The U.S. has been at war with Iraq for twenty-four years.

[JackRiddler]

In one form or another, since August 1990!

And the U.S. government bears primary responsibility for the situation that has now arisen, in a multitude of ways:

by letting U.S. foreign policy be run by military contractors, arms dealers, big corporate interests and bloodthirsty geopoliticians claiming "realpolitik,"

by destroying the Iraqi nation in an unprovoked and imperialist war of aggression at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives,

by promoting the bloody civil wars and ethnic cleansing in the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq,

by not cleaning house of the war criminals of 2003, but "looking forward,"

by the long alliance with the Gulf states, a coterie of repressive monarchical dictatorships that most recently have created and armed the "Islamic State" and crushed the "Arab Spring," as they have waged war historically on all democratic notions,

by arming and at times backing (and also betraying) nearly all of the various sides shooting at each other, such that claims of a CIA hand in the origins of IS and al-Qaeda itself are all too credible,

by always in a crunch preferring "our bastards" no matter how extremist to independent secular movements.

In the absence of a full acknowledgement of that history, and of measures to assure it does not continue (by uprooting the U.S.-based parts of the machinery that drove the history), it's an absurdity to think a new military intervention, without historical consciousness and with transparently bullshit motives ("protecting American personnel," please) is going to yield a chaos superior to that which has followed any of the other interventions.

As a first step, when an administration announces an end to the alliances and arms deals with the Gulf states backing IS and an intent to see peace in the region on the basis of current borders, it might be taken seriously. That even this is "utopian" is another indicator of our predicament.

Instead "we" are off to bomb our new enemy, while continuing to supply arms and support for the states that arm and finance it.

Who has the courage to lead and take on the risks of self-examination? Ain't evident in the present or in any prospective administration. All of them live politically from historical denial and self-praising bullshit, ever since Reagan proved this is a formula for success in American politics.

6 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Get bent.
	2 (33%)
	Whatever.
	0 (0%)
	Sort of.
	0 (0%)
	Yes, but.
	1 (17%)
	Heartless killer!!!
	1 (17%)
	Huh?
	1 (17%)
	Putin-lovin' Obama-hatin' Paul-followin' commie!
	0 (0%)
	USA! USA! USA!
	1 (17%)
	All well and good, chap, you need to understand how interests make strange bedfellows, pip pip.
	0 (0%)
	Long as I'm making money.
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[leftstreet]

1. I wish there'd been more media buildup

Every time I think of ISIS I think of the Egyptian goddess

Colin Powell had power point pictures of trucks and shit

I can't keep score


DURec

[LordGlenconner]

8. ...

From the 1970's Wonder Woman spin off:

[JackRiddler]

9. I remember!

"Isis Isis Isis Isis"

Thanks!

[CJCRANE]

2. It's another neocon Punch & Judy show.

The rest of the world can see the absurdities.

[JackRiddler]

5. They didn't get a war on Iran.

So why not go for a war in alliance with Iran? Long as we're vacating old inventory, the machine can keep spinning.

[Octafish]

3. Money trumps peace.

It don't matter if there are or aren't WMDs.

[JackRiddler]

7. Macho also trumps peace.

If there aren't any WMDs, we should sell them some!

[Octafish]

10. And if you really know anything about gamesmanship, sell 'em to both sides.

It's like politics, I've learned.

[dipsydoodle]

4. Its not just any enemy.

Its the USA's now current enemy.

[JackRiddler]

6. That one's always the worst enemy.

The now-current. The yesterday-maybe, not so much. Let's not get sanctimonious about the past, okay?

[woo me with science]

11. It's like being stuck in a corporate media horror version of Groundhog Day.

Every goddamn time, we're expected to act like we have never seen it before.

This is a superb post. I mean, superb:

And the U.S. government bears primary responsibility for the situation that has now arisen, in a multitude of ways:

by letting U.S. foreign policy be run by military contractors, arms dealers, big corporate interests and bloodthirsty geopoliticians claiming "realpolitik,"

by destroying the Iraqi nation in an unprovoked and imperialist war of aggression at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives,

by promoting the bloody civil wars and ethnic cleansing in the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq,

by not cleaning house of the war criminals of 2003, but "looking forward,"

by the long alliance with the Gulf states, a coterie of repressive monarchical dictatorships that most recently have created and armed the "Islamic State" and crushed the "Arab Spring," as they have waged war historically on all democratic notions,

by arming and at times backing (and also betraying) nearly all of the various sides shooting at each other, such that claims of a CIA hand in the origins of IS and al-Qaeda itself are all too credible,

by always in a crunch preferring "our bastards" no matter how extremist to independent secular movements.

Thank you. Enough is enough.

[JackRiddler]

12. If people are really capable of forgetting 2003...

And pretend this somehow just happened because because those people are backward and like to kill each other...

What can't they then forget, or deny, or justify?

[woo me with science]

13. Good question. Seems that's being tested continually,

judging by how revolting some of the messaging has become.

We're up to torture as patriotism now...

And funding the carpet bombing of a captive population...

And now we are told we need to go provide urgent "rescue" to the country whose situation we orchestrated, after being told that we'd be showered with flowers as "liberators" the first time.

I honestly don't know the answer to your question. I do know that I am wholly drained of trust for the motives of those who get filthy rich from this despair.

[woo me with science]

14. Kick

[Karmadillo]

15. If we don't wholeheartedly support military operations that make no sense,

the terrorists win.

[malaise]

20. Getting up off the floor

because that's as rational a response as we'll ever get.

[woo me with science]

21. I think you nailed it.

[jamzrockz]

16. You just have to wonder

The Syria govt, the Kurds, the FSA, the Russians, the Iraqis, the Iranians are all fighting the ISIS forces and somehow they are able to grow stronger. I hate to believe the US and its allies created another Islamic jihadist group to carry out their proxy wars but I just cannot convince myself that the USA or CIA at least doesn't a hand in the rise of ISIS.

Remember, we have always wanted to remove Malaki from Iraqi and deciding to help fight ISIS could be the bargaining chip that is used to kick him out and install a more obedient leader.

[m-lekktor]

17. you left out the Clinton sanctions on Iraq in the 90's

which caused all those children's deaths (according to UN reports that Clinton denied) and Madeline Albright said was worth it.

https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/170-sanctions/41910.html

[JackRiddler]

18. Had to leave out something.

The first U.S. invasion of the Middle East under Bush I was first plotted under Kissinger, made a doctrine under Carter, and prepared under Reagan (with the building of the superbases in Saudi Arabia). The US-UK no-fly zones were never sanctioned by the UN. After Iraqi WMDs were destroyed in the early 1990s, Clinton then escalated the sanctions and initiated regular bombing. It's a looooooonng history!

[m-lekktor]

24. I forgive you! lol

good info anyway!

[belltower]

32. wonder who got to Carter?

maybe the same men who assassinated JFK and sponsored LBJ and RMN? Then there's FDR who tied the relationship down on a warship, promising Arab consensus about Israel, dying a week later (note: 1944 FDR's Assistant Secretary of State was Nelson Rockefeller, future Vice President, first son of John D Rockefeller's only son). And there's Truman, who carried water of the Israel lobby, who kept Rockefeller in several advisory roles. And then came Eisenhower's coup d'etat in Iran. So the history doesn't quite start with Kissinger though he is surely of these men. These men seem to be related to the batch of ethically-corrupt nazi scientists and intelligence corps who Truman let in after the war, the same men Eisenhower complained about when he left office and who Kennedy was intent on disbanding (hence...)?

So this game of criminal plunder has been afoot a long time, and we will continue to play it until we end our gutless dependence on oil. It is a plunder driven by a petro-dollar "mill" that continues to turn, year over year. Many countries want that mill to stop, by having oil purchasable in non-dollar currencies. Saddam's Iraq was one of those, they wanted to be paid in dinars -- for darn good reasons!

So damn right, Saddam had to go. Exceptional American Capitalism rules the day!!!

But you know, climate change will stop that mill, pretty damn quick. We in the USA sure don't have the political will to stop that mill. I do expect those winds to be undeniably hitting the fan just in time for the 2106 election -- now, isn't that wonderful?

[1] http://mondoweiss.net/2014/01/opposed-religious-fanatical

(edited)

[belltower]

31. great article at link, thanks

[woo me with science]

19. kick

[KG]

22. but this time we'll get it right, for sure!

because obama!

[JackRiddler]

23. And what an excellent start, rhetorically.

No mention of the support IS received or receives from U.S. allies, let alone putting an end to that. Pretext of "protecting Americans." Did he throw in a 9/11 or two?

[m-lekktor]

25. he wants to stop the genocide!11

unless it's Palestine of course.

[rgbecker]

26. This has more to do with Israel than oil, but mostly to do with a runaway MIC. n/t

[JackRiddler]

29. Support for Israel has a lot to do with oil...

and with the geostrategy of dominance, which is the real ideological construct within which "oil" and "Israel" can both be fit. It's about a vision for the region and the world, one backed by multiple interests.

The MIC is the biggest thing of all, as the industry executing it. It's not really "runaway," it's just acting as industries must under capitalism, grow or decline, eat or be eaten. The problem is the degree to which people accept its most fundamental premises: 1) it exists to defend nation against threat, and in its actions actually does so, and to do so must be allowed the resources and authority; 2) it's good to make money doing that as an industry.

[SummerSnow]

27. 24 years? What the hell for?

What has been accomplished?


To end genocide, that's the only thing I could see involvement.

[woo me with science]

28. kick

[Enthusiast]

30. K&R! This post deserves hundreds of recommendations!

[sabrina 1]

33. Excellent post, missed it earlier. But is there anyone left in the world who believes

the steady flow of dribble we get each time we 'find' a new 'enemy'? The recipe is always the same so it no longer has the same shock value, the references to the 'really, really, really bad guys, worser than the ones we told you about last time' routine now tends to invoke a 'oh, here we go again' response rather 'omg we have to go get them' reaction.