We finally have a post-ISIS plan for Iraq
Submitted by gjohnsit on Thu, 07/21/2016 - 4:57pm
Now that it is clear that ISIS is on the ropes, it's time to think about what happens next.
"Most of our conversations today ... were about what happens after the defeat of ISIL," U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said after a separate meeting of about 30 defense ministers at Joint Base Andrews outside Washington, using an acronym for Islamic State.
"The biggest strategic concern of the defense ministers here was for the stabilization and reconstruction ... and making sure our planning and execution of that is in time for the execution of the military aspect," Carter said.
So what will it take to stabilize Iraq? Can you guess?
I'll give you a hint.
Gen. Joseph Votel, who confirmed that more troops would be sought, also insisted that even if ISIS was defeated, it would likely not mean any drawdown of US troops from Iraq, insisting that the US wants to retain “capabilities” in Iraq even after this war.
That's right: a permanent military deployment in Iraq.
How big of one? Larger than what we have now.
The U.S. military expects to seek additional troops in Iraq, even beyond the hundreds announced this week, as the campaign against the Islamic State advances, the head of the U.S. military's Central Command told Reuters.
"As we continue on the mission, I think there will be some additional troops that we will ask to bring in," U.S. Army General Joseph Votel said in an interview in Baghdad on Thursday, without disclosing a number.
Don't worry. Iraqis won't mind at all if we stay.
Comments
Of course they won't mind.
After all, we are going to give them McDonald's and coronary heart disease.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
As always....
These "I Am the Very Model of a Modern Major-General" iterations don't do irony or reflection.
And so the horror continues.
Well done everyone. Splendid stuff. Carry on.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
Remember 2008?
When Democrats demanded we pull the troops out of Iraq?
Back then the idea of permanent boots on the ground was unthinkable.
You might be accused of misandry
on certain sites.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
And another promise broken
I remember Obama stating that there won't be US military boots on the ground in Iraq.
ISIL isn't going to be defeated in our lifetime when there are our allies funding them.
Remember when Bush said that "you are either for us or against us"? How does that work when our ally Saudi Arabia is funding the terrorists that our military is fighting?
Another thing I find astonishing is that after the 28 pages of the 9/11 report was released and there was evidence of Bandar 'Bush', (George's family best friend) had funded the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers, there wasn't much of of an uproar over it.
So there was evidence that it was the house of Saud, not the Taliban or Saddam that was responsible for the attack and no one has a problem with that?
SMDH!
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
Once upon a time,
we almost destroyed Guatemala for bananas.
Once upon a time, we almost took over Panama for the canal.
It was clear, obvious, what we did, why we did it, and for whom we did it.
Will we ever be able to say what we are doing in the middle east is for the oil?
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
We used to say it a lot.
After years and years, we stopped saying it was for oil. It is time to say it again.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Honestly, I think it's more about Israel and Saudi Arabia
at this point. It's about selling weapons systems in the region, it's about the lobbying money that comes into the U.S.
The U.S. doesn't need Middle East oil anymore. It factors into the equation, but I think those other factors weigh more heavily in the political equation.
But this isn't about 'what
But this isn't about 'what the US needs', assuming that it was somehow OK to invade countries and steal other people's stuff. This is about draining insane amounts of everyone else's money and power for those relative few set on global conquest, even though destroying everything in the process.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Interesting article on Saudi Arabia's involvement in funding
terrorists groups along with other countries that are supposedly our allies.
And the US is also funding their own terrorists groups. gj wrote a diary about how the CIA's terrorists were fighting the pentagon's terrorists.
Can there be a bigger clusterfuck in the Middle East then all these countries funding terrorists groups that end up fighting each other?
Oh well, it's good for the defense industry. Too bad that those innocent civilians have to lose their lives so others can profit from it.
http://www.salon.com/2016/07/15/28_pages_showing_saudi_connection_to_911...
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
Bleak cynicism says it's a way of "thinning the herd"
Get them to kill each other, which reduces their numbers without The Powers That Be having to dirty their hands. Solve the overpopulation problem and grab off the resources in one master stroke.
Disgusting.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Not cynicism and not an unheard of idea
“The elderly are useless eaters” — Dr. Henry Kissinger
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
Don't expect HRC to do anything negative about Saudis who
are bankrolling Clinton Global Initiative. She doesn't give a damn about innocent lives being destroyed or ended. She gives a damn only about Hillary.
Funny thing, how if ISIS is licked they are capable of creating so much mayhem around the world. Maybe somebody should tell them they've been defeated and should all go home.
ISIS is on the ropes?
Umm, must have missed that...
Continued US hegemony in Iraq, that's new?
Throw in Afghanistan for chuckles.
Then of course there are those Libyan and Syrian thingees.
Good grief.
Prof: Nancy! I’m going to Greece!
Nancy: And swim the English Channel?
Prof: No. No. To ancient Greece where burning Sapho stood beside the wine dark sea. Wa de do da! Nancy, I’ve invented a time machine!
Firesign Theater
Stop the War!
Fundamentally right. Increased troop levels is in the future.
With the impeding blow to IS, the US/Israel and the Sunni Arab states will have lost the only viable military of any type to counter the Shia Iran axis. There is no group that can that fill that role after Al Queda and ISIS. The only alternative is to increase troop levels in Iraq. This would also give a President Hillary the option of invading Syria and taking out Assad under whatever pretext. Well, at least try to take out Assad although the Russians may have a different opinion about that. But maybe more important, have a military on the ground after Hillary bombs Iran.