REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

White House: Everything’s Fine in Iraq as Ramadi Falls

POSTED BY: JONGSSTRAW
UPDATED: Sunday, June 7, 2015 10:42
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3860
PAGE 1 of 2

Monday, May 18, 2015 9:52 PM

JONGSSTRAW


http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2015/05/15/white-house-everythings-fi
ne-iraq-ramadi-falls
/


"ISIS forces seized Ramadi, a city of nearly one million people that is the capital of the country’s largest province, Anbar.

But White House Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz had an alternate take from the alternate universe known as the West Wing:

"ISIL’s momentum has indeed be blunted – it’s ability to mass and maneuver forces degraded, it’s leadership cells pressured or eliminated, it’s command and control and supply lines severed."

I’m glad ISIS’s momentum has been blunted, because if it wasn’t I guess they’d be in Cairo by now.

The consequences of President Obama’s decision to abandon Iraq and then fight ISIS with half measures continue to descend on Iraq. How sickening to hear again the names of cities where our troops bravely fought and died for victory, cities once again in the hands of the enemy."




So now ISIS has 1 million more people to murder, torture, and enslave.

Obama, the U.N., the world ... "yeah, so what"

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 18, 2015 10:52 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


As was with Yemen , Obama's strategy is working.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 18, 2015 11:50 PM

JONGSSTRAW


re: ISIS taking Ramadi ....


John McCain said today: "The loss of the Iraqi city to ISIS is terribly significant"


Ollie North said today: "The Obama legacy is going to be a bloodbath of unprecedented, biblical proportions in Iraq."


Lindsey Graham said today: "I'm running for President because I think the world is falling apart."



Alrighty then!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 19, 2015 5:22 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


"I am convinced that as the forces are redeployed, and as the days flow in the weeks ahead, that's going to change, as overall [they] have been driven back," Kerry said at a news conference in Seoul, South Korea, where he was meeting with government leaders. "... I am absolutely confident in the days ahead that will be reversed."



SecState weasel John Kerry says that Ramadi can be 'reversed'.

Wow. How inspiring. Extremely confident.

One small problem... the rapes, beheadings and mass executions that are going on now WON'T be 'reversed'.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 19, 2015 7:05 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
"I am convinced that as the forces are redeployed, and as the days flow in the weeks ahead, that's going to change, as overall [they] have been driven back," Kerry said at a news conference in Seoul, South Korea, where he was meeting with government leaders. "... I am absolutely confident in the days ahead that will be reversed."



SecState weasel John Kerry says that Ramadi can be 'reversed'.

Wow. How inspiring. Extremely confident.

One small problem... the rapes, beheadings and mass executions that are going on now WON'T be 'reversed'.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall


Amidst this perpetually continuing debacle, I thought that Kerry Washington would make a far greater representative that Secretary Swiftboat Ketchup.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 19, 2015 9:58 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


The Iranian ambassador would never scream his head off at her. She'd have him wrapped around her finger.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 20, 2015 1:49 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


That's what happens when you support the nation which supports ISIS (Saudi Arabia).

But don't worry- Iran and Russia will save Ramadi's bacon.

And fuck Saudi Arabia.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 20, 2015 4:51 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


The 'hair on fire' remark by the Mouth of Obama Earnest was about as belittling, incompetent and smug as anything I've heard by our gov't.

Unbelievable.

Earnest On Fall Of Ramadi: 'Are We Going To Light Our Hair On Fire Every Time There's A Setback In Campaign Against ISIL?'

http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/05/20/earnest-fall-ramadi-are-we-going-
light-our-hair-fire-every-time-theres-setback-campaign

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 20, 2015 5:31 PM

JONGSSTRAW


Former Def. Sec. Gates said yesterday "The Pentagon has no strategy from the White House to fight ISIS in Iraq."

Col. Ralph Peters said yesterday "Forget Iraq. Iraq is gone."


They're both right. The Iraqi Army will never be able to defend Baghdad, and there's no way they could ever hope to retake Ramadi, Fallujah, Mosul, or Tikrit without American troops leading the fight. And THAT ain't gonna happen while Obama is in office.

So sit back and relax for a spell. Have a cold one and enjoy the show. ISIS is going to give the S.S. Einsatzgruppen and Oskar Dirlewanger's S.S. Penal Unit a run for their money in the history books.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 20, 2015 6:02 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


" never again "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 20, 2015 6:15 PM

JONGSSTRAW



"A candy-colored clown they call Obama
Tiptoes to my room every night
Just to sprinkle star dust and to whisper
"Go to sleep, everything is alright" ...





NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 20, 2015 8:21 PM

THGRRI


Of course none of this will make a difference to the ideologues but here it is anyway.


"George W. Bush's CIA Briefer: Bush and Cheney Falsely Presented WMD Intelligence to Public


Appearing on MSNBC's Hardball on Tuesday night, Morell made it clear: The Bush-Cheney administration publicly misrepresented the intelligence related to Iraq's supposed WMD program and Saddam's alleged links to Al Qaeda.

And there's more. Referring to the claims made by Bush, Cheney, and other administration officials that Saddam was in league with Al Qaeda, Morell noted, "What they were saying about the link between Iraq and Al Qaeda publicly was not what the intelligence community" had concluded. He added, "I think they were trying to make a stronger case for the war." That is, stronger than the truth would allow.

Morell's remarks support the basic charge: Bush and Cheney were not misled by flawed intelligence; they used the flawed intelligence to mislead."


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/michael-morell-bush-cheney
-iraq-war




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 22, 2015 9:47 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Yep, I think we should lay this steaming pile of shit right where it belongs: At the feet of GW Bush and Cheney, who started this whole clusterfuck. They pushed Humpty-Dumpty off the wall, and ain't nobody gonna make that right in the foreseeable future. Not Obama, not Jeb Bush, not nobody.

This is a case where "but Bush" is an entirely appropriate response. Bush made decisions, and there were consequences that we feel to this day. Much as the reichwing likes to forget that there is such as thing as history. So blame Bush for what Bush should be blamed for (Iraq, Afghanistan, 9-11, "Patriot" Act, starting mass surveillance across the USA, torture, "black" prison sites, 2008, bank bailouts, etc). Obama has plenty of his own decisions to answer for.


Furthermore, I'm surprised at the continued lack of curiosity over the continuing "failures" of the USA's Global War on Terror (GWOT) which has been prosecuted over the terms of the last two Presidents- the reason and excuse for all manner of Constitutional violations and incursions everywhere in the world.

Afghanistan.

Iraq.

Libya.

Syria.

Sudan/ South Sudan.

Yemen.

Does anyone see a trend in ALL of our "interventions", no matter WHO was President? Please give this some real thought for a moment: What has been the outcome of USA interventions in each nation?

Peace?

Stability?

Reduction of terrorist/ radical Islamist activity?

And why not?

Seriously. What is the explanation for these results? It's not a Republican v Democrat thing.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 22, 2015 9:52 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


If I were Obama, I would completely walk away from past policies. Leave Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria etc to their fate.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns. But American Presidents keep trying, over and over and over again.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 22, 2015 5:52 PM

JONGSSTRAW


While the world sits by and does nothing to stop the expansion of unspeakable barbarity being committed by ISIS today, how nice for the libtards that they can still reach deep into their own asses and pull out their old Blame Bush Card. It has no expiration date.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 22, 2015 6:15 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
While the world sits by and does nothing to stop the expansion of unspeakable barbarity being committed by ISIS today, how nice for the libtards that they can still reach deep into their own asses and pull out their old Blame Bush Card. It has no expiration date.



That's too funny, but I expected no less from the Benghazi, Benghazi people. First you have to own the fact that the conservatives(Republicans) created all this bullshit including ISIS, then we can move on. Save your breath about Obama letting Iraq fall. Iraq let Iraq fall because of secularism. Since Republicans won't raise taxes to pay for leaving our troops in Iraq to keep Shia and Sunni separated, screaming foul because we left is bull.

Going into Iraq was the biggest blunder of them all. And lets not forget Bush led us into the worst recession since the depression at the same time. All of which you made and continue to make excuses for.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 22, 2015 7:00 PM

JONGSSTRAW


^ See idiot troll using his shit-stained Blame Bush Card.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 22, 2015 7:57 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
^ See idiot troll using his shit-stained Blame Bush Card.



Funny a troll accusing someone of being a troll. I have watched you do nothing but throw insults in the real world discussions thread since before I joined this site. I have never once seen you and some others who post in this thread, join in a discussion about Firefly in the discussion threads above this one. I have never seen you carry on a civil conversation in chat. As a matter of fact, I have witnessed nothing but contempt for others from you. At least Rappy shows some civility when not engulfed in the bullshit he spews here. At least we know from what he posts elsewhere he is a Firefly fan.

Crow all you want. You can't change what the facts show. You are lost in your world of hate for others in this discussion thread. I have no idea why you and some others even visit this Firefly site other than to bitch and attack others. Did you even watch the movie or show or are we just the misfortunate ones who got stuck with you after you stumbled onto this site while trolling?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 8:36 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


George Tenent - WMD case in Iraq a " slam dunk ".


Bush should never have trusted his CIA Director.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 9:27 AM

THGRRI


George Tenet: At the center of the storm

Former CIA Director Breaks His Silence


"The hardest part of all of this has just been listening to this for almost three years. Listening to the vice president go on 'Meet The Press' on the fifth year of 9/11, and say, 'Well, George Tenet said, slam dunk.' As if he needed me to say slam dunk to go to war with Iraq," Tenet tells Pelley. "And they never let it go. I mean, I became campaign talk. I was a talking point. You know, 'Look at what the idiot told us, and we decided to go to war.' Well, let's not be so disingenuous. Let's stand up. This is why we did it. This is why, this is how we did it. And let's tell, let's everybody tell the truth."

"He said to me, 'Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday, they bear responsibility.' It's September the 12th. I've got the manifest with me that tell me al Qaeda did this. Nothing in my head that says there is any Iraqi involvement in this in any way shape or form and I remember thinking to myself, as I'm about to go brief the president, 'What the hell is he talking about?'" Tenet remembers.

"You said Iraq made no sense to you in that moment. Does it make any sense to you today?" Pelley asks.

"In terms of complicity with 9/11, absolutely none," Tenet says. "It never made any sense. We could never verify that there was any Iraqi authority, direction and control, complicity with al Qaeda for 9/11 or any operational act against America. Period."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-tenet-at-the-center-of-the-storm/


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 9:58 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


That's rubbish. The "story" is interweaving to completely different matters. WMD was the reason for going into Iraq. That's what Tenent said. It had zero to do w/ 9/11 , and everyone knew it.

Hell, many thought OK City was retaliation for Gulf War 1. It wasn't ( Though I'm sure some will tell us exactly what it WAS, and nothing we're told by the officials was real about Timmy McVeigh ... that's another issue )


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 10:32 AM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
That's rubbish. The "story" is interweaving to completely different matters. WMD was the reason for going into Iraq. That's what Tenent said. It had zero to do w/ 9/11 , and everyone knew it.

Hell, many thought OK City was retaliation for Gulf War 1. It wasn't ( Though I'm sure some will tell us exactly what it WAS, and nothing we're told by the officials was real about Timmy McVeigh ... that's another issue )




It is a 60 minutes interview with George Tenet the then director of the CIA. It is what it is. You also have the CIA daily briefer to George Bush( Morell ) state that Bush and his administration lied about Iraq in his new book. Claims he is verbalizing on TV talk shows currently. What you say about it means nothing Rappy. The world is hearing the truth. The Republicans, George Bush and the neocons are responsible for all that is going wrong in the middle east.

It's astounding that you scream Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi where we lost four people and not the disaster Bush and the Republicans created in the middle east. Just what the Republicans want you to do. Deflect, deflect, deflect, the same that 1kiki and Sig do here for Russia.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 10:51 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


The guy is trying to sell a book. Saying Bush was right or decided to do the right thing on bad intel doesn't sell as well, so I guess the publisher is gonna reap the rewards.

You can't tell me that I'm wrong here, because I'm not. Bush went on the intel that his CIA director, who was a left over from the Clinton admin, gave him.

The Clinton admin , and damn near every Democrat before AND after 9/11 were saying the EXACT GOD DAMN SAME THING as Bush said , that Saddam had / used and still maintains WMD in violation of UN resolutions.

That simply is a fact.

Did the Bush admin screw up post war Iraq ? Hell yeah they did, at least as far as I can tell. And I was ALWAYS critical of how they ran $ and contractors in there to rebuild, before dealing w/ the root causes. Just more big govt solutions - throw $ at the problem and call it fixed. No different than what Democrats do.

Be honest about disagreeing that we should have ever gone into Iraq in the first place. Even knowing what we knew, I can respect the decision to not commit troops and the war effort. Whether I agree or not is entirely different. But don't spin it off as "Bush lied ! " , but every other Democrat didn't. If Bush did lie, then Bill, Hillary , Kennedy, Kerry, Albright, Gore and damn near every other prominent Democrat lied as well.

So, which is it ? They all lied ? Or none of them.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 10:54 AM

THGRRI



The Democrats were cowards yes but they got fed lies by Bush and Chenney. They also could not stand up to public opinion that was believing our president when he said Iraq had WMD's and was going to use them. And no we would not be in Iraq if Bush had not lied to get us there.

Keep in mind that the Democrats gave him permission to go but only after he exhausted all other options. Once it got the OK he just went. I blame the Democrats for being cowards but Bush for all else.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 12:18 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


First of all KRAPPY, I will repeat for the 100th time...

There was a critical difference between what the Democrats believed in the late 1990's 2000s and what Bush could reasonably claim in 2003, and that was the presence of the UN INVESTIGATION TEAM, UNMOVIC, headed by Hans Blix. The UN was there in Iraq to investigate that very question. It was US bombing that chased UNMOVIC from Iraq, not Saddam Hussein.

Bush couldn't wait for the answer, not because he was impatient, but because the answer was going to be that Iraq DIDN'T possess stores of WMD and was NOT working on WMD programs.That would have seriously gotten in the way of Bush's plans to invade. Because he was going to invade anyway, and WMD had nothing to do with it.

-----------------

Aside from that fact of history, which KRAPPY still wants to ignore ....

Are you people still under the delusion that Al Qaida, Al Nusra, and ISIS are spontaneous creations of clusters of religious fanatics?

Don't you know that Saudi Arabia has been funding Al Qaida FOR DECADES? That they funded the fundamentalist Wahhabi madrassas in Pakistan, which set up the Taliban and the "mujahideen" in Afghanistan? That the USA has been looking the other way, because Saudi Arabia has agreed not to attack Israel? (And, you will note, that Al Qaida and its affiliates and offshoots have never attacked Israel?)

That Saudi Arabia and Qatar shipped over 70 planeloads of arms to radical fundamentalists in Libya, through Turkey (and probably Chechnya)? And then re-shipped the arms to Syria? That Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar currently admit to funding and arming ISIS in Syria?

Everything we have done in invading and destabilizing nation after nation in the Mideast has only left smoking ruins where al Qaida, ISIS, and Al Nusra thrive. It would be understandable as an error, if we did that once. But... six or seven times?

Sure, we peck at Al Qaida with drone strikes. But that is particularly ineffective, it's just for show. If we REALLY wanted to get rid of it, we would stop supporting Al Qaida's supporters.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 3:00 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Siggy - sorry, but the UN lost all credibility with it's involvement in the Oil for Food program. That brought corruption to an all time high on the international level.

Also, the burden of proof was on IRAQ, to show that it had complied. It was NOT up to the UN to engage in some country wide easter egg hunt, to discover if WMD could be found or not. But that's exactly what Saddam engaged in, and Hans happily played right along.

Finally, WMD were found, after the war, in all manner of places. And this is key... IT DOES NOT MATTER IF THE WMD ITEMS ( munitions, parts, chemicals ) WERE 1 or 10 YEARS OLD !!! . These were covered by the treaty, and IRAQ was CLEARLY in violation.

Now, you can legitimately state the case that , even though found, those items didn't warrant a full scale military invasion. I can respect that, and even find some common ground. However, to claim there was NOTHING in Iraq, what so ever, and that Bush , Cheney et all LIED us into war is a flat out lie. Not disingenuous, but a complete and total lie and completely false.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 3:08 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


I don't know why ISIS hasn't attacked Israel. If they are being held in check by Saudi Arabia, then please, explain why. S.A. ( sunni ) and Iran ( shia ) seem to have different agendas in how to control the region / world.

Quote:


Sat May 23, 2015

(CNN)A suicide bomber detonated himself at a Shiite mosque Friday in the predominantly Sunni kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the country's official press agency said, killing 21 worshippers in an attack that has been claimed by ISIS.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 5:03 PM

THGRRI


Cheney Says Peril of a Nuclear Iraq Justifies an Attack


WASHINGTON, Aug. 26 — Vice President Dick Cheney today presented the administration's most forceful and comprehensive rationale yet for attacking Iraq, warning that Saddam Hussein would "fairly soon" have nuclear weapons.

Mr. Cheney said a nuclear-armed Mr. Hussein would "seek domination of the entire Middle East, take control of a great portion of the world's energy supplies, directly threaten America's friends throughout the region and subject the United States or any other nation to nuclear blackmail."

The vice president's remarks, to a Nashville convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, came as White House advisers said they were increasingly concerned about the news accounts and the growing debate in Congress and among former high-ranking foreign policy officials over the administration's plans for Iraq.

Mr. Cheney's speech, which his advisers said he was still writing on Sunday, appeared intended to quell the confusion and present the administration as united behind the central idea that Mr. Hussein must be ousted, sooner rather than later.

http://www.nytimes.com/learning/teachers/featured_articles/20020828wed
nesday.html




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 5:05 PM

THGRRI


This is just one of the lies Cheney told to get us into Iraq. I could post all day the different lies by him. When a CIA operative called Cheney'sstatements lies, they outed her and not only destroyed her career but put her life and her families lives in danger. Remember that?

On NBC's Meet the Press last Sunday, March 16, 2003, Vice President Cheney audaciously reiterated an ominous note.

NBC: "And even though the International Atomic Energy Agency said he does not have a nuclear program, we disagree?"

Cheney: "I disagree, yes. And you'll find the CIA, for example, and other key parts of our intelligence community disagree. Let's talk about the nuclear proposition for a minute. … We know that based on intelligence, that [Saddam] has been very, very good at hiding these kinds of efforts. He's had years to get good at it and we know he has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. I think Mr. ElBaradei frankly is wrong."


After 218 inspections of 141 sites over three months by the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei charged that the U.S. had used faked and erroneous evidence to support the claims that Iraq was importing enriched uranium and other material, notably the aluminum tubes and small magnets for the manufacture of nuclear weapons. "After three months of intrusive inspections, we have, to date, found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq," the chief atomic weapons inspector had told the U.N. Security Council on Friday March 7, 2003.

http://www.iraqsnuclearmirage.com/YellowTimes/Cheneys_Bogus_Nuclear_We
apon.htm



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 8:26 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Cheney may have been wrong.

No evidence that he lied.

Obama lies. That's proven and verifiable.

But not so much for Bush or Cheney.

But hey, go right ahead and distract from events of today with tired old stories from yesteryear. Just because ISIS took Ramadi, that's nothing to fret about, even a little !



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 8:35 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:


But hey, go right ahead and distract from events of today with tired old stories from yesteryear. Just because ISIS took Ramadi, that's nothing to fret about, even a little !



The reason I mention Bush and Cheney is because you and others are not having a conversation about what to do in the Middle East. You guy's only play the blame game and tag, it's always Obama and Clinton. So what's a guy to do except point out the fact that all you care about is bashing Democrats and don't really give a shit about the worlds goings on.

And no I an not overly concerned about Ramadi. If you really understood what was going on you would realize the entire Middle East is waging a secular battle between the Shia and Sunni, and you morons want to drop American troops into the middle of that? Stupid Rappy plain stupid. It is going to take patience while this runs it's course. Let's also remember, Bush set the deadline for pulling out of Iraq not Obama.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 11:10 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Mohamed ElBaradei charged that the U.S. had used faked and erroneous evidence to support the claims that Iraq was importing enriched uranium and other material, notably the aluminum tubes and small magnets for the manufacture of nuclear weapons
Do you remember all that fuss about "yellow cake"?

As evidence, a signed Nigerian contract was presented which (supposedly) demonstrated Saddam's attempts to purchase the raw materials. However, it was demonstrated pretty quickly that the contract was a forgery: signatures of people who were no longer in power, misspelled signatures, etc. But, man, Bush/Cheney rode that hobbyhorse and the fact that the contracts were forged never made it into the MSM. The press (Judith Miller of the NYT especially) let Bush/Cheney have a field day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 23, 2015 11:30 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I don't know why ISIS hasn't attacked Israel.
Well, at least you recognize that ISIS, al Qaida, and al Nusra haven't attacked Israel. That puts you ahead of most of the people, who still lump all Islamic fighters together.

Do you really think that the USA government is committed protecting you from Saudi/Wahabbi Islamic terrorists??

Ahem!

The USA DoD, State etc never had a problem with al Qaida (Yes, even under Bush-Cheney). They didn't have a problem with the various Saudi terror projects in the Mideast.

Heck, after 9-11 - in which nearly all of the terrorists were Saudi- what did Bush do? He allowed Saudis to fly out of the USA ... during a time when all planes were supposedly grounded.
The mastermind - bin Laden - was Saudi.
And who did Bush decide to invade?
Saudi Arabia???
NOPE!
Afghanistan!

The reason why is because OUR GOVERNMENT (and is really doesn't make any difference whether it is Dems or Repubs in office) find the Saudi terror projects tolerable and at times EVEN USEFUL. They were useful in attacking Russia in Afghanistan (we funded and armed them under Carter), and useful in attacking Russia from Chechnya, and useful in taking out Libya (which was making a push to move away from the petrodollar). And useful in attacking the USA on 9-11. If the Saudi al Qaida hadn't done it, Bush and Cheney would have wanted to do it themselves, it was that useful (to them).


Our "concern" over al Qaida has been merely superficial. As long as al Qaida doesn't attack our essential interests in the Mideast (petrodollar, oil), as long as al Qaida and its affiliates and offshoots never attack Israel, as long as we overlap on most of our enemies (Iraq, Libya, Russia) and goals, our government will be content to peck away at them from the sidelines in a way guaranteed never to do away with them altogether.

Only within the past year has daylight opened up between us and the Saudis, and that's over Syria.



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 3:30 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Curiously, I just wandered to ZeroHedge and found this

Secret Pentagon Report Reveals US "Created" ISIS As A "Tool" To Overthrow Syria's President Assad

Quote:

From the first sudden, and quite dramatic, appearance of the fanatical Islamic group known as ISIS which was largely unheard of until a year ago, on the world's stage and which promptly replaced the worn out and tired al Qaeda as the world's terrorist bogeyman, we suggested that the "straight to beheading YouTube clip" purpose behind the Saudi Arabia-funded Islamic State was a simple one: use the Jihadists as the vehicle of choice to achieve a political goal: depose of Syria's president Assad, who for years has stood in the way of a critical Qatari natural gas pipeline, one which could dethrone Russia as Europe's dominant - and belligerent - source of energy, reaching an interim climax with the unsuccessful Mediterranean Sea military build up of 2013, which nearly resulted in quasi-world war.

The narrative and the plotline were so transparent, even Russia saw right through them. Recall from September of last year:

If the West bombs Islamic State militants in Syria without consulting Damascus, LiveLeak reports that the anti-ISIS alliance may use the occasion to launch airstrikes against President Bashar Assad’s forces, according to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. Clearly comprehending that Obama's new strategy against ISIS in Syria is all about pushing the Qatar pipeline through (as was the impetus behind the 2013 intervention push), Russia is pushing back noting that the it is using ISIS as a pretext for bombing Syrian government forces and warning that "such a development would lead to a huge escalation of conflict in the Middle East and North Africa."

But it's one thing to speculate; it's something entirely different to have hard proof.

And while speculation was rife that just like the CIA-funded al Qaeda had been used as a facade by the US to achieve its own geopolitical and national interests over the past two decades, so ISIS was nothing more than al Qaeda 2.0, there was no actual evidence of just this.

That may all have changed now when a declassified secret US government document obtained by the public interest law firm, Judicial Watch, shows that Western governments deliberately allied with al-Qaeda and other Islamist extremist groups to topple Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad.

According to investigative reporter Nafeez Ahmed in Medium, the "leaked document reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states [Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE etc-SIGNY] and Turkey, the West intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize Assad, despite anticipating that doing so could lead to the emergence of an ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

According to the newly declassified US document, the Pentagon foresaw the likely rise of the ‘Islamic State’ as a direct consequence of the strategy, but described this outcome as a strategic opportunity to “isolate the Syrian regime.”

... The newly declassified DIA document from 2012 confirms that the main component of the anti-Assad rebel forces by this time comprised Islamist insurgents affiliated to groups that would lead to the emergence of ISIS. Despite this, these groups were to continue receiving support from Western militaries and their regional allies.

Noting that “the Salafist [sic], the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI [al-Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria,” the document states that “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition [ie. known terrorists-SIGNY]"

... The formerly secret Pentagon report notes that the “rise of the insurgency in Syria” has increasingly taken a “sectarian direction,” attracting diverse support from Sunni “religious and tribal powers” across the region.

In a section titled ‘The Future Assumptions of the Crisis,’ the DIA report predicts that while Assad’s regime will survive, retaining control over Syrian territory, the crisis will continue to escalate “into proxy war.” The document also recommends the creation of “safe havens under international sheltering, similar to what transpired in Libya when Benghazi was chosen as the command centre for the temporary government.”

In Libya, anti-Gaddafi rebels, most of whom were al-Qaeda affiliated militias [supported by plane loads of arms from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and assisted by bombing campaigns from the west-SIGNY] were protected by NATO ‘safe havens’ (aka ‘no fly zones’).

In a strikingly prescient prediction, the Pentagon document explicitly forecasts the probable declaration of “an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria.”

“… there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist Principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).”

The secret Pentagon document thus provides extraordinary confirmation that the US-led coalition currently fighting ISIS, had three years ago welcomed the emergence of an extremist “Salafist Principality” in the region as a way to undermine Assad, and block off the strategic expansion of Iran. Crucially, Iraq is labeled as an integral part of this “Shia expansion.”

More at
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-23/secret-pentagon-report-reveal
s-us-created-isis-tool-overthrow-syrias-president-assad


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 6:20 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Sig - bin Laden wasn't in Saudi Arabia, so why attack them ? He was in Afghanistan. As he was in Somalia before. And in Sudan before that...

* 1991 -- Bin Laden is expelled from Saudi Arabia by its regime. Eventually he and his followers relocate to Sudan, funded by assets that had grown to as much as $250 million, according to some officials. In that African nation, al Qaeda begins to evolve into a terror network.

* December 1992 -- U.S. forces land in Somalia, spearheading a U.N.-authorized humanitarian plan to bring in famine relief supplies. Part of their challenge is disarming the various warlords who controll the country. Prosecutors charge that bin Laden threw himself into the conflict, sending some of his followers to Somalia to train the warlords to fight the U.S. troops

Should we have attacked them as well ?

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 10:13 AM

THGRRI


Rappy you and I disagree a lot but some here are just propaganda shovelers. It's one thing to be wrong due to being an ideolog, and quite different to be a liar. Sig and 1kiki are liars. I will no longer respond to them, but I will post about them.

Perhaps you disagree, no matter.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 11:14 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sig - bin Laden wasn't in Saudi Arabia, so why attack them ? He was in Afghanistan. As he was in Somalia before. And in Sudan before that...

* 1991 -- Bin Laden is expelled from Saudi Arabia by its regime. Eventually he and his followers relocate to Sudan, funded by assets that had grown to as much as $250 million, according to some officials. In that African nation, al Qaeda begins to evolve into a terror network.

* December 1992 -- U.S. forces land in Somalia, spearheading a U.N.-authorized humanitarian plan to bring in famine relief supplies. Part of their challenge is disarming the various warlords who controll the country. Prosecutors charge that bin Laden threw himself into the conflict, sending some of his followers to Somalia to train the warlords to fight the U.S. troops

Should we have attacked them as well ?



But bin Laden was funded by Saudi families. The Saudis, by and large, were eager to export their Wahabbi fundamentalism, via Islamic terrorists. They just didn't want it at home. Even the NYT says so.

Quote:

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — During the 1980s and ’90s, the historic alliance between the wealthy monarchy of Saudi Arabia and the country’s powerful clerics emerged as the major financier of international jihad, channeling tens of millions of dollars to Muslim fighters in Afghanistan, Bosnia and elsewhere. Among the project’s major patrons was Prince Salman Bin Abdulaziz al-Saud, who last month became Saudi Arabia’s king.


And this isn't just in the far-distant past. There is no doubt that Saudi Arabia and Qatar were arming anti-Qaddafi Islamic terrorists in Libya beginning 2011. There was an article that I posted here, about the (literally) dozens and dozens of planeloads of arms that were shipped from Saudi Arabia and Qatar to al Qaida and its Islamic terrorist affiliates in Libya. And when their work was done in Libya, many of those arms were then shipped to Syria (via Benghazi and Turkey) to bolster the al Qaida-affiliated terrorists in Syria.

There is no doubt that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey are still arming and funding the radical Wahabbi Islamic terrorists in Syria. I could provide link after link, to major newspapers, investigative reporters .... would that make any difference to you? Would that convince you that what is happening, is really happening?

THUGR, you think these are lies? Then you're a naive child. Your belief in/ loyalty to the American government is sweet and touching. You apparently believe that the President lies awake at night, thinking of how to protect you. My crude assessment of the USA government is that, if the President and Congress thinks of you at all, is how to get you to bend over and spread your cheeks. I could name on the fingers of one hand the Congresspeople who actually worry about you. Elizabeth Warren is one and Rand Paul is another.


---------------

But did nobody wondered WHY that particular report (by the Defense Intelligence Agency [DIA], as quoted by ZeroHedge) was declassified now?

Why wasn't it buried for the next 30 years?

There has been, until now, a very tight relationship between the Saudis, their terror projects, and the USA government, beginning with Jimmy Carter (Afghanistan), and running thru Bush I (invade Iraq), Clinton (Bosnia, Chechnya), Bush II (9-11, invade Iraq again), and Obama (Libya and Syria- up to a point). An agreement between USA and the Gulf states about oil, Treasuries, and the petrodollar. About Israel. About geopolitics. Our interests and their interests intersect on several absolutely critical points. It's been a relationship of necessity, as long as the USA holds these interests to be of key strategic importance.

I PREDICT, and KPO can put this in his prediction thread, that you will be hearing a LOT MORE about Saudi Arabia's complicity in Mideast terrorism. More official secrets will be revealed, more official papers will come out. That is because the Obama administration, IMHO, has broken with the Saudi government- first over Syria (when Russia stood athwart the Syrian coast and prevented us from bombing, our military had to suddenly reassess, and realized they might lose), definitively over Iran, and "pipelinistan". The Saudi response - to lower oil prices- may not have been aimed just at Russia, but ALSO at USA fracking.

I'm reasonably certain that Obama was "read into" the level of cooperation between us and the Saudis when he came to office. I expect that not only was the drastically-reduced oil price interpreted for him as an act of aggression (we may have even had a secret agreement with the Saudis about that) but the USA may have even been threatened directly, just as Bandar "Bush" bin Sultan (Saudi head of security) threatened Putin before Sochi. I think that Obama wants to push this particular Saudi terrorist-loving agreement off the wall so that it can never be put back together again.

Hillary, meanwhile, has been relying on the Saudi card since Bill Clinton days ... So long, Hillary! Farewell, you corrupt and evil creature!

I've tossed the facts out onto a board, and I've been looking at this picture for several years now, trying to get the pieces to arrange in ways that make some kind of sense. No matter how I try to arrange them, they only form one kind of picture. I know that these ideas are new to many, and the facts aren't generally well-covered by the MSM, but the internal logic is pretty powerful. I hope I've made some kind of sense to you.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 11:24 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


I'll say this, to anyone and no one in particular... it seems no matter what the issue, the topic, be it politics, religion, science... there are some folks who I just want to say " How in the HELL can you think like that ?? "

Seriously, by what thought processes does one go through to arrive at their tightly held beliefs and views ?

Now, w/ religious folks ( like young Earth creationists ), it's sorta understandable. For their faith to " work ", they MUST buy into the Holy Book as being literal, and therefore the Earth can only be so many years old, man can't have evolved, etc... their comprehension is short circuited so that they are unable to process the known evidence. In short, they put the cart in front of the horse, no matter what. The facts have zero chance of deviating from the stated TRUTH, and anyone who says different is doin' the devil's work, or some such.

We converse in a common language here, we understand basic tenants of science and cause and effect. Sun comes up in the East, sets in the West, water runs down hills, there's a change of seasons which always occur, .... there are basic things which we all can agree on, but for some reason, take another couple of steps down that road, and all hell breaks loose.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 11:43 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


RAPPY, the facts are that Saudi Arabia has been supporting Islamic terrorism for decades. Not just in the distant past, but in Libya and Syria. Heck, look at Yemen, where fighting is going on even now: ISIS is fighting the Houthis, and who is Saudi Arabia fighting? ISIS? Or the Houthis? [HINT: Houthis]

I think "like that" because I look at facts. Not some of the facts, but ALL of the facts. And then, I try to let the facts tell me their story, with as little pre- judgment or interference as possible from my fears, desires, and assumptions.

I know it's difficult, but it's the only way to be scientific. Anything else is just a belief. But just because you really want something to be true doesn't make it so.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 11:53 AM

THGRRI


Ideology, is "the imaginary relation to the real conditions of existence." It can be described as a set of conscious and unconscious ideas which make up one's goals, expectations, and motivations.

Ideology refers to the system of abstracted meaning applied to public matters, thus making this concept central to politics. Implicitly, in societies that distinguish between public and private life, every political or economic tendency entails ideology, whether or not it is propounded as an explicit system of thought.

Some can learn new facts and change their opinions, at least shift them a bit. My experience with these threads suggests many who post here are incapable of grasping new concepts. At least that has been the case so far. In many cases they just do the math in the same way Jane from Firefly does and are not capable of critical thinking. In other words, if Saudi Arabia supports radical elements of Islam then by virtue of our relationship with them we must as well. It's pretty lame thinking but it works for the propagandist.





NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 12:05 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:
Ideology, is "the imaginary relation to the real conditions of existence." It can be described as a set of conscious and unconscious ideas which make up one's goals, expectations, and motivations.

Ideology refers to the system of abstracted meaning applied to public matters, thus making this concept central to politics. Implicitly, in societies that distinguish between public and private life, every political or economic tendency entails ideology, whether or not it is propounded as an explicit system of thought.

Some can learn new facts and change their opinions, at least shift them a bit.

Alas, you don't appear to be one of them.

Yanno, THUGR, when I started looking at this region of the world, Saudi Arabia as the nexus of Islamic terrorism wasn't even in my mental map. But I stumbled across too many irrefutable facts: too many planeloads of arms to Libya and Syrian terrorists, too much money to fundamentalist maddrassas in Pakistan and Sudan, too many terrorist operations in Chechnya and Afghanistan, too much direct military intervention on behalf of ISIS and al Qaida ... too many solid and irrefutable on-the-ground facts, too much ground truth ... to ignore. Too many bits and pieces that only fit into only one kind of picture.

Man, I have to say, you would suck at being a military strategist. You're too much of an idealogue.



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 12:44 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
.... there are basic things which we all can agree on, but for some reason, take another couple of steps down that road, and all hell breaks loose.

Suddenly AURaptor is the voice of reason? Tell me that Obama needs to pay Iraq with even more American blood and money after you reason your way through this: Iraqi security forces vastly outnumbered ISIS fighters. In Ramadi it was 2000 Iraqi troops against 200 ISIS.

"This was a classic breakdown of a military unit, the worst I've ever seen, that allowed ISIS to take down Ramadi without a fight," one U.S. official said condition of anonymity.

So what happened to the Iraqi army the West paid for?

Across the country, the reality on the ground stands in stark contrast to what it should be. On paper, some 350,000 soldiers and 650,000 police stand ready to take on ISIS. In truth, many of the rank-and-file men rarely wear a uniform.

Senior officers buy their commissions, often at exorbitant cost. They ensure they would profit from their time in the army, taking bribes not just from the population but from officers and men beneath them.

Then there are the country's estimated 50,000 "ghost soldiers" who pay a portion of their salaries to their superiors in order not to show up for duty. While al-Abadi has vowed to put an end to the huge scam, this is thought to be a key reason Iraq's U.S.-trained military has proven largely ineffective in the face of ISIS.

And if soldiers aren't paying to be absent, they have to buy their own army issue boots. In numerous battles with ISIS, Iraq's troops complain that they haven't enough ammunition. Some have used pistols against ISIS' anti-aircraft guns. Apparently Iraqi officers are selling the ammo, maybe to ISIS.
www.nbcnews.com/news/world/neely-ramadi-n361811

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 1:03 PM

THGRRI


Welcome to the debate TWO. The issues are a bit complex for some here. Like the fact that it is Sunni vs. Shia and not about Iraq and whether or not it will survive as a country. Once they make their choices over there and things become more clear, we will be better able to assist. Till then it is a fools game. I don't wish to get further caught up in a thousand year war over there.

Right now the world is experiencing major land grabs in the middle east, Asia and Europe as well. The neocons in this country have shown they are not only not up to the job, but woefully lacking in brain power to deal with it. We live in times where rushing in only creates more problems.

This is an actual Fox headline: (Carter saying Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' sparks more criticism, concern about Obama plan). Why is it some think we should fight the Iraqis' battle for them and Irans' as well? Is it because they screwed things up so badly themselves they are desperate to point the finger elsewhere?


Sunni and Shia: The Worlds of Islam

While the Islamic world is predominantly of the Sunni sect, the Muslims who live in the Middle East, and particularly those in the Persian Gulf region, are often Shiite. Globally, the Shia account for an estimated 10 or 15 percent of the Muslim population, but in the Middle East their numbers are much higher: they dominate the population of Iran, compose a majority in Iraq, and are significant minorities in other nations, including Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Pakistan, and Syria. Outside of the region, Shia generally constitute only tiny minorities in other Muslim countries, including Algeria, Sudan, and Egypt in Northern Africa.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 1:57 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


But, yanno THUGR, this isn't just a pointless religion-based land-grab. If it weren't for the oil and gas underneath the Mideast, nobody would care to fight over the sandpiles (except Israeli Zionists and Saudi Wahabbis, but that's another story.) There is a huge gas deposit underneath Iran and Qatar, and the most direct route to Europe is thru Iraq and Syria to the Mediterranean. But Shiites (Iraq, Syria, Iran) are in the way.

There is also the issue of what a nation is willing to do to get control of the pipeline routes, and in the case of the Saudis and Qataris that means supporting ISIS and al Qaida.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 6:36 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


" So what happened to the Iraqi army the West paid for? "


I don't know if it was General Schwarzkopf, or some one else, but after the Gulf War, one of our guys said something to the effect of " We could have given them our gear and our guys used theirs, and we'd still would have kicked their ass. "

Takes more than hardware to win a war.

Takes training, commitment, will, tactics, leadership... all of which the Iraqi army woefully lacked.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 7:00 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
" So what happened to the Iraqi army the West paid for? "


I don't know if it was General Schwarzkopf, or some one else, but after the Gulf War, one of our guys said something to the effect of " We could have given them our gear and our guys used theirs, and we'd still would have kicked their ass. "

Takes more than hardware to win a war.

Takes training, commitment, will, tactics, leadership... all of which the Iraqi army woefully lacked.



Exactly, so if they aren't going to defend themselves and fight to keep Iraq whole, which includes sharing power with the Sunni's, fuckem. Right or wrong, we went into Iraq to get Saddam and the WMD's and nothing else. So stop your bitching about Ramadi. When the Sunni's take back the country they will deal with IsIs. Besides, let Iran get bogged down fighting IsIs while we pick and choose our targets.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, May 24, 2015 7:26 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Takes more than hardware to win a war.

Takes training, commitment, will, tactics, leadership... all of which the Iraqi army woefully lacked.

Maybe ISIS will train Iraq better than the USA did. The Iraqi army is many times larger than ISIS, whichever estimate you use for ISIS. And Iraq has a huge pile of American made ammo that never seems to make it to the battlefield.
http://warontherocks.com/2015/02/how-many-fighters-does-the-islamic-st
ate-really-have
/

ISIS is outnumbered and outgunned by Iraq, and yet the liars and thieves in charge of the Iraqi Army are expecting Obama to save them. Republicans also expect Obama to do Iraq's fighting. Until the Iraqis pull themselves together, I wish that Obama would continuously remind Iraqis and Republicans that the Iraqis can choose to either fight like men or die like chickens with their heads chopped off. And Iraqi generals ought to stop selling ammo to ISIS, even though it is very profitable.
www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/world/isis-ammunition-is-shown-to-have-orig
ins-in-us-and-china.html

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 25, 2015 11:11 AM

THGRRI


Let’s take a moment shall we. John McCain the neocons and now the Republican candidates for President, want us to gather up the Kurds and the rest of the Middle Eastern armies and get them with our help to fight ISIS. Sounds like what Obama is trying to do that the Republicans say is not a good plan. The trick is to do it while not advancing the strategies of the Iranians to dominate Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon, as well as attaining nuclear weapons. This is the part that requires intelligence beyond any the Republicans have displayed when discussing the current situation publicly.

When prodded the Republicans go back and forth complaining we should have done more in Syria. Like sent military help and bombed Assad. That we should send troops into Iraq and even Libya to stop ISIS there(once you go in you can never leave and you can't defeat ISIS without marching into Syria as well). The Republicans want us to get more involved militarily in the Ukraine, (We are sending them humanitarian supplies training their troops and sharing intelligence, while holding military exercises in Europe to ease the minds of those concerned about Russian expansionism) and get ready, we need to bomb Iran because there is no deal that can be made we can trust.(In other words do the bidding of Israel rather than what is best for us).

Oh yeah, we have China building islands in the China Sea’s that are filling our Asian allies with concerns of Chinese expansionism. They are also striking deals and cozying up to the Russians. I think the Republicans would lead us into World War III if given the chance, and my hope is they don’t get that chance.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 25, 2015 12:47 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Neocons are stupid about the potential of military action. They think everything can be solved if you just bomb it. A couple of quick comments:

There are neocons in both parties; you don't have to be Republican to be an idiot. And AFA I can tell, the way Hillary, from her perch in the State Department, managed the gun-running-from-Benghazi-to-Syria operation, and the shit that she (or her subordinate, Nuland) got us into in Ukraine, she's also a necon, and a really stupid one at that. Because she decided to crank up these hot spots, she got Russia involved. And our military may be able to walk over partially-developed Mideast nations, but we're not about to take on Russia and win. Not only that, but her actions came at about the time that Obama was trying to "pivot to Asia". Didn't she believe in coordinating her activities with the President and the DoD? All Syria and Ukraine managed to do was force Russia and China into each others arms, and what a fatal mistake that was!

Our budget, and our military, is wildly overextended. Geopolitically and economically, we're extremely vulnerable. If Obama is making nice with Iran, that's the only sensible thing to do, even if it means pissing off the Saudis. The problem with that is, the Saudis have no problem sending terrorists to kill people anywhere in the world: Russia, France .... the USA. Anywhere. It's something we would need to be prepared for. (And don't expect any help from Israel, they've got a deal going with ISIS etc.)

Since bombing/ invading/ destabilizing nation after nation got us into this mess, anyone who thinks that more of the same is "the answer" should have their head examined, preferably by MRI, to see if there is any gray matter between the ears. Even McCain had to good sense to refuse the "consultancy" that Kiev offered him.

The Republican "solution" is a terrible idea, but Hillary's approach was just about the same.





--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 25, 2015 1:03 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Well, whaddaya know? Just as I was explaining the Saudi response ....

How we know that we pissed off the Saudis: ISIS (their tool) issues a not-so-veiled threat against the USA

ISIS Planning US Nuclear Attack In Next 12 Months: Report

Quote:

Let me throw a hypothetical operation onto the table. The Islamic State has billions [Billions? Like, from their "Saudi friends" and "illegal oil sales thru Turkey" billions?- SIGNY] of dollars in the bank, so they call on their wil?yah in Pakistan to purchase a nuclear device through weapons dealers with links to corrupt officials in the region.

The weapon is then transported overland until it makes it to Libya, where the muj?hid?n move it south to Nigeria. Drug shipments from Columbia bound for Europe pass through West Africa, so moving other types of contraband from East to West is just as possible.

The nuke and accompanying muj?hid?n arrive on the shorelines of South America and are transported through the porous borders of Central America before arriving in Mexico and up to the border with the United States.

From there it’s just a quick hop through a smuggling tunnel and hey presto, they’re mingling with another 12 million “illegal” aliens in America with a nuclear bomb in the trunk of their car.

Perhaps such a scenario is far-fetched but it’s the sum of all fears for Western intelligence agencies and it’s infinitely more possible today than it was just one year ago. And if not a nuke, what about a few thousand tons of ammonium nitrate explosive?

That’s easy enough to make. The Islamic State make no secret of the fact they have every intention of attacking America on its home soil and they’re not going to mince about with two muj?hid?n taking down a dozen casualties if it originates from the Caliphate. They’ll be looking to do something big, something that would make any past operation look like a squirrel shoot, and the more groups that pledge allegiance the more possible it becomes to pull off something truly epic.

Remember, all of this has happened in less than a year. How more dangerous will be the lines of communication and supply a year on from today? If the West completely failed to spot the emergence of the Islamic State and then the allies who so quickly pledged allegiance to it from around the world, what else of massive significance are they going to miss next?



Well, first of all, the rise of ISIS wasn't exactly unnoticed.

So, not so much of a "plan", more like a cross between a "daydream" and a "threat". IF they were REALLY planning this, we wouldn't hear about it. Warning shot from the Saudis.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Elections; 2024
Fri, April 19, 2024 01:21 - 2272 posts
This is what baseball bats are for, not to mention you're the one in a car...
Thu, April 18, 2024 23:38 - 1 posts
I'm surprised there's not an inflation thread yet
Thu, April 18, 2024 23:20 - 742 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, April 18, 2024 20:24 - 6263 posts
FACTS
Thu, April 18, 2024 19:48 - 548 posts
Biden's a winner, Trumps a loser. Hey Jack, I Was Right
Thu, April 18, 2024 18:38 - 148 posts
QAnons' representatives here
Thu, April 18, 2024 17:58 - 777 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, April 18, 2024 16:51 - 3530 posts
Why does THUGR shit up the board by bumping his pointless threads?
Thu, April 18, 2024 12:38 - 9 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Thu, April 18, 2024 10:21 - 834 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, April 17, 2024 23:58 - 1005 posts
Sentencing Thread
Wed, April 17, 2024 22:02 - 364 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL