General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNY Times: "Obama Warns of ‘Long-Term’ Iraq Strikes" (And we're off to the races!)
Who could have predicted it? Jesus Fucking Christ!
[font size=1]By MICHAEL D. SHEAR and TIM ARANGO AUG. 9, 2014[/font]
WASHINGTON Laying the groundwork for an extended airstrike campaign against Sunni militants in Iraq, President Obama said Saturday that the strikes that began the day before could continue for months as the Iraqis build a new government.
I dont think were going to solve this problem in weeks, Mr. Obama told reporters before leaving for a two-week vacation on Marthas Vineyard. This is going to be a long-term project.
The president repeated his insistence that the United States would not send ground combat troops back to Iraq. But he pledged that the United States and other countries would stand with Iraqi leaders against the militants if the leaders build an inclusive government in the months ahead.
Hours before Mr. Obama spoke, Sunni militants in northern Iraq ordered engineers to return to work on the Mosul Dam, the countrys largest, suggesting that the extremists who captured the dam last week after fierce battles with Kurdish forces will use it, at least for now, to provide water and electricity to the areas they control, and not as a weapon.
< . . . . >
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)and is better able to get Sunnis on board with resisting the nuts. Right now the less-rabid Sunnis/Baathists are letting ISIS do its thing in order to weaken the Maliki/Shiite grip on Iraq and get them out of power. Once Maliki goes (let's hope so), there's a chance for cooperation with Sunnis to get rid of ISIS. They're just using ISIS as a weapon of sorts to get their way, from what I've read. They don't want to actually live under their rule.
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts)F. . . and every move we have made has made the situation worse. I think it is beyond naive to think it will be any different this time. It is not up to the U.S. to determine what the make=up of the Iraqi government should be. We may prefer a Sunni/Baathist controlled government, but Iraq is still a majority Shia country. This is fucking nuts.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)and wants that as a hedge against Iran, but they've helped create a Frankenstein that is getting hard to control. I think we're just trying to get a more inclusive government that will resist Islamic terrorism in its midst. We don't and can't control it, all we can do it try to keep the worst effects of ISIS at bay (genocide, American personnel and important assets being harmed, that sort of thing) until someone, somewhere gets their shit together and drives these crazies back to Syria.
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts)... which was that "there is no military solution for Iraq." Which is it, Mr. President? And if there is no military solution, why are you ordering military action?
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)they're not a strategy--they're a tactic. The solution is this: an Iraqi government that doesn't overly favor Shiites, Sunnis, or Kurds, and doesn't oppress/shut out any faction. The real question is whether or not they will divide up or stay together as a cohesive nation.
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts). . . in a majority Shia country in which that Shia majority has not forgotten how it was treated the last time Baathists ruled the country? Do the people of Iraq have a right to self-determination or not? Are we going to prop up yet another government in defiance o the will of the people of Iraq/
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)few years, with less and less regard and tolerance for the minority. This is what happens--the ones who feel shut out will latch on to terrorist movements, or at least tolerate them, to gain influence. They did it with Al Qaeda, they're doing it again with ISIS. This is how the Middle East as a whole seems to function, really. Just ever-nastier groups pitted against each other.
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts). . . you are sadly deluded.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)vs. Saudi Arabia. It's a big, ugly, dangerous situation that needs to be cooled off or resolved regionally.
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts)But you haven't demonstrated how these airstrikes will in any way address the objective of cooling things off. The Sunnis in Iraq will interpret the strikes as the U.S. continuing to prop up the Maliki government which they despise. Hard to see how that cools anything off..
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)personnel, for now. I don't know if we're going to just limit them to that narrow purpose, or try to set back ISIS on a larger scale.
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)in the pit of my stomach.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Brigid
(17,621 posts)I knew it!
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)The MIC must be fed.
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts)Newsjock
(11,733 posts)BeyondGeography
(39,382 posts)over imaginary Obama as Bush scenarios.
Awesome.
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts). . . I merely pointed out that he's taking us down the same rabbit hole. And I don't think I imagined the story in the NY Times.
NutmegYankee
(16,201 posts)markpkessinger
(8,401 posts)...nor, in 1993 did we have such a large cabal of neocons constantly pressing for greater military engagement.
NutmegYankee
(16,201 posts)I expect it will be air missions like we did under Clinton.
conservaphobe
(1,284 posts)I have the highest confidence in this administration to do the right thing. They have an outstanding track record in foreign policy and measured use of military power.
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts). . .Hmmm, that has a familiar ring to it. Like maybe a definition of something I heard somewhere along the way.
Response to markpkessinger (Original post)
RandySF This message was self-deleted by its author.
soryang
(3,299 posts)...to coin a phrase. we would like to thank our allies and intelligence services for paying, arming and equipping ISIL, so that our necons have another fait accompli to force further military intervention in Iraq. Of course we too were involved as this group of mercenaries, bagmen, murderers, thugs and fanatics was supposed to overthrow Syria's Assad government but it didn't work out. At least they can block any overland lines of communication from Iran and Iraq to Syria. That will help in our strategic plan to dominate the area and continue the high level of military expenditures and profits to which our war contractors have grown accustomed.