Today American warplanes flew their first sorties against The Islamic State in Syria and the Levant or ISIS aka ISIL. Why now?. There are two reasons.
The Kurdish Peshmerga has shown a willingness to stand and fight the ISIL although at present they are badly outgunned as the Iraqi Army fled leaving to the ISIL all the good stuff we gave them. The Peshmerga lost their first major battle to ISIL not because they ran away but because they were running low of ammunition and strategically withdrew to positions around the Kurdish Capital of Erbil. They need our help and our arms. Why arm the Kurds? The Kurds are longtime strong allies of America in the region. While we don't share their desire for a Kurdish state they have remained a trusted ally throughout our misadventures in the region. And they will fight so we don't have too. Although the Kurds are Sunni they do not accept what ISIL has to offer. The Kurds are and have always been a secular population so the whole Sharia thing is unacceptable to them.
After being told to halt their advance, over the weekend ISIL attacked the area of Iraq that was home to the Yazidis a non Islamic group in Iraq and Kurdistan and have carried out mass killings of these "devil Worshippers". The Yazidi are Zoroastrians a religion even older then Christianity, and soundly rejected by Islam. The Yazidi have fled to the mountains with nothing but the clothes on their backs and they need help. ISIL controls all entrance points to the mountains and have trapped the Yazidi there. If allowed they will complete this act of genocide.
I always knew when ISIL got to the borders of Kurdistan that the Kurds would fight unlike the Iraqi security forces who cut and ran at the first sign of trouble.
The peshmerga are some of the fiercest fighters in the world and they can win with our help.
Here is a good news article from Bloomberg.com:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-08/obama-pulled-back-into-iraq-conflict-amid-genocide-threat.html
I note the Australian Prime Minister has issued a statement of support for the US action, From a personal level, I wonder if either your Pres has mistread the people and will wear a backlash for his actions or whether he has misread the needs of the nation and has led your country once more into the conflict in the Middle East which can never be won. In either case, we shall support America but I do not think we shall understand the reason for your actions. I wonder what Jefferson would have advised James Monroe if they had been around to make the decision today/
ReplyDeleteCheers from Aussie
Respectfully King, I think your response here highlights some of the problems we have in this country today. I don't think it is a useful pursuit to continually ask ourselves how would the founding fathers, who lived in the 1700's, handle a situation occurring in 2014. In life, children grow up and eventually have to make their own decisions for the life they face in the present, rather than the life their parents faced. There are enormous problems in Iraq, and we helped create quite a few of them. This is not to say things were previously good there because they weren't. In this situation, with ISIS, the latest cult of death Islamist group, there are no good options. Trying to prevent a wholesale slaughter of the Kurds, with many US weapons that were taken from the Iraqi army, seems the least objectionable thing at the moment.
DeleteThere is a lot of backstabbing in this country right now shrouded under the banner of getting back to the limited government the founding fathers intended. I believe there are probably some quotes out there about things coming wrapped in a cloak of patriotism. I think Obama understands very clearly where the majority of the country is on this, they flat out do not want us back in Iraq and are not really in any mood to hear about "future" threats that may harm us later. I highly doubt Obama wants to engaged in war action here. Hopefully he receives some support from his dysfunction children in both houses.
I agree Max and we must look also at the relationship we have had in the past with the Kurds.
DeleteUp until now no group within Iraq has had the wherewithal to stand up to this horrid group ISIL.
The peshmerga are willing to do that. But because ISIL has captured so much equipment from the Iraqi security forces, our stuff, they are severely outgunned. The attack on Sanjar which has created this outpouring from America the average peshmerga fighter had 3 clips of ammunition for his antiquated AK 47. The ISIL are driving around in armored American Humvees. Fuck the Iraqi government and al-Maliki. We need to arm the Kurds with good stuff. They can produce an Army, 190,000 strong just within the borders of Iraq. Who knows how many more they can bring from Turkey and Iran where they also have autonomous regions. We need to give them updated arms and as a prize for waging this battle for the world, we need to facilitate a national homeland within Northern Iraq for the Kurdish people. They are democratic although they still have some questionable human rights practices but don't we all. They are the only group in Iraq that has been economically successful since we left and they did that with us denying them the right to sell their oil separate of the Iraqi government. They are and have always been a strong ally to the west in the region. Not 1 American soldier lost his life in combat in Kurdish controlled regions of Iraq during our mis adventures there. These are a people who want to succeed and yes secede, and we need to make that happen. The rest of the shamble of Iraq let them fend for themselves.
Simply put King it is the right thing to do. The Kurds have always stood with the western world. They are a democratic people who share many of our beliefs.
ReplyDeleteThe Republican leadership has criticized Obama for not doing enough in Iraq.
ReplyDeleteThe Republicans have criticized Obama for everything short of the Kennedy assassination ...
DeleteGood point Pfunky.
DeleteSorry pfunky, Kennedy was clearly Bush's fault as every liberal knows.
DeleteThere are those that believe we should be the world's policeman, those that do not. The question is the Saudi's have F-16's that could do the job, Germany, Britain, France, etc. If this was so important, why aren't they dealing with this problem? Same reason they don't deal with the Ukraine issue?
It's the right thing or not, where is the UN? Why do we support the UN with 3.6 billion a year when they do nothing. Time to relocate the UN to France or another worthy country.
Good afternoon Lou,
DeleteThis is not a police effort, it is the same motivation that drives everything we do in the ME, it is about oil. The Kurds, compared to others, are a group we want to support because they are not terrorist assholes and they seemingly don't have any visions of taking over the world. Why don't the other countries join in? If you are asking for a legit answer rather than hypothetical, I would say it's because they don't collective share our love of blowing shit up while thumping our chests. But, this is a little different from Ukraine. If that flames up, the stakes are way way higher.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteLou plain and simple WE broke it. Saddam Hussein would have not taken this shit for 1 minute. Yes he was a bad man but he also ruled an unruly people with an iron fist. We should have left him there. He was an uncontrollable menace to no one except his own people. France and Britain are helping with the aid to the people trapped in the mountains. They will soon help with the rest if needed. As for now with the help of the Kurds we got this.
DeleteAs we should have left Libya as well as Egypt alone.
DeleteAmerican intervention at it's best.
Not to mention leaving 20K troops behind may well have prevented the disaster.
DeleteNo one has ever won a war with air power. When will they ever figure that out.
Have to agree we should have left well enough alone. 20k troops may or may not have prevented this. Where do you leave them? Deep down, I believe that a majority of American's, no matter how slim, really didn't care about the rational to go into Iraq. it was one place we could go, do what we wanted, and show the world that despite what happened on 9/11, we are bad asses and nobody else better take a swipe at us. As I listen to the far right chamber on this and the Ukraine, the message is the same, all acts of aggression are good for letting the world know we won't be messed with.
DeleteUnlike Bush, Obama faces a different scenario. The majority in this country no longer wants war, they don't want 20k troops left behind and frankly, I have to ask, why should it be the same people sent back over and over and over? I tend to agree that bomb dropping is not going to solve this and the only hope is that a combination of bomb dropping and arming of the Kurds is enough.
The Kurds are going on the offensive where possible. They have cleared a tenuous path for the Yazidis to leave Sinjar Mountain to the north and circle through the corner of Syria to reach safe haven behind the Kurdish lines. So far about 20,000 have taken this route to safety. They have also started an offensive out of their positions at Irbil and have retaken two villages.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteNow lou you know exactly why we couldn't leave troops behind. The very government that won't get their defeated asses out of the way would not sign a status of forces agreement. They wanted us gone. Would you really favor leaving 20K Americans in a place like that with no legal protection when they would have to take steps to defend themselves. they would have been either sitting ducks or sitting in Abu Ghraib. That would be a wonderful way to show our troops appreciation for conducting GWB's personal war wouldn't it.
DeleteShh! Lou. Don't ever tell the Nazis that airpower doesn't win wars. If I recall correctly we bombed the fucking hell out of them with almost impunity at the end. Yeah airpower when you got it and they don't it makes a huge difference.
Deletehey Max.
Delete20K troops in country would be the signal that we would do what ever is necessary to ensure the security of the Iraqi people.
And yes, people are tired of Iraq, Afghanistan and involvement no matter where it's at.
An interesting thought, we are so concerned with 100K people crossing the border and want to do right by them yet ignore 170K people killed in Syria, thousands killed in Iraq.
Out of sight, out of mind truly applies.
The Nazi's were defeated by ground troops as history tells it. Perhaps you have the progressive rewrite.
DeleteIn Japan, air power coupled with a giant bombx2 seem to do the trick. Perhaps that's whats needed.
With massive air power Louman. Is that not in your conservative history. Let's look for example at the Battle of the Bulge, the one time we were getting our butt kicked in Europe. And Lou what changed the tide of battle? It stopped snowing so the planes could fly and at that point the battle switched into our favor. Air power louman it made the difference. Now we don't have to have boots on the ground in Iraq. Not this time. We have long standing and powerful allies in the Kurds. they are willing to fight this battle for the world. Yes Lou for the world. We need to arm them with what they need. And support them with airpower. Lou we have really done little so far in either instance but with that little bit of help and the threat of air power the tide of the battle is already turning. When the Kurds win this battle for the world , the world should then give them the one thing they want from the world. Their own country. they are the only group of people in Iraq who have prospered and they have done it in spite of us and all the stupid regulations we have put on doing commerce with the Kurds directly and not through the Iraqi government. They are a secular democratic people. They are in the process of earning their own country and let the unrulies to the south fight it out amongst themselves.
DeleteAs always Rick, you know everything and your progressive liberal ideas are right. The North Koreans agree 100%.
Delete
DeleteGeneral: Iraq airstrikes have limited, 'temporary effect'
[Two F/A-18 Hornet strike fighters launch simultaneously from the deck the USS George H.W. Bush, underway in the the Persian Gulf, Aug. 11, 2014. Hendrick Simoes/Stars and Stripes]
Two F/A-18 Hornet strike fighters launch simultaneously from the deck the USS George H.W. Bush, underway in the the Persian Gulf, Aug. 11, 2014.
Hendrick Simoes/Stars and Stripes
By Jon Harper
Stars and Stripes
Published: August 11, 2014
The U.S. military said in a statement that the strikes outside the city of Sinjar either destroyed or damaged four checkpoints and nearby vehicles that were used by the Islamic State militant group.
President Barack Obama's August 11, 2014 statement on the situation in Iraq, as provided by the White House:
The Obama administration has begun directly providing weapons to Kurdish forces who have started to make gains against Islamic militants in northern Iraq, senior U.S. officials said Monday, but the aid has so far been limited to automatic rifles and ammunition.
WASHINGTON — The ongoing U.S. air campaign has slowed the advance of Islamic militants in northern Iraq, but the effort won’t significantly degrade the insurgents, the Pentagon said Monday.
“We assess that U.S. airstrikes in northern Iraq have slowed ISIL’s operational tempo and temporarily disrupted their advances toward the province of Irbil. However, these strikes are unlikely to affect ISIL’s overall capabilities or its operation in other areas of Iraq and Syria,” Lt. Gen. William Mayville Jr., director of operations for the Joint Staff, told reporters.
The refugees on our border is a little disingenuous. Throughout history, we have taken many stances of not giving a shit about slaughter as long as it wasn't on our doorstep. Iraq was primarily about oil, but secondarily about giving us a chance to thump our chests and feel good again. Deep deep down, it's possible that the neo-cons, people like that Cheney truly believed we could essentially make Iraq a puppet country that could be our jumping off point for conquering the rest of the ME. I would not put that past that group of assholes to think that.
DeleteI think that what Obama is basically praying for is that if the airstrikes can buy enough time to get weapons to the Kurds, perhaps they can win their own battle. As for our situation on our border, it's going to take more political will to solve that.
Curious to get your take on something on the border while we are at it. I'm starting to think that basically there is probably a third of the country who is basically left on this that wants a pretty comprehensive amnesty solution, maybe another third who is truly more moderate that wants some degree of amnesty/better border control and then a third who is basically pretty who basically just wants them all rounded up, pushed back and to have the border militarized. What do you think?
Max, a better description of Iraq, Afghanistan would be nation building which failed in SE Asia. Wonder why we can't seem to figure that out.
DeleteAs far as the Kurds, small arms are not a match for the hardware captured by ISIS.
As far as Amnesty.
An interesting topic. We are allowing an invasion from Mexico/Central America because we have the attitude, oh the poor people, they are just trying to provide for their families, They are just trying to get away from murder in their own countries. What about the rest of the world that is faced with the same or worse problems? What about Americans who are citizens today. We seem to be more concerned about oh the poor illegal people while ignoring the poor people that are US citizens.
When does it become Americans first? When does this government say, you work, we will help? You know the 1996 Bill Clinton reforms.
Until we address American issues we cannot afford to deal with Mexico, and central America's issues. It will take a major disaster originating from the southern border to wake this country up and finally close the border.
I think nation building will always fail when there are natural resources to exploit. The Kurds are a unique situation we aren't building a nation as much as we are probably trying to build an ally in the midst of a failed nation. That brings up it's own dubious connotations of course, but comparatively, the Kurds seem to just want their own space and I'm not sure I see them linking with other whack jobs down the road to take over the world. Is our supporting them a good idea? In some ways it's moot because Republicans will take the opposite position of Obama even if he's doing what they want. The only reason I bring that up is to acknowledge the schizo politics of this country. People scream even when they get what they want.
DeleteThe amnesty para there is a little too cynical for me. You make a fair point, within our country, there are plenty of people living in extreme violence, and, considering the S&P article I posted, there is probably little chance we fix our own problems here. You ask the rhetorical question, when is it about Americans first? I think that ultimately, the violence in south America occurs for many of the same reasons it does here, poverty.
People should work and should be self sufficient. I would think you are probably close to thinking that we give away so much free shit, there is no incentive to work. If we set aside that point for a second, do you disagree that the leaders of business have done more than their fair share to dis-incentivize working hard when they won't share your increased output? I think it cuts both ways. Within this country, a lot of jobs in the service sector pay shitty wages and it enrages me to have to pay for food stamps for people who work nearly full time just because those cheap fucks at Walmart don't want to pay a living wage. It also outrages me that the income gap is as wide as it is for CEO's and those MF'rs still want to headquarter their companies off shore to avoid paying taxes. I honestly don't have a gripe with what many Republicans gripe about, but like Democrats, they are perfectly content to create welfare for people who clearly don't need it at the expense of people who could be much more self sufficient. I see no "fair" solution to any of this, the poverty stricken and the super rich will likely never be happy. Nonetheless, I believe that what's best for a majority is to punish extremes. If rolling taxes from 70% to 35% serves only concentrate money at the top and pull it out of the economy and further encourages the holders of capital to simply suck the blood out of the working class, than its time to start unwinding that.
Nation building fails as there are few countries like the US. SE Asia, different culture as is the entire Middle East. Nation building fails as Asia, the middle east are focused on survival and of course a different base religion. Most of the world is it it for survival by any means, democracy is but a diversion.
DeleteThe point many miss is we have our own population to fix, deal with before taking on Mexico's excess population. Imagine if we were to send 10 million Americans across the border and Mexico's reaction.
Bill had the right idea with the 1996 reform act. Work and benefits follow. Some people are unable to work and that's not a problem as we should take care of them as best possible. A question. Why would we employ 11-30 million illegals and allow millions to sit at home and collect benefits with no strings attached? I have no problem with people working can collecting benefits. Beats people not working collecting benefits and illegals working collecting benefits for their citizen children. Perhaps if we had less illegals the natural order of supply and demand would kick in again and business would compete for low wage workers. Why would any business that employes entry level, unskilled labor pay 10 bucks an hour or more when there is an endless stream of illegals willing to work for less?
Why do we allow only our southern neighbors to flow freely into the US and deny the rest of the worlds poor access to the US unless they wait in line. Talk about hypocrites.
Max, you know business pays no taxes to states or federal government. As a business owner I factored in all costs of business into the services I sold. Every business foreign or national does the same. WE PAY THE TAX, in higher prices. Why is it that people get so wound up about business paying their fair share when their fair share is our dollars?
You also know why the concentration of wealth is moving upward.
Inflation.
The poor remain poor.
The middle class struggles to maintain getting nothing for their savings.
The wealthy continue to invest and make money. I certainly continue to invest even without working and paying 25K a year after my daughter's merit based scholarship.
Yet the left continues to divide the country with the divisive propaganda and refuses to say, yep our spending is killing us but look what you have now. You think this spendfest has been tough on the poor, just wait until the lenders say, no problem 7% interest and we will think about it.
Just for philosophical discussion sake, it's interesting to me that you see taxes in pretty much the exact same way that I see our ridiculous shell game of how we fund health care. The profit of insurance companies is simply a private tax that is just a mirror image of corporate tax.
DeleteAt the risk of running to the left of Rolling Dude, I have to say that when you think about it, the entirety of economics and flow of power/money is one giant mind game. Ironically, I learned this best from Ayn Rand while reading Atlas Shrugged for probably the third or fourth time.(http://capitalismmagazine.com/2002/08/franciscos-money-speech/) Because we don't want to hunt and gather, we created the concept of money and this freed everyone up to pursue what they want to pursue and allowed society to thrive. Money, however, has nothing to back it except perception. As long as everyone wants to participate in that system and protect the perception, those with a lot of money wield a lot of power. Every one of them, however, is one bullet in head away from being....nothing. There is a point to this.
The cost of defending that perception cannot be estimated. Millions and millions of people willingly go to work, pay for the upkeep of the country, refrain from stealing and killing, and generally, provide a stable society that provides roads, protection of intellectual property, police, fire, trash pickup and so on. Because of this, business has an enormous market place with a lot of protections that substantially reduces their risk. They still face competition and the possibility that they created a product the market doesn't want, but once they create something useful, the have roads to ship it on, stores to sell it in, and the perceived strength of the United States dollar to give them power as they build up cash. Take all that away and Sam Walton is just another guy shootin at some food.
Certainly, as corporate taxes go up, so do prices and hence, your point has some validity that we are to some degree just paying higher taxes. But there is some perspective here. We can let corporations pay no taxes and they will price their item as high as humanely possible, or we can charge taxes while they price their item as high as humanely possible. In the former case, the business keeps the rest as profit and sits on it like they are doing right now. In the second case, it is inevitable that higher taxes will eat into profit at some point. Even if we are playing a shell game to pretend we aren't paying higher taxes, it is still some clawback and if it is spent on things like access to education or health care, I don't see the downside in that
What you ignore is competition. If the US were a closed market, your point may be valid. Unfortunately we have a global economy where we allow certain countries access to our markets with no tariff. When we tax a corporation i.e. Walgreens which has a tax load of 37%, it impacts prices where as another company foreign based can sell for less as they tax load is far less.
DeleteAt some point, raiuse taxes high enough, biusiness flees to lower their taxes. At some point a company may just close the doors. At some point the company off shores much of it's work, the auto companies come to mind with imported parts. Look at the government 30% of military goods come from China. Better hope we never piss them off or we may be short of parts.
As to healthcare, we can let government administer the entire program and payments. They have far from a great track record on anything. Fraud is easy when dealing with the government.
As to money, some people will never have enough, i.e. Sam Walton and it's a game. Others like me are content and comfortable without the LED TV.
DeleteWell, consider this, if we had a closed market, we could also end the labor tax arbitrage games that these assholes conduct. If someone is opposed to any and all forms of corporate tax, this is all moot. But to consider your point further, suppose we had a true closed market, and lets use the example of Walmart. If you want to sell in Walmarts vast marketplace, you will do so totally under the rules that Walmart tells you. Why is this is okay for Walmart but not okay for US consumers via trade laws? Walmart charges it's supplies a tax, which is also known as profit. I think we can be assured Walmart can very precisely calculate what a supplier is maker and take as much of that as they want. Again, I'm simply asking we our nation of consumers cannot do the same.
DeleteGoing back to another point though, the bottom line Lou is that we don't get a break on price for no taxes. You, as a small business man, and Walgreens, as a company that makes most of it's money in the United States, are required to play by legal and perception rules that other companies are not. This is from a Forbes story, "An equally important factor behind the company’s decision was the possible consumer backlash and political ramifications, including the risk its business faces from the government. Walgreen gets millions of dollars in revenue from the federal Medicare and Medicaid programs."
My last point is that corporations want it both ways. They want the corporation to have the rights of a citizen without any of the responsibilities or liabilities of being a citizen. I've said for years that if those who lose their mind over taxation are agreeable to ending all rights of citizenship and personhood for corporations, I'm in favor of taking away taxes. Still, as your last point makes clear, it's about greed and never having enough. In the US, the business community believes that taxation is some extra, evil thing that philosophically can't be supported. In other countries that aren't so ruthless about splitting nickels, taxation is a way life, as is living wages and healthcare. If corporations are allowed to have the rights of people, then theoretically, why should I be allowed to become an independent contractor selling my skills as a nurse to m employer and then pay no tax on what I earn?
The republican leadership needs to okay massive military assistance to the Kurds. they will fight this battle so we won't have to. But they need modern equipment since the Iraqi security forces ran away and left all the good stuff we gave them behind for the ISIL to have.
ReplyDeleteNot to worry, war hawk Barry will be paying attention between nines at the Vin yaaad.
Delete