Back to Iraq? You Bet!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by poncho, Jan 14, 2014.

  1. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    As usual, the interventionists who run the US foreign policy establishment are drawing all the wrong conclusions from the news that the former “al-Qaeda in Iraq” (now “al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria”) has set up shop in the notorious Fallujah. Sen. John McCain and his sidekick, Sen. Lindsey Graham, issued a joint statement over the weekend which unsurprisingly blamed the whole development on President Obama’s decision to withdraw US forces form Iraq in 2011.
    Wrote the Senators:
    When President Obama withdrew all U.S. forces from Iraq in 2011, over the objections of our military leaders and commanders on the ground, many of us predicted that the vacuum would be filled by America’s enemies and would emerge as a threat to U.S. national security interests.
    There are two things wrong with this analysis. First, the phenomenon of al-Qaeda in Iraq was created by the invasion that the two Senators championed. Al-Qaeda was not in Iraq before 2003, as we all know. So if anyone is responsible for al-Qaeda in Iraq it is McCain, Graham, and the coterie of cakewalk neo-conservatives who pushed for the war. Secondly, as the Moon of Alabama blog so deftly points out, the whole “power vacuum” argument is a reality vacuum — making no sense:
    It was the U.S. attack on Iraq that set off the sectarian war in Iraq and beyond. It was the removal of Saddam Hussein that changed the balance between Saudi Sunnism and Iranian Shiaism which then motivated the Saudis to unleash the Jihadist forces. It was not a ‘power vacuum’ that created the strife that continues today and will continue in the future. It was the insertion of U.S. forces into the Middle East that led to overpressure and the current explosions.
    McCain and Graham and the neocons want to have it both ways. They want us to believe that the “liberation” of Iraq produced a successful, positive result — a brave new society eager to spread its democratic, tolerant, and multicultural wings. That would justify their decade long (and more) advocacy of such an attack.


    http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/back-to-iraq-you-bet/
     
  2. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,332
    Likes Received:
    786
    That is true they were not there before. But neither does that mean the US is responsible for Al quaeda being there now. Not sure what kind of logic that is outside of a biased agenda. And by the way this is that "Washingtons Al Quaeda" that we are talking about here.



    The liberation of Iraq did produce successful results. That much is clear
     
  3. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Okay if it's so clear then prove it. Shows us these successful results. And while you're at it let's see some of that logic you rely so heavily on used to explain why "we" should go back into Iraq to fight against "Al Qaeda" while "we" and our "allies" are supporting "Al Qaeda" fighters in neighboring Syria.

    Washington and the corporate media have a habit of claiming everyone with a beard and an AK 47 is "Al Qaeda" without proof. "Al Qaeda" and "terrorists" are brand names for anyone Washington wants to make war on these days.
     
    #3 poncho, Jan 14, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 14, 2014
  4. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Still waiting to see those successful results.
     
  5. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Still waiting . . .
     
  6. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    “Liberating Iraqis”, Limb by Limb, Life by Life, Home by Home, Gene by Gene

    “Why should we hear about body bags and deaths … I mean, it’s not relevant, so why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that …” (Former First Lady, Barbara Bush, Good Morning America, 18th March 2003)

    In these days of the tenth anniversary of the illegal invasion and near destruction of Iraq, answers are owed not alone for the dead, but to the cancer stricken, the deformed, to their parents, their siblings and all Iraqis. They were left with a land poisoned by depleted uranium in 1991, the burden ever building over twelve more years of (illegal) US and UK bombings, then the enormity of 2003.

    Fallujah’s victims have rightly come under medical and media scrutiny since the US military onslaught of April and November 2004, but throughout Iraq, there have been no reports of areas unaffected.

    In context, Dahr Jamail writes from Fallujah, “Official Iraqi government statistics show that, prior to the outbreak of the First Gulf War in 1991, the rate of cancer cases in Iraq was 40 out of 100,000 people. By 1995, it had increased to 800 out of 100,000 people, and, by 2005, it had doubled to at least 1,600 out of 100,000 people. Current estimates show the increasing trend continuing.

    “As shocking as these statistics are, due to a lack of adequate documentation, research and reporting of cases, the actual rate of cancer and other diseases is likely to be much higher than even these figures suggest.” He also cites, ” … a dramatic jump in miscarriages and premature births … particularly in areas where heavy US military operations occurred …” as Fallujah.

    Jamail cites the study by Dr Chris Busby, Malak Hamdan and Entesar Ariabi: “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth-Sex Ration in Fallujah, Iraq 2005-2009.” Of it, Dr Busby’s opinion was that the Fallujah health crisis represented “the highest rate of genetic damage in any population ever studied.”

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/libera...ife-by-life-home-by-home-gene-by-gene/5329168

    Some of the neocon's shinning successes in Iraq. How liberating eh?
     
    #6 poncho, Jan 15, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2014
  7. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    After all this we're supposed to believe the Iranians are evil people that have to be kept in check by Washington and the "international community"? "Al Qaeda"? What has it done if it indeed exists that could rival the heartless evil Washington and it's "allies" has visited on the whole population of Iraq for generations to come? USA! USA! USA! Hooah!

    I hope I have a front row seat come judgement day when all the neocons and their faithful followers have to answer for their sins.
     
    #7 poncho, Jan 15, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2014
  8. Sapper Woody

    Sapper Woody
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,112
    Likes Received:
    105
    I am not advocating more military action. I also am not going to deny that some of the increase in those numbers COULD be due to military actions. But I would contend that a more likely cause would be an increase in reporting. One thing we did right over there was build schools and hospitals. With the increased availability of medical care, it is small wonder that the reported cases of cancer went up. I would wager that the reported cases of every disease went up, due to medical availability.
     
  9. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Yeah that must be it Sapper.

    Increased reporting. Yeah. Okay.

    I'm sure all the Iraqi people are comforted to know their children have a nice new school to attend . . . if they survive their infancy.
     
    #9 poncho, Jan 15, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2014

Share This Page

Loading...