Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 117

Thread: U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

  1. #61
    Light△Bender

    grip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    ☚ ☛
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 02:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,224
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Wouldn't that be dandy!

    Well, the recent Russian economic sanctions on imported food from us is only the beginning. Putin can't allow us to strangle their gas supplies from the Ukraine or sales to Europe. This is quickly becoming what I feared it could, with a 'tit for tat' series of escalations. There's been a sudden increase in Big Bear bombers flying into US airspace.
    Einstein, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

  2. #62
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    We can help the Kurds by sending them military hardware, but if we're going to get involved any further, then we need to do it all the way. Surely, we must have learned that limited warfare is not a good thing. That was the lesson of Vietnam, of Iraq. Little "military actions" have unintended consequences.
    You don't get it, didn't read the story or my post.
    We Should HAVE sent them heavier weapons they asked for Weeks ago, but now it's too Late.
    And I am Not calling for an invasion, but limited air/missile strikes.

    They (USA friendly) and and their Oil Rich province, and Electric-providing Dams, and Heavy Christian population, are in IMMINENT danger of slaughter.
    GOT IT?

    Many are stranded/under Siege on a mountain as I post.
    ANYONE Speak English?
    This is an IMMINENT danger/slaughter situation.
    No, all these Clowns see this as sending in 100,000 USA troops!
    The objections do NOT address the immediacy of the situation as it exists NOW, despite the fact I presented it as such.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  3. #63
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by grip View Post
    Well, the recent Russian economic sanctions on imported food from us is only the beginning. Putin can't allow us to strangle their gas supplies from the Ukraine or sales to Europe. This is quickly becoming what I feared it could, with a 'tit for tat' series of escalations. There's been a sudden increase in Big Bear bombers flying into US airspace.
    Got a link on the Big Bear bombers? I hadn't heard that. No, nothing about the mess in the ME or our sparing with Russia right now is positive.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  4. #64
    Guru
    Porchev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    GA
    Last Seen
    01-08-17 @ 12:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    3,092

    Re: U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
    I think we ARE going to see strikes against ISIS in support of the Kurds soon.
    Tens of thousands Christians and other religious minorities are in a dire situation as well
    In today's press conference, Obama seems to be giving in.
    I think it's pretty Dam urgent we act to help them.
    I strongly advocate this, tho not any strikes helping Maliki's mini-Iraq in the South.


    U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq
    ISIS claims control of strategic Mosul Dam, Yazidi community under threat
    Thomson Reuters Posted: Aug 07, 2014 8:42 AM ET Last Updated: Aug 07, 2014 2:52 PM ET
    U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq - World - CBC News
    We should have kept a military presence there and this would not have happened. However our government failed at negotiating a status of forces agreement.

  5. #65
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
    Air and/or Missile strikes are Not "Boots and rifle", NOR "shedding blood."

    ...
    I agree.

    The case for U.S. intervention (air strikes, weapons supplies, intelligence support) on behalf of the Kurdish Regional Government is much stronger than it was in Libya and is in Syria:

    1. The KRG has been a functioning democracy for years. This is not a matter of confusing American hopes with actual reality, as occurred with respect to Syria's and Libya's sectarian conflicts.
    2. The KRG has been stable and pro-American. One could not say the same for the Syrian rebels and Libyan rebels. In the latter case, following U.S.-led regime change, one of the first acts of the new Libyan government was to deny a U.S. request for extradition of the Lockerbie mastermind.
    3. The KRG has been a force for moderation in a region in which extremism has flourished.
    4. The KRG has had implicit cooperation with U.S. strategic ally, Israel, is currently selling oil to Israel and would likely formally conclude ties with Israel were the Kurdish region to become fully sovereign.
    5. The Islamic State terrorist organization is extremely hostile to American interests and allies and is a destabilizing regional force.
    6. The Islamic State has threatened possible genocide against the Yazidi religious minority with genocide used in the proper sense of the term, not the more political sense that has pervaded coverage of conflicts in Gaza, Syria, Libya, etc.

    In sum, the U.S. has far greater interests involved than it did in Libya and does in Syria. I opposed U.S. intervention in Libya and Syria. Air support and arms supplies to the KRG are a different matter.

  6. #66
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    I agree.

    The case for U.S. intervention (air strikes, weapons supplies, intelligence support) on behalf of the Kurdish Regional Government is much stronger than it was in Libya and is in Syria:

    1. The KRG has been a functioning democracy for years. This is not a matter of confusing American hopes with actual reality, as occurred with respect to Syria's and Libya's sectarian conflicts.
    2. The KRG has been stable and pro-American. One could not say the same for the Syrian rebels and Libyan rebels. In the latter case, following U.S.-led regime change, one of the first acts of the new Libyan government was to deny a U.S. request for extradition of the Lockerbie mastermind.
    3. The KRG has been a force for moderation in a region in which extremism has flourished.
    4. The KRG has had implicit cooperation with U.S. strategic ally, Israel, is currently selling oil to Israel and would likely formally conclude ties with Israel were the Kurdish region to become fully sovereign.
    5. The Islamic State terrorist organization is extremely hostile to American interests and allies and is a destabilizing regional force.
    6. The Islamic State has threatened possible genocide against the Yazidi religious minority with genocide used in the proper sense of the term, not the more political sense that has pervaded coverage of conflicts in Gaza, Syria, Libya, etc.

    In sum, the U.S. has far greater interests involved than it did in Libya and does in Syria. I opposed U.S. intervention in Libya and Syria. Air support and arms supplies to the KRG are a different matter.
    Point number three has been with US support.

    Point number five is applicable to US involvement in the region as well.

    And those actions that you correctly opposed in Libya and Syria, have led to the strengthening of IS.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  7. #67
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Point number five is applicable to US involvement in the region as well.

    And those actions that you correctly opposed in Libya and Syria, have led to the strengthening of IS.
    The sectarian government in Baghdad under which Prime Minister Maliki has deprived Iraq's Sunni minority among others of full political participation has probably played a much larger role in creating a fertile environment for groups such as the Islamic State to take hold.

    I do agree that U.S. policy with respect to Libya and Syria has been destabilizing and created power vacuums that have been exploited by the Islamic State and other extreme actors. Politically unpalatable as it might be, I suspect that if the U.S. immediately and completely terminated assistance to armed elements in Syria, the Syrian front would become more difficult for the Islamic State. Unfortunately, I doubt that the U.S. government will do so and any approach it takes will be end up being internally contradictory with aspects of policy having the effect of weakening the Islamic State (e.g., aid to the Kurds, if it is approved) and other elements having the effect of strengthening it (arms flows into Syria, larger power vacuum there than might otherwise exist, etc.).

  8. #68
    Light△Bender

    grip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    ☚ ☛
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 02:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,224
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Got a link on the Big Bear bombers? I hadn't heard that. No, nothing about the mess in the ME or our sparing with Russia right now is positive.

    Russian bombers penetrated U.S. airspace at least 16 times in past 10 days

    Now CNN is announcing that the WH, State and Staff have gone quiet about air strikes in Iraq. That usually means they're planning something. Once I heard the Kurds were losing against them, I knew it was going to get bad.
    Einstein, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

  9. #69
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    The sectarian government in Baghdad under which Prime Minister Maliki has deprived Iraq's Sunni minority among others of full political participation has probably played a much larger role in creating a fertile environment for groups such as the Islamic State to take hold.

    I do agree that U.S. policy with respect to Libya and Syria has been destabilizing and created power vacuums that have been exploited by the Islamic State and other extreme actors. Politically unpalatable as it might be, I suspect that if the U.S. immediately and completely terminated assistance to armed elements in Syria, the Syrian front would become more difficult for the Islamic State. Unfortunately, I doubt that the U.S. government will do so and any approach it takes will be end up being internally contradictory with aspects of policy having the effect of weakening the Islamic State (e.g., aid to the Kurds, if it is approved) and other elements having the effect of strengthening it (arms flows into Syria, larger power vacuum there than might otherwise exist, etc.).
    The Maliki government is a Shia government with a sectarian facade, and US interference in the ME is drowning it in sectarian violence. But I generally agree with the rest of your post!
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  10. #70
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

    Quote Originally Posted by grip View Post
    Russian bombers penetrated U.S. airspace at least 16 times in past 10 days

    Now CNN is announcing that the WH, State and Staff have gone quiet about air strikes in Iraq. That usually means they're planning something. Once I heard the Kurds were losing against them, I knew it was going to get bad.
    Thanks for the link. That's concerning.

    White House won’t commit to stopping looming genocide of Christians, Kurds in Iraq

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ing-genocide-/
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •