Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, June 12, 2014

As the threat from Sunni militants in western Iraq escalated last month, Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki secretly asked the Obama administration to consider carrying out airstrikes against extremist staging areas, according to Iraqi and American officials. But Iraq's appeals for a military response have so far been rebuffed by the White House, which has been reluctant to open a new chapter in a conflict that President Obama has insisted was over when the United States withdrew the last of its forces from Iraq in 2011.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

rcade

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

in a nutshell, al-maliki pleaded:

"oh country who totally ruined our country, please come and ruin our country some more in order to keep the extremists from further ruining our country!"

#1 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-12 11:21 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2

Does Iraq not have any military aircraft of their own?

I know we pretty much decimated their air power in the early stages of the war, but has none of it been replenished?

#2 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-12 11:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

'You are going to be the proud owner of 25 million people,' Colin Powell told the president. 'You will own all their hopes, aspirations, and problems. You'll own it all.' Privately, Powell and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage called this the Pottery Barn rule:

You break it, you own it.

#3 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2014-06-12 11:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Does Iraq not have any military aircraft of their own?

If they did, I'd assume they'd conduct their own airstrikes.

#4 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2014-06-12 11:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

Who do these guys think they are? We don't take orders from anyone but Israel.

Sheesh.

#5 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-06-12 11:30 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Here we are on the eve of a World Cup and:

The Iraqi security forces, whose training by the US military cost an estimated $20 billion, dropped their weapons and fled at the first sign of trouble. Now the streets, government buildings, schools, hospitals, airports and military installations are in the hands of the al Qaida-splinter group called the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The group is now in possession of helicopters and tanks that were left behind by al Malaki's soldiers.

The American invasion and occupation of Iraq is entirely responsible for the problems that plague Iraq today. There were no bands of armed terrorists roaming the countryside and wreaking havoc before the US invasion. All of Iraq's troubles can be traced back to that bloody intervention that has left the country in chaos. The fall of Mosul is not a minor setback that can be corrected by deploying special ops and lobbing a few bombs on targets in Mosul. It is a complete policy collapse that illustrates the shortcomings of the abysmal War on Terror.

The American people have never supported the Iraqi quagmire. The prospect of refighting the war in order to beat the radicals which the administration-itself created through its own disastrous arm-the-terrorist policy is bound to be widely resisted as well as reviled. If the ISIS starts taking out pipelines and oil installations around Mosul, it's Game-Over USA. Oil futures will spike, markets will crash, and the global economy will slump back into a severe recession. Obama has a very small window to reverse the current dynamic or there's going to be hell to pay.

The Obama administration may choose to stay out of the conflagration altogether, because the goals of the ISIS coincide with a similar US plan to create a "soft partition" that dates back to 2006. The plan was first proposed by Leslie Gelb, the former president of the Council on Foreign Relations, and then-senator Joe Biden. The "so-called soft-partition plan ….calls for dividing Iraq into three semi-autonomous regions…There would be a loose Kurdistan, a loose Shiastan and a loose Sunnistan, all under a big, if weak, Iraq umbrella."

And this is why the US will probably not deploy combat troops to engage the Sunni fighters in Mosul. It's because the Obama administration's strategic goals and those of the terrorists are nearly identical. (MIKE WHITNEY)

#6 | Posted by nutcase at 2014-06-12 11:40 AM | Reply | Flag:

#2-- naive as hell.

#7 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-12 11:44 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Next time, don't call in the middle of the night. -B.H. Obama

#8 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-12 11:45 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

The Bush Legacy continues to eff over this country.

Let's elect JEB. This time it will be different.

#9 | Posted by 726 at 2014-06-12 11:46 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

here's a link to dubya bush's latest painting. it is called "iraqi still life: land of flowers and chocolate"

www.artchive.com

#10 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-12 11:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

The Bush Legacy continues to eff over this country.

#11 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-12 11:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

And so does Joe Biden's...

"I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government," said Biden.

"I spent -- I've been there 17 times now. I go about every two months -- three months. I know every one of the major players in all of the segments of that society. It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."

#12 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-12 11:53 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Yeah Wisgod. We've learned the hard way that what ever Biden or Obummer say you can safely assume the opposite and go full speed. Wether it's Benghazi attacks caused by a video. Iraq is going to be awesome. Bergdahl served with honor and distinction. The economy is good.

#13 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-12 12:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

news for wisgod-- joe "i am a zioist" biden wasn't the deciderer back in 2002-03 when this whole fiasco was put into play.

#14 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-12 12:03 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

I know we pretty much decimated their air power in the early stages of the war, but has none of it been replenished?

#2 | Posted by JeffJ

Who in that country has enough self control to be responsible for owning military aircraft?

#15 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2014-06-12 12:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

news for wisgod-- joe "i am a zioist" biden wasn't the deciderer back in 2002-03 when this whole fiasco was put into play.

#14 | Posted by NerfHerder

News for Nerfherder, he wanted to take credit for a "great acheivement" for the Obama Adminstration. You own it when trying to take credit for it.

#16 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-12 12:12 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

#15

Probably nobody.

#17 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-12 12:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

Gotta wonder if Malaki is reconsidering the decision to not grant American soldiers immunity from Iraqi prosecution for any crimes they might be accused of while serving in Iraq? I had a feeling that would come back to bite him in the ass. It was a golden opportunity for Obama to pull out our troops without leaving the impression that we deserted Iraq since they insisted that our troops be subject to Iraqi laws and prosecutions and incarcerations or even worse punishments.

#18 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-12 12:19 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

Hillary also voted for this WAR.

#19 | Posted by shirtsbyeric at 2014-06-12 12:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's funny Danni. Months ago you were claiming Obama didn't really try to get the security agreement. Now you claim it's Malaki that didn't want the agreement?

#20 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-12 12:21 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

"Hillary also voted for this WAR."

ONe of the reasons Obama is President today instead of her.

#21 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-12 12:22 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

Well if the Yemen military could retake the territory the same militants created a "state" in, why can't the Iraqi military do it? I am sure they are much better armed and trained...

I am also pretty sure the Sunni population of that area largely do not want Radical Islam enforced on them. After all it is home of the Baath party and these people did very well in an essentially secular dictatorship.

I do think splitting the country into 3 is pretty much the only way the people will largely see peace unless a strong dictator emerges.

#22 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2014-06-12 12:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Months ago you were claiming Obama didn't really try to get the security agreement."

He saw it just as I said in #18, an opportunity to pull out of Iraq with the excuse that Malaki wouldn't offer a security agreement providing immunity from Iraqi prosecution for our troops. I'm sure if Obama really wanted it he could have offered more money, more equipment transfers, etc. to convince the Iraqis to provide it but he didn't and I'm glad he didn't. Malaki probably wishes he would have offered it without any strings attached now that he fears for the end of his country.

#23 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-12 12:24 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2

Outside interference would only make the bombing campaigns continue indefinitely, so perhaps a final division of the nation will be necessary to ever establish peace for the nation of Iraq.

#24 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-12 12:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Does Iraq not have any military aircraft of their own?"

Yup.. they have 24 F-16's, and 6 Mi-35M attack helicopters.

I guess they would rather burn ours.

#25 | Posted by sames1 at 2014-06-12 12:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Iraqi air force fighters bombed positions around Mosul today.

Insurgents have a couple of helicopters in the air as well.

#26 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-06-12 01:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

#25

The F-16 is not particularly well suited for strategic bombing. It's designed to primarily be an interceptor and mission support plane. It's designed for air-to-air support not air-to-ground support.

Maybe we could give them a great deal on a handful of A-10 warthogs since we are set to take them out of service anyway (STUPID decision IMO).

#27 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-12 01:10 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"Does Iraq not have any military aircraft of their own?
I know we pretty much decimated their air power in the early stages of the war, but has none of it been replenished?
#2 | Posted by JeffJ"

Yes. See, e.g.,--
Iraqi recon plane:
4.bp.blogspot.com
And jets too: global3.memecdn.com
And a lightweight, unmanned drone: pictureshd.imagestocks.in (still on the drawing board)

#28 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2014-06-12 01:17 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

Getting rid of the warthog would be a huge mistake. It is a ground support dream come true. It flies lpw and slow. It has plenty of armor and plenty of firepower. It is a gattling gun that flies.

#29 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-12 01:17 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Danni denied that Obama tried to negotiate our stay in Iraq, and now she's admitting he did, but that it was all a master plan, and it worked...

Holy sheep ship. Absolutely amazing. This Obama guy is a flipping cult leader for crying out loud.

#30 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-06-12 01:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Danni denied that Obama tried to negotiate our stay in Iraq, and now she's admitting he did, but that it was all a master plan, and it worked..."

I'm saying that Malaki refused to grant immunity from Iraqi prosectution of American soldiers in Iraq and that Obama refused to extend our stay there under those terms and yes, I do believe he realized it was an opportunity to get out while the getting was good.

#31 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-12 03:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

BTW, I've been hearing a whole different take on what is going on over there, that this whole "disaster" is really just a complete rejection of Malaki and his troops and that both Sunnis and Shia in some of the areas taken over by the ISIS are actually glad to be out from under Malaki's control. I don't have any way to know if that is true but I have heard from Iraqis on talk radio who could, I realize, just be shills for the ISIS but they sounded like regular secular Iraqis to me.

#32 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-12 03:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

What does a regular secular Iraqi sound like, Danni?

Never mind, I honestly won't bother reading your reply. I was just pointing out how utterly ridiculous your 32 was.

#33 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-06-12 04:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I was just pointing out how utterly ridiculous your 32 was."

I don't think it is ridiculous at all to wonder if we are getting the straight scoop from the same news media that sold us on the stupid invasion in the first place. I'll check it out on Al Jazeera when I get home tonight. You watch Fox or whoever and we'll see who gets the truth and who gets fooled again.

#34 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-12 04:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

ISIS is playing nice-nice with the Sunnis is Iraq right now but anyone who is fooled by them is going to be sorry later. They are so brutal in Syria that AQ doesn't even want to associate with them.

#35 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-12 04:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

news for wisgod-- joe "i am a zioist" biden wasn't the deciderer back in 2002-03 when this whole fiasco was put into play.
#14 | POSTED BY NERFHERDER

Regarding Iraq, Biden stated in 2002 that Saddam Hussein was a threat to national security, and that there was no option but to eliminate that threat.[113] The Bush administration rejected an effort Biden undertook with Senator Richard Lugar to pass a resolution authorizing military action only after the exhaustion of diplomatic efforts. In October 2002, Biden voted in favor of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq, justifying the Iraq War.

en.m.wikipedia.org

#36 | Posted by Daniel at 2014-06-12 04:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

They are so brutal in Syria that AQ doesn't even want to associate with them.

#35 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-12 04:41 PMFlag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

How funny and mixed up would it be to arm them in Syria and bomb them in Iraq?

#37 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-12 04:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

hello, earth to daniel. george bush was the deciderer, not biden. your link does not change that fact. the zionist lackey biden was and still is, of course he agreed. he knew where his bread was buttered.

purge zionism from american politics and you are halfway towards saving america.

#38 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-12 04:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

What exactly do you mean by "purge zionism from american politics"?

#39 | Posted by Daniel at 2014-06-12 05:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

How funny and mixed up would it be to arm them in Syria and bomb them in Iraq?

#37 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-12 04:48 PM | Reply |

Well, zero is a funny guy and we all know how mixed up he and his increasingly decreasing sycophants are.

#40 | Posted by matsop at 2014-06-12 05:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What exactly do you mean by "purge zionism from american politics"?"

end all political and financial support for the terrorist state of israel.

israel was founded through terrorism. it cannot exist as an independent entity without being propped up by american $$$.

can't happen? well, its a hard choice to make. either israel or america. you choose your side and i'll choose mine.

end support for the terrorist state of israel, and america will find itself in much better shape to deal with the terrorists in iraq and elsewhere.

until that happens, good luck keeping a huge part of this country from going down the crapper.

#41 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-12 05:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

end all political and financial support for the terrorist state of israel.
#41 | POSTED BY NERFHERDER

Nice attitude, how is that Hezbollah membership thing coming a long?

#42 | Posted by paneocon at 2014-06-12 05:20 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

has nothing to do with hezbollah. it has to do with reason. israel is an illegitimate entity founded in terror and it has way too much influence on american politics. deal with reality.

#43 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-12 05:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

Wow! You really don't know what the hell you are talking about. There wasn't a single thing you said that was accurate. At least I gave you a chance to hang yourself and you did a bangup job.

#44 | Posted by daniel at 2014-06-12 06:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

i know exactly what the hell i am talking about, daniel.

perhaps you, as a zionist, need to re-evaluate your loyalties. supporting a state founded on terrorism and perpetuated through more terrorism and financial blackmail isn't a badge of honor, you know.

#45 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-12 06:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

Listened to a former American General who was the commandant of the N. Iarq area during part of the occupation, he agreed with the callers I heard on talk radio, he also says this is a big push back against the Malaki government which has basically locked Sunnis out of power. I heard the callers say that Sunnis and Shia alike were happy because under Malaki the corruption has been so bad that people were nearly starving, power was intermittent, etc. all in an area that is the largest producer of oil in IRaq. Both of the callers and the General also said that the Baathists, and Saddam's former military are parts of this take over, I suspect we are seeing the rise of a new Saddam who can end the bombings, etc. with a harsh government that can keep order which will demonstrate the utter stupidity of taking out Saddam in the first place.

#46 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-12 07:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

We've got no excuse for not providing air support.

As for troops, that's more debatable. I'd lean against that. Its been 10+ years, if any Iraqis want a non-AL-Qaeda government, they need to fight for it themselves at this point.

And talking bad vs worse, an intervention by Iran is probably 'less bad' than Al-Qaeda Iraq would be.

#47 | Posted by USAF242 at 2014-06-13 03:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

lol, Danni

At this point, I'll agree that taking out Saddam was a mistake. Its just so funny to see that come from YOU. Its suppose to be us right leaners that accept preferring a 'brutal bastard' if the 'brutal bastard' keeps 'worse bastards' out.

Do you feel the same about Assad?

#48 | Posted by USAF242 at 2014-06-13 03:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

I agree with #47. Perhaps we should even let the Russians take care of it. They are neighbors share a few borders and have the largest share of petroleum holdings to protect in the region. We need to stop doing their dirty work. They are not big fans of Islamic militants. We also need to cool our jets with Israel who loves nothing more than stoking the fire.

The only reason we were concerned about Iraq in the first place was because the Ayatollah Khomeini cut off our supply of cheap black goo from Iran. Rather than develop our own resources as we are doing now 35 years later. Iran got tired to the 80/20 split the Brits where getting of Iranian oil... and realistically who could blame them?

Read the history of events leading up to the first invasion of Iraq. Saddam sided with us Bush 1 (the Rumsfeld handshake) we turned our back while he invaded Kuwait then the Kuwait oil men came promising a sweeter deal and hired a New York public relations firm to sell the war in Iraq. Sell they did babies taken out of incubators and the whole nine yards of B.S. Meanwhile back at home Bush the elder pardons Casper Weinberger and anyone else who could implicate Reagan and himself in the Iran /Contra affair.

The Bush family roots in M.E. intrigue go back roots go back even further to when the Arabs were schmoozing with Adolf Hitler and the Bush/Walker family were negotiating their first oil contracts. That is one of the reasons Bush1 was able to put a million boots on the ground many from Arab nations (including a small group of (al Queda) for Desert Storm.

The Arabs were pretty tired of the Bush family tactics when Bush2 came in which is why there wasn't a single Arab nation that invested military support in Operation Iraqi Freedom. They didn't mind selling us the oil for jet fuel and hiding bin Laden while Bush spent 7 years looking for him elsewhere. They are building universities and hospitals with the profits meanwhile the US is bickering over basic medical care and the costs of college tuition for its citizens.

#49 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2014-06-13 07:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

"At this point, I'll agree that taking out Saddam was a mistake. Its just so funny to see that come from YOU. Its suppose to be us right leaners that accept preferring a 'brutal bastard' if the 'brutal bastard' keeps 'worse bastards' out.
Do you feel the same about Assad?"

Completely different situation with Assad, it is Syrians who are fighting him not Americans, in Iraq is was Americans not Iraqis.

#50 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-13 08:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

Saddam managed to kill 5 times more people with his chemical weapon attacks than Assad did, after ethnically cleansing them from key oil cities. The Kurds are far better off without Saddam. It's the Shia that are screwed right now. It's definitely not a black & white issue.

#51 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2014-06-13 09:36 AM | Reply | Flag:

Danni's point..
www.cnn.com

But given that, why wouldn't the State Department recognizing this work on correcting it? Or at least influencing it?

The Shiite-Sunni relations were good, and worked well together 2007-2009. When we saw the Shiafication, why didn't we leverage anything?

#52 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-06-13 09:53 AM | Reply | Flag:

israel was founded through terrorism. it cannot exist as an independent entity without being propped up by american $$$.
#41 | POSTED BY NERFHERDER

Whatever nation was in Israel proper would have been founded on Terrorism, so not sure what your point is there.

Israel is in pretty good shape actually. But the US uses its $$$ for influence, same with the money we give to Egypt.

Would you want an Israel you have no influence over?

#53 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-06-13 10:00 AM | Reply | Flag:

RE:52 and Danni's post....

Sunni-Shiite relations within Iraq are good, in fact working together in 2007-2009.....

What changed on Feb 27 2009?

Obama announced complete withdrawal, and training of non-secatarian troops.

Al-Maliki, then starts thinking about the end of US presence, and begins Shiafication because he knows whats coming....

What if we said we would keep a contingent there, just like we have in every other war?

Would Al-Maliki have still done "Shiafication"? Probably not.....

#54 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-06-13 10:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

So...

After experience in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, etc...

Syria is "Completely different"?

At least in Egypt the old corrupt dictator's army was still there and able to save the day.

Our mistake in Iraq was not forcing an 'understanding' after 911, and leaving Saddam in power.

Our mistake in Afghanistan is even trying to achieve some semblance of western decency, although we really did not have much choice about going in and butchering the Taliban.

Lessons learned (well, by some of us...).

Long Live Assad, at least until a 'nice' leader who has his OWN winning army comes along. Once that happens, then yeah, sure, I'll support the nice guy.

And with Fracking, there is massively less reason to bleed there, even from a national interests perspective.

KOREA would be 'completely different'. At least there, there is a healthy South Korea to do the rebuilding (assuming China allowed it...). But Syria??? Nope.

#55 | Posted by USAF242 at 2014-06-13 10:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Saddam managed to kill 5 times more people with his chemical weapon attacks than Assad did"

well, saddam was given the green light to use them by the good ol' u.s.a.

i don't think assad had the same permission...

#56 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-13 10:41 AM | Reply | Flag:

"western decency"

lol... like hiroshima.

#57 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-13 10:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

Sounds like a carrier will be moving into the Persian Gulf.

#58 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-06-13 12:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Sounds like a carrier will be moving into the Persian Gulf."

yup. america never learns.

#59 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-13 12:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

Whatever nation was in Israel proper would have been founded on Terrorism, so not sure what your point is there."

that's bull---- deflection and doesn't even deserve a reply.

"Israel is in pretty good shape actually. But the US uses its $$$ for influence, same with the money we give to Egypt."

no it's not. its an international pariah without us support. if the us ended its support, it would collapse within a decade. nice try bringing up egypt. as if you could compare egypt with israel. i don't see egyptians influencing american politicians and its foreign policy even 1 % of 1% that israel and its supporters do. but i'm open to ending all support for them too. start with the big bullies first before dealing with the little bullies.

"Would you want an Israel you have no influence over?"

another deflection. i would rather that america cut off funding to israel and allow it to die like the 60 year terrorist experiment that it really is. i'm guessing that it would throw around a few nukes before it finally gives up the ghost and dies, but chances are they'd be aimed at places americans would love see turned to glass anyway. maybe they can nuke detroit while they are at it...

#60 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-06-13 12:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort