It's frightening how easy it is to build support for war

[cali]

It's frightening how easy it is to get people to accept encroachment on privacy and personal freedom. It doesn't take much. Yes, ISIS is horrible. Yes, it's wreaking havoc in Syria and Iraq, but it's hardly the only place in the world where brutal groups are operating and wreaking havoc.

I'll make some predictions. Bombing will not destroy ISIS. We will not be able to train an effective army in Iraq. Didn't we just have over a decade to do that? Now we're going to create and train a new Iraqi military? And what is the government that military answers to? How do you have an effective armed force without a stable and somewhat unified government? And that Iraq does not have. Another prediction: Arming and training "moderate" opposition groups in Syria will backfire. Our intelligence there as to who these groups are (and whether at this point, they actually exist) is very poor. This just strikes me as another very risky idea.

And it is expensive. Very expensive for an indefinite period.

La plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.

[leftstreet]

1. DURec

[KG]

2. oh, we'll get it right this time, because obama!

[redgreenandblue]

3. Even on DU, it is much harder to oppose a war than to support it.

[mazzarro]

78. B-I-N-G-O!

No matter the political color, Americans are gung-ho about their military adventurisms and are easily persuaded that the American military will always "kick ass". So the idea of f**ked up situation hardly register in their mind until it is too late to reverse the situation. The only times when DU is generally antiwar is when the occupant of the WH is someone DU generally disagrees with in most policy matters. Otherwise you are going to see a significant support for war even if the logic is pretzelised to the n'th degree.

[busterbrown]

144. Politicians in our country are rewarded in Nov..

for supporting wars.. Our country has become paralyzed with fear and politicians especially republicans adore fear mongering..

[geek tragedy]

4. Did you miss the fact that Maliki has been replaced

and that the US's #1 goal is to get a more inclusive, stable government in place-- so much so that they refused to lift a finger against ISIL until it was clear Maliki was on the way out?

Really a good idea to understand what the strategy is before criticizing it.

[cali]

7. No. I did not miss that. Did I miss that a new stable government has been formed. No

I didn't miss that either.

Really a good idea for you to not make unfounded guesses as to what others know, geek.

And btw, that the U.S. goal is to to get a more inclusive government in place is irrelevant because that hasn't happened. It takes time for that to happen. The U.S. can't make that happen. This is basic stuff. Really a good idea to grasp basic realities. You don't.

[geek tragedy]

10. Reality is that symptoms must be treated

in the short- term. Too soon to say if new gov is stable. But without us involvement there would be no more Iraqi government.

At a minimum, halting its gains against the Kurds was necessary.

"Let Iraq burn" is isolationism, not progressivism.

[cali]

14. Perhaps. Perhaps it is isolationism, but I'm not against engaging in other ways

Making a real concentrated effort to cut funding for ISIS. And yes, I know they control some oil fields and receive revenue from that- so don't go assuming that I don't know that- as is your wont. No, it is NOT too soon to say that the new Iraqi government is not stable. It is not. It isn't even fully formed yet. Furthermore, a number of high ranking officials in the new government are the same faces as those in the Maliki government- shuffled around.

http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-iraq-new-government-20140910-story.html#page=1

And btw, we choose to be "isolationists" in many different conflicts, just as bloody and tragic as Iraq. Not only that, but according to all sources, the President will also be intervening in Syria by funding and training so-called "moderate" opposition groups.

We've done enormous harm in Iraq and the wider region. There is no guarantee that we won't continue to do more harm and increase the whirlwind of destruction.

Again, we trained and provisioned the Iraq army and that was beyond a disaster. Why would anyone think that under these circumstances, we'll manage to successfully create and train a new one?

[geek tragedy]

24. There is middle ground between ground troops

and doing nothing, and the president is pursuing such an approach.

Accountants aren't going to stop ISIL in the field. Cutting off funding is a long- term tool, not a short- term remedy.

[cali]

35. And what about funding and training those so-called "moderate" groups in Syria?

So far it's been a fucking mess- a nightmare. Bombing Syria? I'm sure you think that's a dandy idea. I don't. Btw, it was the FSA, the most prominent of the "moderate" Syrian opposition groups that sold Sotloff to ISIS. And more on them:

There is NO short term remedy. The President himself says it will be "3 year campaign". fuck. you certainly are, uh, all in. ugh.


http://amestrib.com/news/nation/us-leaves-free-syrian-army-leaders-out-military-planning

War Crimes Allegations

On 20 March 2012, Human Rights Watch issues an open letter to the opposition (including the FSA), accusing them of carrying out kidnappings, torture and executions and calling on them to halt these unlawful practices.[128] The United Nations-sponsored "Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic" has documented war crimes in Syria since the start of the civil war. It said that rebels had committed war crimes, but that they "did not reach the gravity, frequency and scale" of those by state forces.[129][130] Some FSA-aligned groups have also been criticized for their alleged affiliation with Islamists.

The FSA has been accused of summarily executing numerous prisoners who it claims are government soldiers or shabiha,[131] and people who it claims are informers. A rebel commander in Damascus said that over the months his unit had executed perhaps 150 people that the "military council" had found to be informers. He explained: "If a man is accused of being an informer, he is judged by the military council. Then he is either executed or released".[132] Nadim Houry, a Middle East researcher for Human Rights Watch argued that "Intentionally killing anyone, even a shabiha, once he is outside of combat is a war crime, regardless of how horrible the person may have been".[133] On 10 August 2012, a report indicated that Human Rights Watch was investigating rebel forces for such killings. The FSA, for its part, stated that they would put those fighters that had conducted the unlawful killings on trial.[134]

Witnesses have also reported rebels conducting 'trial by grave' in which an alleged government soldier was given a mock trial next to a pre-made grave and executed on the spot by members of the FSA Amr bin al-Aas brigade. One rebel said: "We took him right to his grave and, after hearing the witnesses' statements, we shot him dead".[135][136]

The Daoud Battalion, operating in the Jabal-al-Zawiya area, has reportedly used captured soldiers in proxy bombings. This involved tying the captured soldier into a car loaded with explosives and forcing him to drive to an Army checkpoint, where the explosives would be remotely detonated.[132][137][138]

The UN noted some credible allegations that rebel forces, including the FSA, were recruiting children as soldiers, despite stated FSA policy of not recruiting anyone under the age of 17.[139] One rebel commander said that his 16-year-old son had died fighting government troops.[140]

In a video uploaded to the Internet in early August, an FSA representative announced that, in response to international concerns, FSA units would follow the Geneva Convention's guidelines for the treatment of prisoners and would guarantee its captives food, medical attention and holding areas away from combat zones. He also invited Red Cross workers to inspect their detention facilities.[132] On 8 August, FSA commanders distributed an 11-point code of conduct signed by scores of brigade commanders and rebel leaders. It states that all fighters must "respect human rights ... our tolerant religious principles and international human rights law – the same human rights that we are struggling for today".[141][142]

The following is a timeline of alleged war crimes by FSA-aligned groups:

On 22 May 2012, an FSA brigade kidnapped 11 Lebanese pilgrims coming from Iran.[143] Four of them were killed in an airstrike by the Syrian Air Force and the rest were released unharmed.[144]

On 20 July 2012, Iraq's deputy interior minister, Adnan al-Assadi, said that Iraqi border guards had witnessed the FSA take control of a border post, detain a Syrian Army lieutenant colonel, and then cut off his arms and legs before executing 22 Syrian soldiers.[145]

On 21 July 2012, Turkish truck drivers said that they had their trucks stolen by members of the FSA when it captured a border post. They said that some of the trucks were burnt and others sold back to their drivers after the goods were looted.[146]

The United Nations report on war crimes states that the FSA's execution of five Alawite soldiers in Latakia, post-July 2012 was a war crime. The report states, "In this instance, the FSA perpetrated the war crime of execution without due process."[130]

On 13 August 2012, a series of three videos surfaced showing executions of prisoners, apparently by rebel forces, in Aleppo province. In one video, six postal workers were being thrown off the main postal building in Al-Bab to their deaths, purportedly by FSA fighters. The gunmen claimed they were shabiha.[147][148][149][150]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Syrian_Army

[geek tragedy]

42. I will wait for evidence of US arming of the FSA

before I decry it.

Ditto bombing Syria (déjà vu )

[cali]

46. Here, have some evidence.

http://amestrib.com/news/nation/us-leaves-free-syrian-army-leaders-out-military-planning

It's hardly a secret. for someone who chastises others on their supposed lack of knowledge....

And the President said, just within the last day, that he doesn't need Congressional authorization to bomb ISIS in Syra. That would be a clue that he is considering taking that action.

basics, geek. basics.

[geek tragedy]

47. Giant grain of salt: story has a single source:

t according to Gen. Abdul-Ilah al Bashir, the FSA’s embittered chief of staff, they just aren’t talking. - See more at: http://m.amestrib.com/news/nation/us-leaves-free-syrian-army-leaders-out-military-planning#sthash.JhJqM2aN.dpuf

[cali]

49. lol. yeah. that source being the chief of staff.

[geek tragedy]

54. the embittered, marginalized chief of staff.

virtually inconceivable that such a chap might mix self-serving speculation in with facts

[Chathamization]

73. It doesn’t seem that “ISIS” took over any towns inside Kurdistan proper. The Kurds, on the other

hand, took the opportunity to annex Kirkuk (something they’ve been trying to do for years) and are now expanding outward.

When do we begin the bombing campaign to halt Kurdish gains against Arabs?

[geek tragedy]

115. When the Kurds conduct campaigns

of mass terror and genocide.

[Chathamization]

122. If we sanction expansionist Kurdish ambitions we shouldn’t be terribly surprised if Sunni Arabs

support whatever militant group will protect their interests. The nearsightedness on display here is pretty much why I can’t support any action. There might be times when people need to fire a gun; but if someone tells you they can’t be bothered to look at what they’re shooting it’s a good sign they can’t be trusted even holding a firearm.

[lark]

90. If more isolationism means less war, I'm all for it.

We created ISIS by going into Iraq and Syria and giving guns to folks we really knew nothing about. ISIS is totally armed with US weaponry.
Going back into Iraq without the support of the neighbors will end just as badly this time as it did before because there is still no inclusive government there. This is such a sweet deal for the MIC. First we make guns and give them to terrorists and let them fall into terrorists hands. Then we have to make more guns to fight against the guns we gave them. Catch 22 I think and it will be amazing if anything good comes of it because most likely that will not happen.

War begets war begets more war and nothing/little else. It doesn't matter who drags/pushes us into war, it's the war machine itself that trundles on along with all the civilian deaths and economic disasters.

[geek tragedy]

116. "Without the support of the neighbors"

That support is being sought and gained, some cases more public than others.

[lark]

201. Where are their troops?

If they are not a visible presence, it really doesn't matter. It will still be seen by the people there as the US killing Arabs. - again

[rhett o rick]

113. First I think it's audacious for anyone to claim they know "reality".

Doing what's necessary to "establish a stable (democratic) government" is the bullcrap that is always used by conservatives, like George Bush, to justify war, to justify killing, to justify enriching the MIC.

You advocate choosing a side, a side fighting for goodness, and helping them fight badness. We have a horrible track record of choosing the side of goodness. Most often we choose the side that will benefit the corporations that pay our politicians.

You say, ""Let Iraq burn" is isolationism, not progressivism." Then please tell us what a "progressive" solution would be. And please don't say, "establish a stable government". Saddam Hussein had a stable government.

[lark]

86. Do you know anything about the new premier?

Is he any better at all than Maliki? Is he accepted by the Sunnis and Kurds as well as the Shiites we generally favor there? I think it's far too early to judge whether things have really changed there or if just the names have changed but the policieis of killing the other sects continue.

[geek tragedy]

114. His deputy PMs are a Kurd and a Sunni nt

[cali]

120. Most of his cabinet are just reshuffled people from Maliki's.

http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-iraq-new-government-20140910-story.html#page=1

[Chathamization]

124. So were Maliki’s when he started

As you said, it’s good to understand something before commenting on it…

[geek tragedy]

127. Everyone knows the long-term solution must be

political. The President has made it very clear that there is no military solution. People are acting as though Dick Cheney is speaking tonight.

[lark]

200. That sounds positive.

Are they given any real power and say in the country or are they just window dressing?

[geek tragedy]

202. honestly, we don't know because that story is still being written

The US is certainly leaning hard in that direction--more inclusivity. They helped push Maliki out precisely for this concern.

One thing that doesn't get said enough: had Obama gone in guns blazing when McCain et al wanted him to, Maliki would still be PM.

[totodeinhere]

145. Yes they rearranged the deck chairs on the Titanic. Now Maliki is a vice president.

Nothing has really changed.

[grahamhgreen]

164. No. Before Maliki was Chalabi. We got him out. It still sucked.

[Downwinder]

5. Keep people poor to supply a ready source of cannon fodder.

[stevenleser]

28. There wont be any cannon fodder. No ground troops. nt

[RufusTFirefly]

37. Cool! Just as long as no Americans are killed, everything will be fine!

After all, the lives of people in other countries aren't as valuable as ours. Everybody knows that.

[stevenleser]

40. That is your strawman. I said no such thing. nt

[Chathamization]

80. Yep; if half of the civilians killed from the bombs were random Americans, you can bet the support

for bombing would evaporate in an instant. As long as it’s only Iraqi civilians that get accidently blown up, everything’s fine.

[RufusTFirefly]

89. Especially when we have leaders who say "We don't do body counts."

Meanwhile, many of our fellow citizens are like the toddler who covers his own eyes and says "You can't see me!"

[lark]

92. Planes and drones are pretty good at killing folks too.

Boots on the ground are not required for killing. Yes, Iraquis will be cannon fodder either way we go. WE should not be involved in this circular firing zone!

[cali]

94. so will Syrians. this is not going to be pretty.

[lark]

98. It will be so sad and ugly.

It will also be used as an excuse to hurt working class Americans cause bombs are more important than SSI, healthcare, building infrastructure, education, etc. etc.

So predictable and so extremely sickening. How can so many Americans live with their eyes closed so tightly?

[RufusTFirefly]

100. Yes, but as long as we stay focused on the truly important stuff, everything will be fine.

[lark]

199. So sad that the MIC is in charge of this country.

Doesn't really matter who's president, the MIC get their wars no matter what. I also think the oil companies are probably complicit in beating the drums to war as well. War in the Middle East always increases the price of crude so they make out like bandits.

[stevenleser]

112. The Iraqis that you seem to be concerned about want our help. It's not a circular firing zone. nt

[lark]

198. The Shiites & Kurds want us there,

The Sunnis do not. There is no unity in Iraq.

[morningfog]

129. So says Obama so far. Three things:

1 this war will out last Obama, they've already essentially conceded that. There are no promises from the next president.

2 planes can get shot down.

3 conditions change. Throwing a US bombing campaign into an already volatile mess will have unpredictable outcomes. There are thousands of ways US ground troops could be pulled in.

[Downwinder]

161. The crusades lasted for 200 years and accomplished little.

[phantom power]

6. It's also too easy to call it something besides war.

It's "air support"
It's "doing something"
It's "no boots on the ground"

[L0oniX]

17. Offense is ...defense.

[factsarenotfair]

8. I'll also make a prediction. They'll have to raid Soc Sec Retirement and Disability to pay for

the permanent fight against ISIS/ISIL.

I'm predicting a hint of this in Pres. Obama's speech tonight.

[leftstreet]

21. !!

Yep

It could be a new SOTU drinking game. Every time you hear 'entitlements' or 'hard choices'

[factsarenotfair]

36. #1 priority...sacrifice...unprecedented challenge... n/t

[RKP5637]

58. Yep, in the name of national security. Forget COLA ...

[ballyhoo]

88. They do that they'll have a bigger fight than ISIS on their

hands because anyone with two brain cells will know why the war was started in the first place.

[factsarenotfair]

104. They can't throw the frog into boiling water, but they can find other ways. n/t

[ballyhoo]

133. Yeah, it'll be "every one's gonna have to sacrifice so we can

end this threat to civilization" .... No, we KNOW now who the threat to civilization is....

[2banon]

111. Apparently, there's too many people lacking even "2 brain cells" in this country

functionaries on this board rationalizing justification for the "war on terror" canard.

1984=2004=2014=

[ballyhoo]

131. It is insanity. Ten thousand freaks cultivated by the neoncons, given weapons

by the defense department under Obama, led by a prisoner from Camp Bucca, and now we gonna go get 'em with money from guess where. If any of this is true, and we will know shortly, it will end the Democratic Party.

[2banon]

134. It's almost as if it were being executed for that purpose..

I know of course, it isn't. But after scraping my jaw from the floor too many times, I'm scratching my head wondering if that's actually the case, from time to time.

[ballyhoo]

135. I think that is actually the case. I have thought so since we armed ISIS

in Syria. Many others think so too. The government has to have an omnipresent threat for which they will need a constant source of funds for it. There wasn't one, so they did a Helgian Dialectic just like _____(fill in the blanks) and now they can say: See we need the money for this or you will all be killed in your sleep by these terrorists. Haven't you noticed some strange things about ISIS and surrounding events that made you blink and wonder what the hell is going on? It is the neocons and guess who is one of them--by orders from above.

[2banon]

149. I have noticed, and wondered. The Shock Doctrine is in full on gear.

Iraq and Afghanistan to "soften up" the public for what's to come.

[ballyhoo]

152. Exactly. And this military stuff being used by the police forces

is a warning as to what will be our fate if we resist neo-serfdom. It may be too late to reverse them with only around 40 members of the House and Senate still approximately honest. And then there's the announcement today that many more possible Ebola carriers were let into the US. Next year will be hell no matter who wins in November. The covered wagons are tightening formation as the indians shoot more flaming arrows into the circle.

[ReRe]

168. He didn't mention that tonight...

... probably saving for the SOTU speech.

[factsarenotfair]

173. #1 priority is securty...

[ReRe]

174. Yeah but...

Money? Meh.

[conservaphobe]

9. The neocons and their media allies have left this administration no choice.

It might be a overhyped threat, but the President has few options now. One poll showed only like 10-13% of the population want to do nothing.

The public is whipped into a frenzy once again. The only difference this time is that the White House has had little to do with it.

[cali]

15. Look, I have a great deal of sympathy for the President in this mess.

but I'm not suggesting doing nothing. I would have liked to see an aggressive campaign to destroy ISIS' funding. And I disagree with you about the White House having little to do with whipping up public sentiment. Comments made by the President, the VP, the SoS- and others- belie that claim.

[stevenleser]

29. ISIS has plenty of funding for the near future after looting all the banks in several cities.

Add ransom money and they have hundreds of millions of dollars at their disposal. That is enough for them to go crazy for several years. All they need to do is feed their troops and buy bullets and artillery and tank ordinance. That amount of money is more than enough for that.

[BuelahWitch]

96. Where are they keeping all this money?

If it's in a bank, shut off the spigots. If it's in somebody's mattress (using an analogy here), find the mattress and burn it.

But that doesn't make money for the MIC, so it won't happen.

[stevenleser]

106. I think they are keeping it on them. But that is only a guess.

I don't think they are putting it in banks.

[bullwinkle428]

22. Joe Biden : "We will follow you (ISIS) to the gates of hell!!!"

[conservaphobe]

26. After days of relentless media criticism saying "The WH has no strategy"

Don't blame him.

[Scootaloo]

105. Good to know the leaders of the free world are slaves to media ratings

[morningfog]

130. Of course blame him. Why do we expect dems to

Cower to repukes transparent bullshit. That is the WORST reason to go to war. You are suggesting war is necessary to regain status in domestic politics. That is terrifying.

[merrily]

181. REC MORNINGFOG's POST!

Wish I could rec it and rec it again and again.

Is this what we have devolved to? Excusing Dem Presidents because, OMG, Republicans criticized them (as they did FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter and Clinton)?

Did Dimson change his policies because of criticism from Democrats?

If we want/allow Democratic Presidents to bow to criticism from Republicans, wouldn't that mean Republicans are always running the country?

No thanks.

Besides, Obama is not claiming that criticism is the reason for his actions.

Good thing, too. If you don't want or can't handle criticism, don't run for President because handling criticism from all sides is part of the job description. Maybe George Washington got away easily on that score, I don't know. But no President after him did.

[merrily]

178. Don't blame the most powerful man in the world? Blame his critics?

The other side ALWAYS criticizes every POTUS. That is not an excuse for any POTUS.

[merrily]

177. And Dick Cheney will use his pass key.

[J_J_]

139. no choice? so the media can just make up shit, and the president has to go along now

they make up shit about how we are all supporting it, then tell us to eat shit and like it

Who is doing the polls telling us we want to go to war?

It is called manufactured consent, and it is unacceptable.

The President has the bully pulpit.

He can stand in front of the American people and call it what it is...bullshit fearmongering!

[GeorgeGist]

189. Awesome leadership!

[kelliekat44]

11. Yes it is. It is even more frightening how the so-called "terrorists" can manipulate US citizens

into doing exactly what they, the terrorists, want us to do. New wars will ensure our total economic and social collapse.

[tridim]

13. Agreed, the American media and the Republicans are very frightening. nt

[freebrew]

20. +1000 nt

[mazzarro]

101. And what have Democrats done? Gone along like they did in prelude to the Iraqi war! - n/t

[tridim]

109. Not being terrorists like the American media and the Republicans. nt

[merrily]

182. IOW, no meaningful, fact-based response to mazzaro's question.

[tridim]

192. Are you here to trash the Democrats too? nt

[merrily]

204. Still no response.

[phil89]

65. We always take the bait

What else could be done with the resources we're going to continue to squander?

[merrily]

183. Fool me once. By George, you CAN fool me again.

And again and again. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. All worked out so well for the average American.



(Sorry to insult DU with the sarcasm emote. I am sure the sarcasm was obvious to you all.)

[arcane1]

81. It will probably drive up the price of oil too.

In what I'm sure is a coincidence.

[Corruption Inc]

12. Propaganda has been perfected over the last century

They know who their targets are and easily manipulate them every single time. About 1/3rd of all Americans are non-thinking cultural robots trained like circus animals to jump through hoops on command.

They could care less about "reasons" or "questions" or whether anything will work in the long run. They jump through hoops.

[cali]

16. I think most people can be persuaded of just about anything.

[deutsey]

18. I agree

The excellent documentary "The Century of the Self" examines how modern PR is used to control and manipulate the masses.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-century-of-the-self/

This series is about how those in power have used Freud's theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy. Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, changed the perception of the human mind and its workings profoundly.

His influence on the 20th century is widely regarded as massive. The documentary describes the impact of Freud's theories on the perception of the human mind, and the ways public relations agencies and politicians have used this during the last 100 years for their engineering of consent. Among the main characters are Freud himself and his nephew Edward Bernays, who was the first to use psychological techniques in advertising. He is often seen as the father of the public relations industry.

[RufusTFirefly]

41. K & R for Adam Curtis, who made "The Century of the Self"

I haven't seen it yet, but I have seen another of his documentaries, The Power of Nightmares, which is also on point.

In the past our politicians offered us dreams of a better world. Now they promise to protect us from nightmares.

The most frightening of these is the threat of an international terror network. But just as the dreams were not true, neither are these nightmares.

[arcane1]

82. Both of them are must-sees

"The Century of the Self" is a bit more general and broad in scope, but equally as eye-opening.

[stillwaiting]

107. Unfortunately it's my opinion that much more than 1/3 are non-thinking Americans.

So many people in my life simply do not want to think (much less talk) about politics, about what's happening in this country domestically, about what the U.S. does on a global basis, etc.

They have relinquished almost all (for many people it is all) of their democratic power and citizenship responsibilities.

People that do this are EXTREMELY easy to manipulate through the established propaganda channels (mainstream media). That, of course, is assuming they even care enough to watch mainstream media. There are many Americans who simply don't keep up with news of any kind. Ever. Well, they may keep up with entertainment and sports related news...

Our biggest challenge is to get Americans to care again about each other, this country's future, and becoming active CITIZENS. It is worthless to live in a supposedly free and open country that possesses a "representative democracy" if very, very few of the citizens care enough to pay attention to what's happening with "our" elected officials. Since so many don't do that, elected officials can EASILY sell out to the highest bidder. There are very few, if any, negative consequences for doing so in today's America.

[bullwinkle428]

19. The "moderate rebels" SOLD Steven Sotloff to ISIS, and have also

sold all kinds of U.S. and Saudi-supplied weapons to ISIS as well. This is utterly fucking ridiculous.

K&R.

[mrdmk]

25. This war was doomed from the start! The start being 1990

Then to have Bush II and those idiots come along in 2003, matters just became worse.

Cannot imagine, just have to believe that things only can get better...

[Kelvin Mace]

74. Oh, long before that

We put the Shah and Hussein in power in the 50s-60s.

[mrdmk]

91. True, this goes back to the policies of imperialism and colonialism

Even the Crusades left a mess.

The question becomes, 'Will we learn from our mistakes?'

[cali]

93. I think the obvious answer to that is no.

[Chathamization]

136. Eh, we didn’t really put the Shah in power. He was already in power and we got involved with him

in a plan where he’d dismiss and arrest Mossadegh (I believe he had the constitutional power to dismiss Mossadegh). The whole plan went to hell but then royalists in the military sided with the Shah against Mossadegh. The CIA tried to take credit for the royalists siding with the Shah, though evidence suggests that was an exaggeration.

Russia and Britain actually did put the Shah (well, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi; his father was also a Shah) in power, but that was a decade earlier.

[Luminous Animal]

143. In declassified document, CIA acknowledges role in '53 Iran coup

Sixty years after the overthrow of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, a declassified CIA document acknowledges that the agency was involved in the 1953 coup.

The independent National Security Archive research institute, which published the document Monday, says the declassification is believed to mark the CIA's first formal acknowledgment of its involvement.

The documents, declassified in 2011 and given to George Washington University research group under the Freedom of Information Act, come from the CIA's internal history of Iran from the mid-1970s and paint a detailed picture of how the CIA worked to oust Mossadegh.

In a key line pointed out by Malcom Byrne, the editor who worked through the documents, the CIA spells out its involvement in the coup. "The military coup that overthrew Mossadeq and his National Front cabinet was carried out under CIA direction as an act of U.S. foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government," the document says, using a variation of the spelling of Mossadegh's name.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/19/politics/cia-iran-1953-coup/

[Chathamization]

147. Like I said, "He was already in power and we got involved with him in a plan where he’d dismiss and

arrest Mossadegh." He was put in power a decade before, by the British and Russians. The declassified CIA documents say the same thing (though if I recall they take more credit for the royalist support than is supported by the facts).

[CJCRANE]

33. We help them with one hand

and fight them with the other.

We might as well cut out the middleman and just punch ourselves in the face.

[cali]

38. so true.

[suffragette]

172. All too true, and pick our own pockets to do so.

Or maybe that's better described as a reverse Robin Hood, with the poor and middle class paying the rich to keep waging the PNAC wars.

[WillyT]

51. Yep...

Rebels sold Steven Sotloff's location to ISIS for thousands, family rep says
By Steve Almasy and Holly Yan, CNN
updated 8:41 AM EDT, Wed September 10, 2014

Link: http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/09/us/steven-sotloff-killing/index.html

[chrisa]

75. And those who knew this would happen were called clueless.

It's like "1984." Next week we'll be ripping the anti-ISIS posters off the wall and will have "always been at war with (new enemy).

Is it governmental incompetence when so many powerful people in the US benefit from endless war?

[arcane1]

85. It's not incompetence, it's the Plan All Along.

[woo me with science]

206. +1

[Doctor_J]

158. And racists

[freebrew]

23. Now we have an all volunteer army...

war is easy. Someone elses kid gets killed, the rich reap the benefit.

And yes, the working class will pay more $ as well. The weapons of war are no longer made by the US, we just buy them elsewhere and call them ours.

[OldRedneck]

27. A Marine speaks

"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes."

-- Smedley Butler, Major General, USMC

[Progressive dog]

30. We could just censor the news,

and no one would know about ISIS. Then, we could just sit back and we wouldn't have to watch them murder the people they don't like.

[Oilwellian]

31. American manufacturers armed ISIS

War is a racket.

According to a new report by the Conflict Armament Research (CAR), which is a project funded by the European Union, a large number of the guns - including high-capacity rifles - used by ISIS were originally supplied to other forces by the US military. "Islamic State forces have captured significant quantities of US-manufactured small arms and have employed them on the battlefield," the report states.

The Conflict Armament Research report and an article in The Independent include a large number of photos indicating the US origin of the weapons. The Independent article states:

James Bevan, CAR director, told [The Independent] that around 30 to 40 per cent of arms his team were able to document were US-made, reflecting the fact that Isis captured most of its weaponry from the Iraqi army when it made stunning territorial gains earlier this year.

Other nations - including Russia and China - were the source of some ISIS weapons, captured as the self-proclaimed caliphate swept across a wide swath of territory in Syria and Iraq and seized arsenals from defeated forces.

But the ISIS use of firearms made in the US is only a small part of the picture. It is clear from photos and videos on the Internet that ISIS has captured US Humvees, Jeeps and other vehicles. It is likely that they are also in possession of US mortars and perhaps even anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles, among other high-powered weaponry.

http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/us-arms-supplying-isis-the-winners-in-wars-are-always-the-weapons-manufacturers

[TBF]

39. ^ This. We created Osama bin Laden as well -

our culture of romancing and support for the military and all things war is the underlying factor. It's not just beating up support for one war - it is a culture that loves it's weapons and supports war-mongering in general. Not to mention the profit that ensues from selling the weapons both domestically and abroad. Until that changes these are the types of symptoms we will continue to see.

[KurtNYC]

45. and now ISIS will be the reason we stay in Iraq and topple Assad

Curiously these "enemies," (with our weapons), serve our agenda very well.

[Oilwellian]

84. That was an amazing and rare moment of truth

I hope we survive the blow-back.

[Scuba]

32. Like cali, "I'm not opposed to engaging in other ways". Further ...

... I cannot see any good whatsoever coming out of any military involvement we might have in the mid-east.

Diplomatic efforts combined with massive humanitarian aid would have a much more positive impact at a fraction of the cost. We don't need to offer or receive any concessions before we send food, medicine and other necessities, but such efforts would certainly lead to an improved image of the US and make the environment more hospitable to the idea of concessions by all parties.

Sadly, that's not been our history.

http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/12/we-re-at-war-and-we-have-been-since-1776/

* Pick any year since 1776 and there is about a 91% chance that America was involved in some war during that calendar year.

* No U.S. president truly qualifies as a peacetime president. Instead, all U.S. presidents can technically be considered “war presidents.”

* The U.S. has never gone a decade without war.

* The only time the U.S. went five years without war (1935-40) was during the isolationist period of the Great Depression.

[factsarenotfair]

59. Perhaps Jimmy Carter could have been considered a peacetime president?

Unless you count the Cold War.

[Bigmack]

34. Frightening because most Americans...

... feel that the US can actually bend the will of people all over the world to our way of thinking/living.

Most Americans have no idea that other people in other places have totally different world views, religion, and political history.

Deep down, we know they want to be like us, and we'll bomb them into being like us. We don't want an inclusive government in Iraq, we want something that looks like a state of the Union. We want a Protestant, capitalist, consumer economy. With Starbucks. Everywhere.

We have proven countless times since the beginning of the 20th Century that our goal is an American caliphate.

Little surprise, then, that Americans support any adventure that comes along.

"We are here to help the Vietnamese, because inside every gook there is an American trying to get out." Full Metal Jacket... The Short-timers

[Zorra]

43. Yep, just like the famous Goering quote says. nt

[valerief]

44. Yeah, you just need an uneducated and unemployed populace and complete control of the media.

Well, no one has that like the U.S. overlords do, so MORE WAR is a cinch.

[still_one]

48. Well since we are co-ordinating with several countries including Iran I don't think your assessment

is correct, and if the past is any reflection of the future in regard to the President, he WILL NOT pursue an open ended strategy

[cali]

52. how does coordinating with other countries ensure success.

Didn't over 10 years in Iraq. Didn't in Afghanistan. Didn't in Libya.

You know what they say about insanity, right?

[still_one]

60. we supply air support, they supply the manpower. ISIS is a real threat to Iran and Iraq where the

Shia population is predominate. Funny how you conveniently left out that Syria removed all of its chemical weapons.

and something else that you may not like, but until we become energy independent the middle east is vital to the world

[cali]

66. who supplies the man power?

The Iraqi armed forces are degraded. The FSA is a mess. Who supplies the manpower?

[still_one]

67. why don't you just wait and hear what he talks about

[cali]

68. Uh, you're the one that just laid out "the plan"- without following your own advice. how amusing.

I responded. I don't see anything wrong with speculating but I do find it hypocritical as hell that YOU do it and criticize me for it.

but that's fine. carry on beating those drums. bombs away. you enthusiast!

[still_one]

72. I was speculating on your speculating, and realized that it is all meaningless until we hear what he

Wants to do

[cali]

77. no, it's not meaningless. Enough has been leaked that we know, roughly, what he plans to do.

We know the bombing will be stepped up. We know the training and providing of weapons will be stepped up. We know there won't be ground troops. We know that he doesn't believe he needs congressional authority to bomb ISIS in Syria.

We know quite enough to speculate. We know for damn sure that he is planning to increase military power against ISIS. He's said so.

[Marr]

110. Remember the Bushies who insisted Bush "knows something we don't", and so criticizing

their plans to invade was wrong?

It's funny how the same sentiments pop up from people who are loyal to politicians.

[KurtNYC]

50. I agree, with only one small caveat -- it has taken over a year to sell this one

They tried "Assad gassed his own people" last August and the American public yawned. Now they give different reasons but the target is still Assad.

[cali]

61. I fear you are right. And that really is frightening.

[WillyT]

53. + 1,000,000,000 What You Said !!!

[TheSarcastinator]

55. I Loves Me Some War!

and apparently I'm not the only one around here.

As the great Noam Chomsky said (in paraphrase): when the cause is something that "everyone" supports, that's the time to beware.

[DJ13]

56. We will not be able to train an effective army in Iraq

Saddam had no trouble doing that, why did we fail?

[TwilightGardener]

119. Can't make Sunnis loyal to a Shiite government they hate. And stocking the Iraqi

military with Maliki-loyalist officers with questionable competence and intentions didn't help either.

[kairos12]

57. Another prediction: none of drum war beaters will have their children on the front lines

[still_one]

63. and there will not be U.S. troops on the ground either. Another prediction from DU how Obama is

going to destroy everything and take us to a full war. It won't happen, but believe what you want

[cali]

64. I don't believe that Obama will send troops back to Iraq- beyond advisors

but he has said this is a conflict that will go beyond his time in office. There's certainly no guarantee that another President won't send troops to Iraq or Syria, depending on the situation at the time.

[JEB]

79. Quagmire.

But the arms industry loves a endless war.

[still_one]

150. Then I guess we agree

[GeorgeGist]

138. There are already a 1000 there. But believe what you will.

[JEB]

62. The Saudis are well armed thanks to us. Let them handle this one.

[Dragonfli]

132. It is the Saudis that bankrolled IS until they became self sufficient

The same with AQ. Qatar helped as well, both supply many militants to the cause as well, and yet no drones visit either countries terrorists and terrorist supporters within those countries, odd that.

[chrisa]

69. You're either with us or against us.

It's time to spread freedom and save those incubator babies being thrown out windows before ISIS gets yellow cake Uranium.

[Jakes Progress]

70. No more wars.

Not without universal draft. Not without surcharge tax on top one per cent to pay for it.

In other words . . . no more wars.

[Kelvin Mace]

71. And ten years from now (and another trillion dollars)

we will be hyping war against the next group with a media friendly name who rose up because of this "intervention".

[Dont call me Shirley]

83. Small petty males and their stupid juvenile war. They are neither men nor human.

[arcane1]

97. They are sadly all too human.

[SoapBox]

87. K & R

Agreed.

What's with the kill, Kill, KILL out of these people. If it moves (2 legs, 4 legs, more) they want to kill it.

We're America...we should have the brains and heart to be smarter.

[NeoGreen]

95. Why, of course, the people don't want war...

Göring:

Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

Gilbert:

There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

Göring:

Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country

[DFW]

125. What Göring said was exactly what happened to my father-in-law

"Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece?"

Answer: the "poor slob on the farm" was my father-in-law. He did NOT want to risk his life in a war. He was drafted by Göring's buddies upon pain of death if he refused. He was 17.

He did come back to his farm at age 18. He was not in one piece.

[cali]

99. I think I'll tack this on here for the folks that are all "but there will be no ground troops":

It's still war. It's still fraught with the dangers of war- further destabilization of an already destabilized region, mission creep, civilian deaths caused by our bombs, further radicalization/recruitment tool for extremists, further degradation of the infrastructure, unforeseen blowback, great expense.

It's still war even if no (or few) Americans die in the conflict.

[the_sly_pig]

102. anybody can pull a trigger.

It takes thought and diplomacy to solve world problems. It would also take this country to start thinking we are a part of the world community rather than its self-appointed savior. Right now, our house is not in order.

[RufusTFirefly]

117. Yes. Violence represents a profound failure of intelligence and creativity

We can solve the problems of the world non-violently. But it isn't easy.
And, I might add, it's not nearly as profitable.

[littlemissmartypants]

186. This^ eom

[JEB]

103. All you working stiffs get ready

for a whole new level of austerity. While the elite may make lots of money from this adventure, regular people will have to pay.

[sadoldgirl]

108. And I bet that Obama will not demand

a discussion or debate as well as a vote from Congress. Yet, especially before this election, it is the duty of Congress to do so.

Cowards, the majority of them.

ISIS has anti aircraft missiles (indirectly from us), which means all our pilots over there are possible cannon fodder.

[ladjf]

118. It makes no sense to me why ISIS would risk provoking us into war by those

be headings that happened. What did they think they were accomplishing

On the other hand, if someone else did it just to trick us into attacking ISIS, ISIS would have denied their involvement.

Something is very screwed up about this entire situation.

[totodeinhere]

153. They wanted to draw us into another quagmire. They can use the involvement of the big

bad USA as a recruiting tool. And they know that we cannot bomb them forever. Eventually we will get tired and stop just like we always do. Then they can come back. It's like what the Taliban is doing. Thye are waiting for us to leave Afghanistan so they can take over again.

[ladjf]

154. That makes some sense. But, before we leave, a lot of those criminal bastards are going to be dead.

[totodeinhere]

155. Fanatics like that consider dying for their cause an honor. n/t

[ladjf]

208. While they can always con some idiot into "dying for the cause", I believe that their rank and

file want to stay alive.

[Nevada Blue]

121. It frightens me how easy it is to create/form public opinion about anything n/t

[BlindTiresias]

123. Well

At least if you are rich.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

126. Erect Bogeyman, wave flag, start bombing, send troops, and talk about peace.

Works every time.

And, don't forget to give more money to the MIC!

[morningfog]

128. We have long been trained to be afraid.

This is a big mistake. Obama is going to take us in to Syria, and where he send ground troops is irrelevant since the next president will inherit it.

[J_J_]

137. Manufactured Consent? How do we know there is support? Media Polls?

??

[blkmusclmachine]

140. "..it's hardly the only place in the world where brutal groups are operating and wreaking havoc.."

We've got one in the U.S. It's called the Republican Party. And its co-conspirators, Third Way "Democrats."

[NorthCarolina]

141. It's easy when all you need do is build that support in the corporate media.

pick and choose what guests you have on, and focus on a centralized point of view that war is justified, and state that the public is behind it. Whether the public is truly behind it or not is immaterial to the discussion as the public really has no way to disprove the statement. If need be, your implication that the public supports war is only a few carefully orchestrated push-polls away.

[hifiguy]

142. The timeless explanation for war

"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY."

-- Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg Trials

[Quackers]

146. I was actually in Iraq training the Iraqi Police.

We weren't allowed to train them anything worth a damn. We even had some IP's try to shake us down at a check point for sunglasses and MRE's. There was almost a fight over it. I don't want to see us in there for another decade.

[grahamhgreen]

165. What's your assesment?

[Enthusiast]

148. Kicked and recommended! More war will not fix Iraq.

Once Dick Cheney fucked it up, Iraq was fucked up forever. Same with Afghanistan.

Historically there will have been nothing positive accomplished through any of these wars.

The ONLY thing they will accomplish is to create another excuse to privatize Social Security and Medicare. That is part of the plan.

[grahamhgreen]

166. We are the problem, not the solution.

[WillyT]

151. And Another...

[Baitball Blogger]

156. That's what happens when you don't have the photos of coffins to remind you of the

consequences of war.

[whereisjustice]

157. it's simple math, take the number of innocent kids and adults killed, multiply that by 10 and

that's the number of new terrorists created who will spend their lives hating and plotting against the USA, in specific, and the West, in general.

For example, our exploits in Iraq and Afghanistan, in addition to Israel's actions has guaranteed that our military industrial economy will be rolling in cash for generations to come.

Is this a great Congress or what?

I suppose at some point our ruthless, violent efficiency at slaughtering people while crippling dissent and protest will no longer be able out run the hatred we are spawning, but hell, that's our kid's problem, not our own.

So in the words of the most famous of chicken-shit chicken hawks, "bring 'em on".

[sulphurdunn]

159. The decision was made

before 9/11 that the US would wage war indefinitely.

[cheapdate]

160. Isn't wondering whether "they actually exist" pouring it on a little thick?

[cali]

163. I was quite clear: organized moderate opposition in Syria

to ISIS and the the regime may well not exist. please identify those groups.

[cheapdate]

194. My mistake.

In hindsight, "these" referred back to moderate opposition in Syria.

Wiki on opposition groups in Syria:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_opposition

[OKDem08]

162. Vous parlez français?

[amandabeech]

170. Parle "price for not delivering Mistral class ships to the Russians." n/t

[Stardust]

167. The surge in support is a visceral reaction to the beheadings. It freaks people out. nt

[JEB]

169. We've been fed this shit so many times

it seems we have grown to enjoy it.

[lonestarnot]

171. So a full on drone war is expensive? No aftercare, just the ammo.

There was no mention of troop care when they come back. So I assumed it will be a full on drone out.

[cali]

179. first of all, it's not just drones. secondly, we are arming and training

both Iraqis and Syrians, so yes, it will be very expensive. billions of dollars.

[lonestarnot]

197. Then there is the training and weapons supplied that will no doubt be used against us at some future

point.

[joshcryer]

175. No, fuck "yes, but."

ISIS is evil. Go watch the full length movies of their executions. If you can still say "yes, but," afterward, then your soul needs some searching. They are the literal definition of evil.

No one is going to arm anyone in Syria.

[cali]

180. oh for the love of reason. I have already provided PROOF that the U.S. is arming groups in Syria

this isn't a secret.

and ISIS isn't the only group committing heinous acts- Boko Haram, for one. And there are many other places where equally heinous shit has been going down- like the DRC- which we completely ignored.

Your soul and mind could do with some reflection on recent history.

[joshcryer]

188. I am openly for eradicating evil.

No passive "buts" about it. But, but, but. Fuck that.

[cali]

193. so then you openly support military action against boko haram? how about North Korea?

Is the Chinese occupation of Tibet evil.

but, but but you say, that's different!

fuck that. and fuck endless U.S. fucking evil wars. fuck the stupid backing of wars.

[merrily]

184. The Sultan of Brunei is evil, too, but we negotiated TPP with him.

During the Bush years, when Republicans told me how evil Saddam was, I would usually counter, "So is the Sultan of Brunei, but we didn't invade his country." Now, I get to mention TPP, too.

The question is not whether ISIL is evil, or whether Saddam was evil (at least he was a nominal head of state). The question is what should America do about it. And what America seems to be capable of doing about it.

Same thing we did in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and then Afghanistan again?

How did bombing Afghanistan because Afghanistan was allegedly harboring Osama work out for us?

Ten years of losing blood and treasure. For what? Giving another few generations in yet another country more reasons to hate us, while Osama was holed up within spitting distance of Pakistan's equivalent of West Point.

We assume the US has terrorists inside it somewhere, too. I don't want to get bombed because of that. I don't think Afghanis, did either.

[merrily]

176. Yes, "easy," when both of the nation's largest political parties and the nation's mass media

are all beating the same drum, some more candidly than others.

We have seen it before, and not only in 2002.

As far as I know, urging for a war has always come from the plutocrats, politicians and media, doing their darnedest to persuade ordinary Americans to give their children and hard-earned tax dollars to war, never from the grass roots to the PTB. No one says, "I want to vote for the candidate likeliest to take us to war." (Some, however, do think, "Please, someone, somehow, protect my loved ones and me from the dangers of which you have recently informed me.&quot

That's probably why we re-named the Department of War. Maybe we should have re-named it the "Department of the Futility of Winning Hearts and Minds of Those You Bomb" or the "Department of Stimulating the Economy of Texas," but we went with the more disingenuous Department of Defense (and added the Department of Homeland Security for good measure).

[djean111]

185. I stopped watching, last night, when I heard "We will be joined by a broad coalition.....", because

a flashback made me feel almost dizzy.

[littlemissmartypants]

187. Thanks for your post, cali.

What about a two day suspension and some sensitivity training?

War is a racket.

Wouldn't it be nice if you and I had a dog in this fight?

Make it a national vote and then let's talk.

Love, Peace and Shelter.
~ littlemissmartypants
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://m.

1:33:42

Naomi Klein - The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism

[GeorgeGist]

190. +1

[NaturalHigh]

191. Yes it is.

Anyone who supports war should sign up to fight it.

[Puzzledtraveller]

195. Just now

I overheard coworkers a few cubes down from me talking about the POTUS speech last night. They were talking about, paraphrasing his remarks about there being no safe haven, and as long as I'm president and being 9/11 it nearly made me sick because they were in fact saying that they were proud of this rhetoric. Now I did not watch the speech, I am only reporting that already, people I work with, reliable Democrats are all in it for whatever it takes.

[olegramps]

196. Will the Islamic countries actually oppose ISIS?

The support by the coalition of the neighboring Islamic countries seem to be rather halfhearted at best. Segments of their population are reported to enthusiastically give financial support to ISIS. It is very apparent that there is deep skepticism on this board as to the necessity of our involvement.

Are we heading for a clash of Eastern and western civilizations that has been predicted as being inevitable? I took out time to read the Koran and it can not be denied that world domination is a sacred goal. It can not be denied that the Islamists are absolutely uncompromising in their non-acceptance of religious freedom and democratic principles. The Islamic zealots believe that the only legitimate form of government is an Islamic theocracy and are believe they are on a God ordained mission to conquer and subjugate every man, woman and child to their vision. I can only wonder just how it will all end.

[Feral Child]

203. The amount of blind jingoism

in these threads is horrifying.

K&R, cali. Righteous post.

[woo me with science]

205. kick

[JEB]

207. Endless war renders the consumer obsolete.

The elite don't need no stinking middle class.