"WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s announcement Wednesday that he will send 450 more military advisers to Iraq highlights the central dilemma of his faltering strategy there: how to shore up the country’s fragile government without being pulled more deeply into a war he never wanted.
With few good options, Obama’s plan amounts to a decision to stay the course.
Administration officials said the troop increase — the second since U.S. troops returned to Iraq last year — isn’t intended to produce quick battlefield victories....."
"If you take out Saddam’s Regime, I guarantee you, that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region." Benjamin Netanyahu, 2002
(and the Republicans have sought this man's advice on Iran, 2015)
Why Obama’s new Islamic State plan signals a long war in Iraq
Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by kyredneck, Jun 11, 2015.
-
-
...a long war in Iraq will make the war industrialists very happy.
-
-
The American Dream MemberSite Supporter
Recruiter and enlist. -
righteousdude2 Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Theses guys are for real. Or do you think industrialists are manufacturing a lie in order to pad their wallets? :flower: -
righteousdude2 Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
I, personally, do not want another war. I think, we should avoid one. But NOT "at all costs". I think there are costs high enough to warrant war.
Hopefully, the cost for not going to war doesn't get too high. I'm tired of war. -
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
The military has been at war a lot, but the country hasn't been involved for decades. -
ISIS trying to bait the U.S. into a ground war
You all do realize that don't you? -
-
The American Dream MemberSite Supporter
Maybe we should start following the Constitution and have Congress declare war. What an idea.
-
The American Dream MemberSite Supporter
-
Sorry, George W. Bush, but this whole mess is still your fault
"Like clockwork, the Republican noise machine is blaming Barack Obama for the crisis in Iraq. And like clockwork, they’ve got everything wrong again.
The man to blame for what’s happening in Iraq is not President Obama — it’s President Bush.
Contrary to Tony Blair’s latest protestations, the U.S./U.K. invasion of Iraq — under deliberately fraudulent pretenses – had a great deal to do with enabling the current emergence of a Sunni terrorist military power in Iraq, but it goes much deeper than that. The recent success of ISIS — the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria — is exactly what Osama bin Laden had hoped that the 9/11 attacks would lead to. And thanks to Bush’s spectacularly foolish responses, bin Laden’s dream has come true.....
....bin Laden recalled fighting alongside the Mujahedin as they “bled Russia for 10 years until it went bankrupt and was forced to withdraw in defeat.” The same could be done with the U.S., he said, citing estimates that the Sept. 11 attacks, which cost al-Qaida $500,000, had cost the U.S. more than $500 billion in destruction and military expenditures. And Naureckas cited a 2011 Washington Post piece by Ezra Klein, elaborating al-Qaida expert Daveed Gartenstein-Ross’ contention that bin Laden had been “enormously successful”:..."
Read the article, follow the links (I found the international poll very interesting), there's much to think about. -
Salon? What else would one expect?
The successful prosecution of the war was indeed Bush's fault.
Screwing up the peace and letting ISIS get a foothold belongs completely to Obama.
Even ultra liberal and Obama sycophant Maureen Dowd agrees. Go figure. :laugh: -
As for the OP, I had to do a double take--I first thought it had read: "Obama's Islamic State's plan signals a long war in Iraq"