We're going back to Iraq to save Christians. It's not about the oil, I'm just sure it isn't.

[another_liberal]

Here we go again, like we don't know where and how this will end. In my considered opinion, we'll end up killing more Muslims than any Christians we might happen to save. And as far as those lovely oil fields in northern Iraq, "Well, it's one, two, three . . . What are we fighting for!"

US considers 'military options' in Iraq to save Yazidis, Christians

US President Barack Obama is considering military action to help stranded Yazidi Kurds in Iraq who fled territories captured by Islamic State militants.

On Thursday, President Obama assembled members of his national security team to discuss the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in regions of Iraq captured by the Islamic State (IS). The US is considering airdrops of humanitarian assistance supplies to Yazidis trapped at the top of Mount Sinjar, as well as airstrikes and other "military options," according to CNN. The Wall Street Journal reported that US aircraft might fly to Iraq to deliver humanitarian aid as soon as Thursday night.

An administration official told The New York Times that “the president is weighing both passive and active options.” Dropping humanitarian supplies is considered passive action. "More active, we could target the [IS] elements that are besieging the base of the mountain," the official added.

CNN also reported that the Obama administration is considering airstrikes against IS strongholds. However, the White House would not reveal its strategy on Thursday. “The United States government, as well as the United States military, is supporting the ongoing efforts of Iraqi official and Kurdish officials to address” this humanitarian crisis,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Thursday, without elaborating on what "support" currently means.

(snip)

Read more at: http://rt.com/usa/178784-pentagon-aid-kurdish-yazidis/

[HERVEPA]

1. Thanks for the Putinista link

[another_liberal]

14. That seems a lot like the right-wingers complaining about "Obamanistas?"

It does sound pretty silly when we hear them say it, right?

[Maedhros]

36. If you can't come up with thoughtful rebuttal to the content of the article,

your posts are not worth seeing.

/ignore list.

[another_liberal]

61. Thank you . . .

It would seem an obvious point, but clearly is not to some.

[Maedhros]

69. It's the primary criterion for getting on my ignore list.

Once you cull the one-sentence snark-mongers, the site becomes much more readable.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. The Yazidis aren't Christians.

They practice a very ancient religion related to Zoroastrianism. So whatever this latest thing is about, it isn't about rescuing Christians.

[VanillaRhapsody]

7. That was my first thought...WTF

they have 3 choices.....Convert, Starve or be Slaughtered.....

I guess they think we should do nothing and watch that happen to 40,000 people? Half of which are CHILDREN

[another_liberal]

10. The refugees supposedly trapped on that mountain are predominately Iraqi Christians . . .

That much has been widely reported:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/07/us-aid-iraqi-trapped-mountain-isis

[The Magistrate]

12. Do You Even Read Things You Link To, Sir?

"The US military is already helping the Iraqi government coordinate air drops of vital supplies to at least 40,000 Iraqis, mostly from the Yazidi minority, trapped on top of Mount Sinjar in the north after death threats from the Islamists who have overrun much of Sunni and northern Iraq." ( italics added )

[another_liberal]

18. I'm all for giving aid to any civilians who are endangered by war . . .

It is the talk of renewing our air strikes and other military efforts in Iraq I object to completely.

[The Magistrate]

23. You Mis-Characterized The Report, Sir

You said 'predominantly Christian', supporting this by a link to an article which reported the refugees were ' mostly from the Yazidi minority'. As a general rule, the opinions of people who display ignorance of what they are opining on not only can be, but ought to be, disregarded. Your opinion can be predicted safely in any case: you are against any action a Western country might decide to undertake, and so at best are of no more use than a stopped clock. And it should be noted that now, in the digital age, these are only right once a day --- and I suspect you have already used up that allowance....

[Tarheel_Dem]

34. "You Mis-Characterized The Report, Sir".

Your entire assessment is on point. Thank You!

[another_liberal]

35. Are you familiar with the term "nit-picking" . . .

Just curious?

[The Magistrate]

46. Are You, Sir, Familiar With The Term 'Reading Comprehension'?

It refers to being able to assimilate the information contained in a written passage. If one reads a paragraph which says ' mostly from the Yazidi minority' and afterwards, asked the import of the passage, answers 'the refugees supposedly trapped on that mountain are predominately Iraqi Christians', one has demonstrated extremely poor reading comprehension. An inability to read and remember suggests similar difficulties may dog employment of logic, and afflict the general base of knowledge a person works from in understanding the world and events.

Mis-statement of large, basic facts about a situation cannot be properly referred to as nit-picking, which is more in the line of complaining how things are spelled, or whether the manufacturer of a piece of equipment is properly named. It is understandable that someone who has mis-stated large, basic facts of a situation would try and claim people who pointed that out were 'nit-picking', but the attempt will only draw further attention to the fact that he or she has mis-stated large and basic facts of the situation, and further erode the pretense he or she has any awareness of what is going on at all. Speaking just as a tactician, you would be better advised just to drop it and try and regroup somewhere else.

Because the next line of attack is your odd formulation 'the refugees supposedly trapped on that mountain'....

[Rhinodawg]

59. Wow

[another_liberal]

62. Your opinion . . .

And you are welcome to it.

[The Magistrate]

68. You Keep Saying 'Your Opinion', Sir, Like It Could Win You A Scrap Over What Two Plus Two Equaled

It cannot.

You mis-stated large and basic facts of the situation. Either you did not read the article you linked to, or you did not understand it, or cannot remember what it said. Any of these open ground for suggestion you are not thinking clearly about the matter, or very aware of the circumstances you are commenting on. They follow logically from the established fact, that you mis-stated large and basic facts about the situation.

That is not an opinion.

That is a fact.

It is what you did.

[another_liberal]

72. Are you really keeping score?

Now that is funny.

[snooper2]

93. I am LOL...been doing it for a while

Right now it's like 237 - 3

[840high]

80. Enough already.

[kwassa]

64. The Magistrate is my hero.

Speaking truth to bullshit.

[kjones]

79. Logic of mass destruction

[davidpdx]

87. Misdirection and lies is his speciality

It's not a reading comprehension problem, it's a misleading fact problem. He wouldn't know what a fact was if it hit him over the head.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

19. The article refers to the Yazidis,

who are not Christians. My point is that the OP title is inaccurate because whatever the reason for this action, it's not to rescue, specifically, Christians.

[another_liberal]

33. Criticism noted . . .

If it is rather tangential to the central point of my OP. There are members of the Christian minority in peril, and that fact is being used by some to gin-up support for our re-intervention in Iraq. See what I mean?

[leftynyc]

97. Except, and this has already been

pointed out to you, they are not Christians. Their religion predates Christ by thousands of years.

[Tarheel_Dem]

3. More crap from the Kremlin. You never disappoint.

[The Magistrate]

8. When I Heard Of This, Sir

My first thought was of 'The Forty Days of Musa Dagh', a novel concerning an incident in the Armenian massacres of the Great War, by Franz Werfel. You might find it interesting; there are some similarities....

[Tarheel_Dem]

29. I'll definitely have to check that out. You have to admire the persistence.

[randys1]

4. I have an idea, let the teaparty and Graham and McCain do the dropping and if necessary

fighting and bombing.

[another_liberal]

38. No, I think thier job is to demand military action . . .

And then bitch about every aspect of how that military action is carried out.

[Cali_Democrat]

5. So Obama just wants their oil, amiright?

[another_liberal]

9. Maybe the President has to placate the fat cats who do want the oil?

The difference is small, perhaps, but important.

The central thing is, our government seems determined to get involved militarily in Iraq once again.

[Ikonoklast]

77. Do you even know who has contracted for oil exploration and production in Iraq?

BIG HINT: Those contracts have been signed for years already.

Since 2009.

The Chinese were the big winners.

The Chinese currently get most of Iraq's oil, and they are now angling for the contract given to Exxon/Royal Dutch/Shell by Iraq.


If you actually think Obama wants to start a war with China over Iraqi oil, you're sadly mistaken.

[another_liberal]

88. I honestly don't think our President "wants" to start any war . . .

He can not, however, always do exactly what he personally wants to. It is a condition of the office, one might say.

[JJChambers]

6. We broke this country ; it's our responsibility to secure it

These people are being massacred by ISIS as a direct result of our actions. Their blood is on our hands. I support President Obama and ANY military action he feels is necessary and appropriate.

[another_liberal]

11. It may be our responsibility . . .

But our going back to Iraq with our military will only make things infinitely worse for all concerned.

Some mistakes, especially some really big ones, can not be fixed that easily.

[EX500rider]

47. "our going back to Iraq with our military will only make things infinitely worse for all concerned"

If by "all concerned" you mean ISIL (al Qaeda in Iraq and the Levant) then yes....if you mean it will make things worse for the over 30,000 Yazidis finding themselves trapped and surrounded on Mount Sinjar, then, no.

[another_liberal]

73. Everyone concerned is meant to mean "Everyone concerned."

It is a simple declarative phrase, right?

[EX500rider]

75. So how would it make it worse for people trapped and dying on a mt?

[another_liberal]

90. It could easily hurry on their deaths . . .

As well as increasing their suffering and grief while they still live. That is what our previous military interventions in Iraq have all done for the people of that pitiful nation.

[EX500rider]

92. So us dropping them food/water & killing their oppressors will hurry on their deaths?

Unlikely.

And the Kurds have not increased in "suffering & grief" with out "gas the Kurds" Saddam.

[Bluenorthwest]

13. You would be amusing if this wasn't about people's lives.

nt

[flamingdem]

15. An Ed show guest said

That the US can drop food and shelter since they are stranded without either

[another_liberal]

20. That is a great idea . . .

At least it is as long as American lives are not put at risk in the process. If a few Americans are killed, then we will quickly be neck deep in it all over again.

[GeorgeGist]

16. They came, they saw, they said ...

'too weird, they'll never survive.'

[Marrah_G]

17. I am all for humanitarian aid

I think that the arab wold needs to be urged to help their adjoining countries defeat Isis.

I think Iran would be capable. Maybe Jordan or Turkey or combinations of all of them.

[another_liberal]

24. Would be nice if they at least tried . . .

Sending in our military might will just be a powerful recruiting tool or the Islamic State crowd.

Our bombs and drones are not the answer for what ails Iraq.

[Marrah_G]

25. Yes- my thoughts exactly and all those countries have it in their best interest to help each other

[Maedhros]

39. Ah! But sending in bombs and drones IS the answer for what ails the defense industry,

and that's what's really important.

[Autumn]

21. It seems I remember Sadam protected the Christians. Now who didn't see this coming.

[another_liberal]

31. The people of northern Iraq have my sympathy, but our military is not the answer.

In my opinion, we are all guilty for not doing more to prevent George Bush's stupid, illegal invasion and occupation. Repeating that mistake now would only prove our nation is as insane as others say it is.

[Autumn]

32. No our military is not the answer, humanitarian aid is the answer.

But I'm willing to bet if our military does anything it will be a military strike.

[Igel]

57. He played the sects off against each other when it suited him.

He supported one against the other when it suited him more.

What he couldn't allow was power to accumulate in one sect or tribe without it being dispensed directly from him and dependent upon him.

This is an old game. Saddam did it. Stalin--whom Saddam admired--did it. So did Tito, who didn't admire Stalin but knew where to take a quick a propos lesson. Stalin, however, didn't innovate the practice:

Ivan the Terrible was a proponent of ethnic dislocation and encouraging rivalries that would ensure that if the strong man faltered, there'd be a flood of fighting: Since this was obvious, every lower-order nobleman supported the strong man that abused him regularly, sure that all the other noblemen were also being abused, and secretly sure that their abuse was worse.

Even then it wasn't original with Johnny the Awesome, because the Golden Horde did it and the Ottomans did it. The Ottomans, of course, were another possible source of Saddam's practice. Where the Horde picked it up, I know not. However, it was something that the Assyrians did in the Fertile Crescent, so that kind of game as a long and terrible history.

[walkingman]

22. Stupid, Stupid Move

This settles it - Obama is a war monger.

[another_liberal]

27. Lets hope he chooses wisely . . .

Instead of listening to his interventionist, war hawk advisers.

[maced666]

26. Are Yazidi Kurds Christians?

Boy, even Christian non Christians catch it for being...Christians(?!)

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

28. No, they are not.

So I have no idea where the OP got the thread title.

[The Magistrate]

30. He Reached In Deep Where The Sun Don't Shine, Ma'am....

And pulled real hard.

[another_liberal]

40. I may read more than you do . . .

Here might be a place to start:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/07/us-aid-iraqi-trapped-mountain-isis

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

42. Maybe so, but THE ARTICLE YOU CITED referred to the Yazidis;

and you used that article, not the Guardian one, to posit that action will be taken in Iraq to rescue Christians. The RT article does not say that. RT is a dubious source in any event; and if you wanted to make the point that the excuse for the action is to rescue Christians, why not cite the Guardian article in the first place?

[The Magistrate]

49. The 'Guardian' Article, Ma'am, Does Not Refer To Christians Either

This is what it says in the body of the article:

"The US military is already helping the Iraqi government coordinate air drops of vital supplies to at least 40,000 Iraqis, mostly from the Yazidi minority, trapped on top of Mount Sinjar in the north after death threats from the Islamists who have overrun much of Sunni and northern Iraq." ( italics added )

The header of the article says, in a sub-head 'Move comes as Iraq's largest Christian city was abandoned as jihadist militants advance through country's north-west', but this is characterization of timing, not of who is on the mountain. One suspects strongly that, for all he claims to 'read more than you', he never got past the header of the Guardian article and into its body....

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

55. Pretty dubious sourcing, then, for the implication in the OP

that the reason the US military is involved in this action is to rescue Christians, which clearly it is not. I am all for bringing humanitarian aid to whoever needs it - and the notion that the US would be involved only "to rescue Christians" is pretty absurd.

[The Magistrate]

60. You Are Going To Edge Me Out For The Understatement Crown, Ma'am, You Keep That Up....

I am pretty much neutral on this: like you I would support humanitarian assistance, and might even stretch that to the odd bullet or three in a pinch, myself, but I recognize we can hardly save everyone in the world, and uncomfortable as it may be, have to accept that as a fact sooner or later, as a political culture.

Butit is easy to recognize when someone starts with a conclusion and policy, provided by some ideological predisposition, which he foists on every situation like Procrustes forced his bed on travelers....

[another_liberal]

66. Yes it does!

Christians are even included in the sub-title: "Move comes as Iraq's largest Christian city was abandoned as jihadist militants advance through country's north-west."

And also in the text that identifies the leading photograph: "Thousands of Yazidi and Christian people flee after the latest wave of Isis advances in Iraq."

Enough of this nonsense, already. Try commenting on the real content of the OP for a change.

[The Magistrate]

70. Again, Sir, From The Body Of the Article

"The US military is already helping the Iraqi government coordinate air drops of vital supplies to at least 40,000 Iraqis, mostly from the Yazidi minority, trapped on top of Mount Sinjar in the north after death threats from the Islamists who have overrun much of Sunni and northern Iraq." ( italics added )

Your statement: "...the refugees supposedly trapped on that mountain are predominately Iraqi Christians'..."

Most people will notice a contradiction in these two statements, and most will consider it of some importance, given the claim of your headline at the start of this thread.

Some, too, will wonder about that 'supposedly trapped' bit as well, but we may safely leave that for later....

[840high]

82. They are people in need - that's

all I care about.

[840high]

81. Thanks for link.

[gordianot]

41. They are a very complex group not exactly Zoroastrian, Christian or Muslim but are a combination.

That they have survived this long over the centuries is a wonder they have never sought converts. Most interesting they claim descent from Adam and not Eve. Leave it to the 21st Century for someone to wipe them out.

[EX500rider]

48. "Are Yazidi Kurds Christians?"

The Yazidi are Kurds who practice a pre-Christian religion related to the pre-Islamic Zoroastrian religion common in Iran (and now only found in India)

[Tarheel_Dem]

37. Just so no one forgets, or is ever confused by the "sourcing" of RT reports & others like it.

[another_liberal]

44. How does that apply?

Who cares if some right-wing Russophobe paid her enough she was convinced to quit her job? I just wonder if she was actually able to collect?

[Tarheel_Dem]

53. Yeah, let's go with that. One conspiracy's as good as another.

Keep on Truckin', A_L!!!

[LanternWaste]

94. Who precisely paid her to quit?

Who precisely paid her to quit? Or (and I find this much more likely) is your premise merely a guess to better validate your illustrated biases?

[TwilightGardener]

43. Geez, you must have been livid when Putin gave Iraq warplanes, sent advisors,

and pledged military assistance. Amirite?

[another_liberal]

45. I'm not a Russian citizen . . .

As long as they don't actually use it to attack us, they can spend their money on practically anything they wish as far as I care. They can even just throw it away, like we so often are prone to do.

[TwilightGardener]

50. You would equally condemn any outside country who helped militarily in

Iraq, right? Iran, too? I pick on Russia, of course, since RT is your favorite source. If Russia supplied and trained or even flew in Iraq, you'd condemn it, right?

[another_liberal]

56. I have no "favorite source" . . .

My choice to reference Russia Today concerning some issues is due to their relative freedom from control by the forces who dominate our Western media. That allows them to offer a point of view which is often significantly different from that of our tightly scripted mass media.

[TwilightGardener]

63. Would you condemn Russia for helping militarily in Iraq or not?

Like providing ground-attack jets, say? And advisors? You'd have to assume they wanted oil, right? And do you believe that RT is NOT "tightly scripted"?

[another_liberal]

71. I don't want my country involved in another Iraq war . . .

What is so hard to understand about that?

I would advise Russian people to take the same stance in regard to their own military, but, as an American, I don't feel I have the moral standing to "Condemn" what any other country might do along the lines of arming Iraq. Our national guilt weighs a bit too heavily on me. The hypocrisy of it would stick in my throat

[TwilightGardener]

83. Don't need "moral standing". Just consistency.

[kwassa]

67. Your favorite "news" source is a Russian propaganda outlet.

and the idea that our mass media is tightly scripted is delusional.

Our mass media is often incompetent, and too incompetent to follow a script.

The point of view that is significantly different that you enjoy is the viewpoint of Vladimir Putin. That would make you a rather devoted follower of his viewpoint, as you post it so frequently.

[another_liberal]

74. As a matter of fact . . .

I am personally the foremost authority on what constitute my favorite things in the World. Trust me when I, as the aforementioned authority, tell you that you are wrong in this regard. I happen to know for a fact I have no "favorite" news source.

Now you have heard it directly from the foremost authority on all things me, and you can rest assured it is the truth.

[kwassa]

85. do you link to anything but RT?

[SidDithers]

51. Oh FFS...

Sid

[The Magistrate]

54. God I Love That, Sir

My grand-son is laughing at me because I have only now seen it for the first time, but...Damn!

[maddezmom]

96. Love it

[JoePhilly]

52. Well, if that is your "considered opinion" ...

Tell us ... when is the ground war going to start ... ??

Don't be coy. Come one ... when do US troops hit the ground???

Why do I suspect you will not make a prediction?

[another_liberal]

58. How the hell would I know that?

Though I would be willing to bet we already have more than a few "dark ops" types active in the conflict zone.

Do you doubt it?

[pinboy3niner]

65. I rejected this at first...

...but the rec from the long-time 23-post DUer is making me think twice.

[dionysus]

76. more RT eh?

[Rapillion]

78. Should we help the Kurds and others fight IS?

"IS is reportedly targeting any ethnic and religious minorities - including Shabaks, Turkmens, Yazidis, and Christians - that refuse to bend to its strict brand of Islam." This is from the RT link.

[another_liberal]

91. In my opinion . . .

We have done all we need to do to Iraq in the way of military intervention. Lets leave them alone for a few decades. They need a break from our "assistance."

[Hekate]

86. Zoroastrians

[malaise]

89. Oops the link got it right

Dear oh dear!!!

[LanternWaste]

95. Much as it was only about oil during the U.S. involvement in the Kosovo air campaign, yes?

Much as it was only about oil during the U.S. involvement in the Kosovo air campaign, yes?

[Chathamization]

98. And once again, we’re being fed a media fairytale

For starters, their seems to be no distinction made between “ISIS”/”ISIL” and the other militant groups who are part of the offensive, though many reports mention the other groups involved at least in passing. An Iraqi government official said a few months ago that they would consider anyone they fought to be part of ISIS, no matter their actual affiliations. My hunch is that things are similar to the way they were before – secular, tribal, and religious militias have a loose affiliation, but every battle is framed as ISIS vs. the good guys (when we were their it was always framed as al Qaeda vs. the good guys).

At the moment we’re told that “ISIS”/”ISIL” is one the verge of taking Irbil (mostly because some of their fighters are halfway between Mosul and Irbil now). Estimates that I’ve seen for the Kurdish military forces and ISIS forces have the Kurds outnumbering ISIS at least 10 to 1, with more experience and better training, plus them defending their own territory. Not only that, but ISIS is supposedly taking on the Kurds at the same time they’re taking on the Iraqi government army, Syrian government army, Shiite militias and other rebel groups. Even factoring in the fact they’re working with other rebel groups, the total number of rebel coalition troops is much, much smaller than that of their enemies.

Also not talked about is how Kurdistan seems to be a dictatorship interested in expanding its own territory.

This seems to be more of a general uprising in Sunni areas against government control, spearheaded by a diverse group of militants with ISIS being one of the more prominent groups. The media portrays it as “this is a new Caliphate (of 10,000 people) that’s about to conquer the Middle East!”