That is the present day right wing for you. This is what they have reduced themselves to, sadly, all the way from the top down to the masses. It is ultimately America's loss
Disgraceful.
Gifts for Iraq“The military task has, in fact, been outsourced in Iraq,” confirmed analyst Steven Schooner, a professor at George Washington University Law School.
Washington’s relationship with Baghdad has undergone a major transformation. Officially, the US has just several hundred troops in Iraq and the US Defense Department does not contract private security companies to operate in Iraq.
Yet the major shift in US-Iraq relations now is that Washington is no longer allocating budget money on operations in Iraq. It is Baghdad that spends money on American weaponry, vehicles and equipment, while American defense companies are earning money in Iraq by placing military contractors there.
Private defense companies, such as Triple Canopy and Dyncorp International, have multibillion contracts in Iraq for years to come.
Boom times for the American Defense Industry!The U.S. is giving Iraq $580 million worth of equipment, the Pentagon estimates. That bothers Scott Pepperman, executive director of the National Association of State Agencies for Surplus Property, which helps states purchase excess government equipment.
...The Pentagon believes helping the Iraqis is money well spent, especially if the bases and donations help the fledgling government fight off insurgent attacks and preserve goodwill between Iraq and the U.S. in a region of the world hostile to American interests.
ISIS recruitment soaring in wake of U.S. bombing, and this too from an Israeli newspaper.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.616730
As I said, this is self perpetuating. More bombs mean more enemies. Which means more bombs. Which means more enemies, and yet more bombs.
so what is the choice?
They were ignored in Iraq and look what happened there until the US intervened.
I think you missed the part where Iraq was a stable country, that had done nothing against U.S., posed no threat to it. But we invaded it and left it as a non country. You think the latest and greatest intervention will not lead for a "need" for further intervention down the road?
The point has been made by many thoughtful people (including Gen Zinni recently) that we know nothing about the complexities of middle east, its ancient rivalries and enmities. We just go in there and think we can do things with the barrel of a gun. Has never worked that way, never will.
I think you missed the part where Iraq was a stable country, that had done nothing against U.S., posed no threat to it. But we invaded it and left it as a non country. You think the latest and greatest intervention will not lead for a "need" for further intervention down the road?
The point has been made by many thoughtful people (including Gen Zinni recently) that we know nothing about the complexities of middle east, its ancient rivalries and enmities. We just go in there and think we can do things with the barrel of a gun. Has never worked that way, never will.
Y
While Iraq under Saddam may not have been a direct threat to the US at the time, it was a threat to others.
Kuwait, Kurds and Israel for starters.
While Iraq under Saddam may not have been a direct threat to the US at the time, it was a threat to others.
Kuwait, Kurds and Israel for starters.
While Iraq under Saddam may not have been a direct threat to the US at the time, it was a threat to others.
Kuwait, Kurds and Israel for starters.
He wouldn't of been much of a threat to anyone without all the US aid
What aid was the US providing to him against Kuwait, Kurds and Israel other than purchasing his oil?
He was not using US manufactured weapons against those three that I know of.
U.N. inspectors had identified many United States manufactured items that had been exported from the United States to Iraq under licenses issued by the Department of Commerce, and [established] that these items were used to further Iraq's chemical and nuclear weapons development and its missile delivery system development programs. ... The executive branch of our government approved 771 different export licenses for sale of dual-use technology to Iraq. I think that is a devastating record.
Jesus Christ, are you really trying to argue that we are better off without Saddam? That is just plain nuts.
You wish to look at dual use capability.
I believe that much was after the first Gulf War, not prior to.
Such was when Kuwait, Israel and the Kurds were being targeted. Soviet manufactured equipment
Jesus Christ, are you really trying to argue that we are better off without Saddam? That is just plain nuts.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/iraq/timeline/062793.htmU.S. Navy ships launched 23 Tomahawk missiles against the headquarters of the Iraqi Intelligence Service yesterday in what President Clinton said was a "firm and commensurate" response to Iraq's plan to assassinate former president George Bush in mid-April.
The attack was meant to strike at the building where Iraqi officials had plotted against Bush, organized other unspecified terrorist actions and directed repressive internal security measures, senior U.S. officials said.
Clinton, speaking in a televised address to the nation at 7:40 last night, said he ordered the attack to send three messages to the Iraqi leadership: "We will combat terrorism. We will deter aggression. We will protect our people."
Clinton said he ordered the attack after receiving "compelling evidence" from U.S. intelligence officials that Bush had been the target of an assassination plot and that the plot was "directed and pursued by the Iraqi Intelligence Service."
"It was an elaborate plan devised by the Iraqi government and directed against a former president of the United States because of actions he took as president," Clinton said. Bush led the coalition that drove Iraq from Kuwait in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. "As such, the Iraqi attack against President Bush was an attack against our country and against all Americans," Clinton said.
After two months of investigation and mounting evidence, Clinton became convinced during two "exhaustive and exhausting" meetings last week that Iraq was indeed behind a foiled car-bomb plot to kill Bush during his visit to Kuwait April 14-16, a senior administration official said.
You wish to look at dual use capability.
I believe that much was after the first Gulf War, not prior to.
Such was when Kuwait, Israel and the Kurds were being targeted. Soviet manufactured equipment
Yeah, their weapons were Soviet (along with some French).
Fern
Damned right if someone is declaring war and saying "we're going to kill you"Western civilization bring love and peace to the world - with bombs, missiles, fighter jets, nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers, drones and who know what else.
I guess if you gotta go.. might as well go out in flamesFox News presenters mock female pilot who took part in campaign against Isis: Hosts crack sexist jokes about UAEs Major Mariam al-Mansouri, calling her boobs on the ground
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/sep/25/fox-news-mock-female-pilot-isis-sexist-jokes
The kind of stuff that makes you go Umm
Here's an article that sums things up pretty well.
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread...essive-democrats-follow-obama-to-war-in-syria
You Democrat cheerleaders can keep taking turns slurping each other off, pretending you're better than Republicans.
LOL, Democrats.
I seem to recall the same things being said when we went to Afghanistan. 13 years later, we are still there for what is the longest military engagement of the country in its history. Nobody is really sure why we are still there, who are we fighting anymore, or why we are fighting.
We are definitely now living in the times of endless war.
A former British guy I used to work with would call you a twit and tell you to "shut you're Gob Hole."
To sum it up.