy us, not through natural competition, but through more primitive forces for which we ultimately must protect ourselves.

Either way, guns and bombs will be involved. In the former, we will have a multitude of allies, fake governments, and pretend economies to play with.  In the latter we defend ourselves alone after all others have been reduced to grave and rubble by the more powerful and terrible.

I don't know what the answer looks like, but running out the clock is simply not an option.  No one understands this concept of making an appointment to carry out military action against a known enemy. Victory only comes through surrender or destruction.  Since the time of Sun Tzu, we've known that the greatest military strength against an enemy is knowing when and where he will attack. And for the attacker, the element of surprise is invaluable. 

If we attack ISIS exactly when and where president Obama said we will, there will be no reason for the enemy to be present, and our efforts will be mostly political.  However, if we attack from a different vector, I will be duly impressed with our president. 
Make a sound in the east, then strike in the west.--Sun Tzu

[dbacksfan 2.0]

The entire Middle East, as well as most of Eastern Europe are simply pretend countries, propped up through US, Chinese, or Russian intervention.  None would exist without assistance and they will crumble without it.

As a Libertarian I'm torn on this.

If we continue our policies of intervention, we continue to build deeper dependencies that ultimately lead to the need for more intervention.  We also find ourselves propping-up a growing number of economies, and artificially distorting markets.

If we pull back, and only intervene when the national security of the United States is at risk, we guarantee the destruction and murder of millions, and foster the growth of organizations, economies, and ideologies that seek to destroy us, not through natural competition, but through more primitive forces for which we ultimately must protect ourselves.

Either way, guns and bombs will be involved. In the former, we will have a multitude of allies, fake governments, and pretend economies to play with.  In the latter we defend ourselves alone after all others have been reduced to grave and rubble by the more powerful and terrible.

I don't know what the answer looks like, but running out the clock is simply not an option.  No one understands this concept of making an appointment to carry out military action against a known enemy. Victory only comes through surrender or destruction.  Since the time of Sun Tzu, we've known that the greatest military strength against an enemy is knowing when and where he will attack. And for the attacker, the element of surprise is invaluable. 

If we attack ISIS exactly when and where president Obama said we will, there will be no reason for the enemy to be present, and our efforts will be mostly political.  However, if we attack from a different vector, I will be duly impressed with our president. 
Make a sound in the east, then strike in the west.--Sun Tzu

You mean something like what was done with Africa and Asia after WWII. That worked out pretty well don't ya think? (sarcasm on the last part)

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/asia-and-africa

[heironymouspasparagus]

This has really gotta hurt the RWRE psycho-fanatics who want us sending in troops....  Granted it's early days, but when you have all the countries in the neighborhood starting to step up and fight these guys, it may be just the approach that may solve the problem.  And we should support that as aggressively as possible....lots of bullets, rpg's, vehicles, maybe some air strikes - oh, that's right - we have made over 16,000 air strikes between Aug 2014 and mid Jan 2015 in support of this effort.

Almost like someone was actually thinking and planning to support the development of local resistance to IS.  Huh, wonder how that could happen?  Oh, yeah...a measured response the doesn't immediately knee-jerk us into another stupid involvement where we have no business going....

Hopefully, they can continue to succeed.  With our and Iran's ongoing help, I bet they can.

http://news.yahoo.com/militants-launch-attack-syrian-kurdish-border-town-094841204.html

And who would have thought that it would be Iran to take the first direct military action against these gangsters....
And isn't it just wonderful the way Donald Rumsfeld's training and equipping 450,000 man Iraqi army has paid off so well.... oh, wait....

30,000 man force was cobbled together in spite of Rumsfeld's training results who are standing up to fight.  Trained by an Iranian general who is directing their operations.  If this doesn't illustrate the abject failure of Baby Bush/Rumsfeld on the whole Iraqi war topic, then the observer is blind.  Or blinded by the right....

As reference, here is a synopsis of what has been going on - as opposed to the lies and distortions Rupert's Minions would have you believe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_intervention_against_the_Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant

[Breadburner]

[Gaspar]

That would be racist, but no one cares anymore.  Go Hillary!