Pentagon orders aircraft carrier to Gulf in case Iraq military option needed
Source: Reuters/Yahoo
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel ordered an aircraft carrier moved into the Gulf on Saturday, readying it in case Washington decides to pursue a military option after insurgents overwhelmed a string of Iraqi cities this week and threatened Baghdad.
"The order will provide the Commander-in-Chief additional flexibility should military options be required to protect American lives, citizens and interests in Iraq," the Pentagon said in a statement.
Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-orders-aircraft-carrier-gulf-case-iraq-military-163630548.html
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Earth_First
(14,910 posts)Something, something about a Mission being...
hack89
(39,171 posts)Earth_First
(14,910 posts)You're right.
valerief
(53,235 posts)karynnj
(59,503 posts)To do otherwise if things get worse would be unthinkable.
mylye2222
(2,992 posts)But I dont think Obama really wants to put on a new military " adventure " over there. Too much sad legacy from Bush years.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)The US government took in 2.5 trillion last year. Mandatory payments (SS, interest on debt, etc.) were 2.6 trillion.
EVERYTHING ELSE we think of as government - military, border patrol, FDA, Agriculture Dept., parks, IRS, all government buildings and offices, FAA, SEC, road construction and repair, dams, etc. etc. etc. was paid for with borrowed money.
Your children - even the ones not yet born - are getting stuck with the tab for this, and everything else.
Sick, isn't it? Big bad-ass aircraft carrier propelled through the mighty oceans by the future earnings of children.
valerief
(53,235 posts)It's so hard to keep track of what they believe.
But I don't worry about "future earnings" the same way the GOP doesn't worry about "future climate". Money is magic. Climate is real.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)The ship is already at sea. The crew is already getting paid regardless of where they go.
Wernothelpless
(410 posts)We always have a presence in the area. They are on alert, but no more than usual.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 14, 2014, 05:10 PM - Edit history (1)
Let's just be clear about this. The article states Hagel ordered the aircraft carrier moved. A bit disingenuous. It's Obama's call. Even if he limits actions to airstrikes, all those anti-aircraft weapons the US turned over to Iraq are still there. Hate to see more loss of any life there, but especially US servicemen. And if only drones are used, there will be collateral damage, as per usual. Let the factions there fight it out. Wonder which of them will take over the Taj Mahal, i.e., US Embassy complex, construction costs of which have now reached $850 million stuffed in the pockets of Big Military/Construction.
At 440,000 square meters, it is the largest and most expensive embassy in the world and is nearly as large as Vatican City.[1] It employs 15,000 people and cost $750 million to build. The Embassy opened in January 2009 following a series of construction delays. It replaced the previous embassy, which opened July 1, 2004 in Baghdad's Green Zone in a former Palace of Saddam Hussein.[2] (Wikipedia).
In addition to that $750 million, "The State Department is planning to spend $115 million to upgrade the the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad only three and a half years after American diplomats moved into the massive $700 million facility, reports Walter Pincus of the Washington Post."
(2012)
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/us-embassy-baghdad-money-2012-6#ixzz34eMpRj00
As of 2 days ago, evacuation was planned. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/11/u-s-embassy-prepares-for-possible-evacuation-as-militants-take-control-in-iraq/
All Obama should do is expedite evacuation - get all Americans into that bloody fort called an embassy, and chopper them out. It's the bloody fall of Saigon again.
brett_jv
(1,245 posts)You have any idea how much all Iraq's OIL is worth?!?
Gotta look at the big picture here ...
Raphael Campos
(46 posts)With visions dancing in their minds of smoky flame-flowers blossoming up from the desert.
madamesilverspurs
(15,801 posts)is either fucking perverse or deliberately provocative. Good gawd.
hack89
(39,171 posts)IronGate
(2,186 posts)named after the father, not the son.
madamesilverspurs
(15,801 posts)Was thinking back to the first Gulf War. It was AFTER that it was publicized that Bush Sr. and James Baker had a significant business relationship with the Kuwaitis. And it was members of Bush Daddy's administration (and Reagan's) who had played paddycake with Saddam long before W was thought of as anything other than the family idiot. The Bush family doesn't exactly have a benign history in that part of the world (or in this part of the world, for that matter). The Bush family is directly responsible for way too much death and destruction over there, even "Bandar Bush" couldn't claim blindness to that reality.
IronGate
(2,186 posts)but the Carrier was named after him for his service to his country during WWII.
My personal feeling is that a capital ship like a Carrier should only be named after a president who actually served in the military with honor.
reddread
(6,896 posts)Turbineguy
(37,324 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 14, 2014, 07:22 PM - Edit history (1)
A Bush returns to Iraq.
That said, it's best to have hyper-accurate air strike capability.
santamargarita
(3,170 posts)Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)if you are referring to contingency planning in case they ARE ordered to attack, that's just being prepared.
fujiyama
(15,185 posts)Who are the militants? All of a sudden I just hear "they're worse than Al Qaeda", and some ooga-booga scary talk about these mean bad ISIS guys.
Seriously though, unless you send in ground troops - which is perhaps the single stupidest thing you can do now - what good are some air strikes going to do?
My guess is that this is just posturing. We might lob a few missiles and call it a day. Then Obama can feel like he did something. But there is no real political will for any of this. The republicans will criticize away, but at this point everyone knows the likes of McCain are just fucking nuts anyways.
Iraq will disintegrate into another Syria. My guess is the Saudis are already secretly funneling money to these ISIS fighters to further their Wahhabiist ideology. Iran will back Malaki until he's about to fall and they'll attempt to prop someone else up. Unlike Syria though, the Iraqi military isn't in good shape. I suppose the Iran will provide Maliki with some hardware and troops, but my guess is they'll be stretched thin. And what happens if Maliki goes all Assad on the militants? Will the US come in and condemn Malaki's human rights violations?
There are no good solutions. Everything over there is just fucked. There's no other way to put it. And no one is interested in listening to our lecturing and self serving hypocrisy anyways. We need to stay out AND STFU.
LuvLoogie
(7,003 posts)Last edited Mon Jun 16, 2014, 07:12 PM - Edit history (1)
ISIS has to be a self-sustaining entity beyond gathering fighters, RPGs and AK 47s. They either have to protect supply lines or hope the refugees left behind enough sustenance for an extended stay.
If Iran is really sending 2 battallions of government-backed, well trained army, I can't see ISIS holding out for the long run inasmuch as ISIS would cause the downfall of IRAQ. ISIS is symptomatic of Iraq's instability not a cause of it.
The Iraqi army is now culled of its non-commited. And Iraq is enlisting volunteers to stop ISIS. It was a big push, but it's done.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Bush, Chenney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice, etc. Iraq can keep them for as long as they need them. We'll even toss in Graham and McCain for free.