dagblog - Comments for "Obama Considering Military Strikes on ISIS in Iraq"

NCD :Here is a very good

Resistance — Fri, 15 Aug 2014 07:27:13 +0000

NCD :Here is a very good recap, of what type of person Maliki was and why the world wanted him replaced.

"Maliki himself has stocked away 25 billion in Qatar, England, Syria and the UK making him one of the richest men in the world. His relatives, business associates and trusted friends also were all on the take.,,,,,,,

He personally controlled the military, the secret police, the policeman on the street, and the entire security apparatus. He also controlled and paid for by his Executive share of the budget, 6000 private bodyguards (goons) all carrying government cards showing their legitimacy."

http://www.dinarrecaps.com/our-blog/tlar-updated-email-to-family-friends3

I'm suspending judgment about

Aaron Carine — Sun, 10 Aug 2014 21:22:59 +0000

In reply to Obama Considering Military Strikes on ISIS in Iraq

I'm suspending judgment about the air strikes. So far, the statements of the peace groups have been foolish boiler plate. It's "a war for empire", it will only "mean more death and destruction", what about Gaza, blah, blah.

Fear of ‘Another Benghazi’

artappraiser — Sat, 09 Aug 2014 06:28:13 +0000

In reply to Obama Considering Military Strikes on ISIS in Iraq

Fear of ‘Another Benghazi’ Drove White House to Airstrikes in Iraq
By Mark Landler, Alissa J. Rubin, Mark Mazzetti and Helene Cooper, New York Times, AUG. 8/9, 2014

WASHINGTON — On Wednesday evening, moments after finishing a summit meeting with African leaders at the State Department, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff delivered a stark message to President Obama as they rode back to the White House in Mr. Obama’s limousine [....]

Point taken and of course

Bruce Levine — Fri, 08 Aug 2014 21:50:59 +0000

In reply to Just an aside on "mission

Point taken and of course mission creep is the kind of thing that is inevitable until it isn't!

Just an aside on "mission

artappraiser — Fri, 08 Aug 2014 18:33:20 +0000

In reply to I understand your position

Just an aside on "mission creep." It often strikes me that people let Bush Derangement Syndrome affect their judgment on this.

I.E., there was no mission creep with Kosovo. There has been no mission creep on Libya, though sometimes it seems Republicans in Congress would like to see some of it. Another example comes to mind that Bill Clinton stopped the possibility of mission creep in Somalia in its tracks. There was no mission creep for the military aid in Haiti....etc. etc.

It's not a foregone conclusion that there will be mission creep from a military intervention just because Bush I and II and Lyndon Johnson made a lot of wrong decisions.

We've got little interventions going on all the time by these guys. No creep, more like the opposite: continual efforts to pre-empt having to do more.

I understand your position

Bruce Levine — Fri, 08 Aug 2014 14:15:51 +0000

In reply to I'm not happy about the air

I understand your position but I think the president set forth sound reasons for going in last night: (1) there is a real humanitarian crisis and he used the term "genocide"; (2) Iraq asked for help; and (3) we can help (at least in the short term). I would add, as I mentioned yesterday, that the other reason I believe is material here is that we helped shape the circumstances in which Iraq finds itself now, and I guess I subscribe to the Colin Powell (you break it you own it doctrine).

This is the best I can do right now and I really do believe the topic deserves better consideration, so sorry for that. I'm reading Samantha Powers book right now (coincidentally, and which explains why I haven't gotten to Michael's book yet because it's . . . comprehensive so to speak), and I'm particularly interested in our legal and moral obligations in cases of genocide. I will try to add the link later, but this came up in yesterday's White House press conference, and press secretary Josh Earnest was asked and was unable to say whether the prevention of genocide was a "core" American foreign policy interest. [Edited to add that Earnest, in fairness, was probably not authorized to respond to the question, or believed in good faith that it was not something that he was authorized to address.]

Finally, I'm not happy about potential air strikes, because the fact is that there is a real chance under the circumstances for "mission creep". I think we all should be candid, particularly the president going forward, about how that might occur. But I cannot help supporting him for the reasons I touched on above.

Edited to add this link that reviews the press conference colloquy on genocide that I refer to above and also touches on dilemma for Earnest as press sec. The link includes the video from the conference too. Check it out.

I'm not happy about the air

Aaron Carine — Fri, 08 Aug 2014 13:29:19 +0000

In reply to Obama Considering Military Strikes on ISIS in Iraq

I'm not happy about the air strikes, but I can't blame Obama that much. It will be bad for both Iraq and America if ISIS wins, and there may have been a threat to the American consulate. I'm still not happy, though.

Anyone know if Maliki has

NCD — Thu, 07 Aug 2014 20:54:53 +0000

In reply to The Iraq treasury needs to

Anyone know if Maliki has properties in the emirates of the Persian Gulf, as Karzai does in Dubai?

The Sheikh of Dubai having his own hang loose crib and far from the conflict zone residence, a palace in London.

The Iraq treasury needs to

Resistance — Thu, 07 Aug 2014 19:58:06 +0000

In reply to CNBC, 3 August:

The Iraq treasury needs to keep Maliki and his cronies away from the money.

Maliki wants the credit for delivering the money to the people of Iraq, He wants to win another election, so he wants money, to spread around and tell the people of Iraq, how great he is for the country.

I've read reports that say; the world does not want Maliki, but hes devious enough to do things, to block the elections, so he can remain in power, while his country is invaded.

The US has found a reason to support the people of Iraq, but not Maliki.

CNBC, 3 August:

NCD — Thu, 07 Aug 2014 19:02:50 +0000

In reply to Obama Considering Military Strikes on ISIS in Iraq

CNBC, 3 August:

...But Instead of helping the peshmerga, the Obama administration is working diplomatic channels to discourage countries from selling weapons to the Kurds. It is also lobbying countries to prevent them from buying oil from Iraqi Kurdistan.....The Obama administration also intervened with the Moroccan government to block delivery of oil from Iraqi Kurdistan. A tanker recently anchored in international waters off Galveston, Texas. A U.S. district court intervened to block the sale to U.S. refiners. Without a royalty and revenue-sharing deal between Baghdad and the Kurdistan Regional Government, which Maliki blocks, Baghdad is threatening to sue anyone who tries to buy oil from Iraqi Kurdistan....

Obama is 'waiting for Maliki' to form a unified Iraqi government before even allowing the Kurds to sell oil or buy weapons to defend themselves?..........How long has Maliki had, 8 years?

How bad is it? When the really heavy work needs doing, Muslim men always have the women do it, and they are now arming the women to fight ISIS.