Friday, November 14, 2014
TV'S MCGUYVER COULD BUILD SOMETHING OUT OF ANYTHING.
TURNS OUT FADED CELEBRITY BARRY O'S JONATHAN GUBER HAD HIS OWN TRICK, HE COULD TURN ANYTHING INTO S**T.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
US House Rep Walter Jones: Mr. Secretary it's kind of ironic the last time that I heard, before today, a Secretary of Defense talk about military involvement in Iraq was Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. That got us into a war that was unnecessary. I know ISIL is evil. There's no question about it. They need to be taken out. But I looked at some of your statements from 2002 when you were a senator and how you felt about the obligation of a member of Congress to make a decision to send a young man or young woman to die. I also looked at your statements in 2007 when, like myself, you came out against the surge in Iraq. Now we are going to possibly be asked by the President of the United States -- like we were by George W. Bush -- to authorize an AMUF. This is nothing but an abdication of our Constitutional responsibility. To give any president an AMUF. We tried this past year in June when we had the NDAA bill, Adam Schiff tried to sunset out the AMUF that we gave to President Bush -- which is what was used by President Obama. And I do not understand how we in Congress can continue to abdicate what the Constitution says is our responsibility. Before I get to a brief question, James Madison once said this, "The power to declare war -- including the power to judging the cause of war -- is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature." And I do not believe sincerely because when -- this happens to be President Obama. He wants to have another AMUF or an extension of what we have. I hope that the Congress -- both parties -- will look seriously at what is our responsibility because it's not going to be but so long. You have sent more and more troops to Iraq to train. Many of these [being trained] are former Saddam Hussein loyalists and now they're fighting with ISIS -- some are fighting for the other side. It's very complex, I understand that and I agree with that. But for goodness sake, why in the world should we make such a commitment? And we don't even have an end point to it. I would like for you or Gen Dempsey -- I have great respect for both of you -- to submit for the record two things very quickly: how does this new war end in your opinion? And I realize that it's just your opinion but it's very important because of what you are. What is the end state of what we're trying to accomplish. The American people -- fifty -- over fifty percent of the American people do not want our personnel in Syria or in Iraq. And I will be honest with you, I don't know how we can convince the American people that a nation that's financially broke -- You sat right here, Gen Dempsey, and you were exactly right, sequestration and all the budget problems coming your way and yet you're asking for five or six billion dollars to drop more armaments in Iraq and in Syria? Where is it coming from? Please explain to the American people and to this Congress how this war is going to end some day? Whether we are advisors or we are fighting? And I hope to God we are not fighting and I hope we do not give the president a new AMUF. So if you'll get those into the Committee in written form [take the question for the record] then you won't have to answer them now. But this, again, looks like we're going down the same road that Secretary Rumsfeld said we had to do -- we had to do! -- and yet there was no end point to that as well. Thank you very much.
That was Jones from this today's House Armed Services Committee hearing where Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and the Chair of the Joint-Chiefs of Staff Gen Martin Dempsey testified.
Committee Chair Buck McKeon made clear from the start that any authorization he got behind would not be an open-ended one.
The hearing was often surreal (and what was up with the band aid Hagel had on the left side of his face?) and a demonstration of just how insane the government is.
For example, to listen to Dempsey, the Islamic State is nothing but a big pimple "We need to squeeze ISIL from all directions."
He also insisted, "There is no change, and there is no different direction." Or when he declared, "I think progress purchases patience." Were that true, the reality would still be that there is no progress. A fact Hagel seemed to acknowledge when he declared, "We are three months into a multi-year effort." Not a reassuring statement.
Justin Raimondo (Antiwar.com) offers:
So what’s our policy? You can’t really tell from here what this most "transparent" of administrations is up to, and what’s particularly scary is that one doubts whether even they know. Obama says one thing, and then does another. Dempsey says more, Obama says less. This game of seesaw between the President and Dempsey is a bit banana-republic-anish – I mean, who’s in charge here, exactly? Or are we being fooled into thinking Obama is the "reluctant interventionist," as he cynically plays the game once played by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the run up to our last world war?
FDR, you’ll recall, pledged "again and again" that "your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars" – even as he was scheming and plotting to get us in by doing everything possible to provoke a German attack on our trans-Atlantic shipping. While FDR pussyfooted around – or appeared to – his allies and advisors clamored for more decisive measures, to which he eventually and gladly gave in.
Whatever the President’s real views, we are sliding down the Iraqi slope pretty rapidly. Hardly a week goes by when we don’t hear of another few hundred GIs being quietly shipped to Iraq – "non-combat" troops, to be sure. Yes, they’re going over there to engage in some pretty dangerous and potentially lethal "non-combat" – and when they start getting killed in numbers high enough to notice, will they come back in non-bodybags?
At one point early on, Chair Buck McKeon noted that Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes went on TV (PBS' Frontline) and stated that US President Barack Obama would not reconsider his decision re: sending in troops for combat on the ground.
Dempsey stated he was under no limitations with regards to what he recommends to Barack. and that there was nothing to stop him, if he felt it was needed, from recommending US troops accompany Iraqi troops on missions in Mosul and along the border, "I'm not predicting at this point that I would recommend that those forces in Mosul and along the border would need to be accompanied by US forces, but we're certainly considering it."
US House Rep Loretta Sanchez wanted to know what was different this time? After all the training that had taken place, what was different in this latest 'solution'?
Hagel insisted one difference was the new prime minister (Haider al-Abadi) and how Iraq now had a Minister of Defense, "We haven't had a Minister of Defense in Iraq for more than four years -- [former] Prime Minister [Nouri al-]Maliki took that job for himself -- as he did the Minister of Interior."
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Yeah, there is a war against women (and the White ..."
"How To Get Away With Murder (Annalise on a tear)"
"How To Get Away With Murder"
"50 Shades of Embarrssment"
"What? Us Diet?"
"Mashed Potatoes in the Kitchen"
"Bruce Springsteen's stupidity"
"Is Obama Really Coming Home from Asia Without Anything on the TPP?"
"He gets freaky"
"THIS JUST IN! HE'S A KARDASHIAN AFTER ALL!"
Thursday, November 13, 2014
AS IT TURNS OUT, HE'S A BOTTOM!
FADED CELEBRITY BARRY O HASN'T HAD A SEX TAPE LEAK YET, HOWEVER A PHOTO OF HIM BENT OVER THE KNEE OF RUSSIAN PRESIDENT VLADIMIR PUTIN IS ON DISPLAY.
IN THE PHOTO, BARRY O IS SEEN BEING SPANKED.
HE IS SAID TO HAVE BEEN SPANKED TO CLIMAX -- IN OTHER WORDS, THE TEARS FLOWING OUT OF HIS EYES WEREN'T THE ONLY LIQUIDS HIS BODY SHOT OUT.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
And sly lover boys
With big bad bedroom eyes
I never loved a man I trusted
As far as I could pitch my shoe
-- "Lucky Girl," written by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her Dog Eat Dog
Wise guys, shy guys and apparently pee shy guys.
Listening to the spokespeople for the US government, the Canadian government, the British government, the Iraqi government, et al announce their daily 'kills' from bombings who knew the big swinging dicks would go all pee shy the moment they had to step up?
This morning, NINA reported Mosul Medical Center "received the bodies of 15 civilians, including six women and four children, [who] were killed in an air strike on the Mithaq area east of Mosul."
Yet night has fallen and none of the big swinging dicks have come out to brag.
Come on, 15 kills.
Why the sudden shyness?
Usually, 15 kills would have you all crowing about the 'terrorists' you killed.
But this time, when it's known before you can brag that the dead were civilians, so you clam up.
How many times, be honest, do you think these governments have crowed they killed 'terrorists' in Operatoin Inherent Bulls**t when, in fact, they killed civilians?
Yeah, I'd go with that too.
RT observes today, "The US military has admitted that it is reliant on satellite images, drones and surveillance flights to try and get a better picture of what is happening on the ground. It has very few reliable sources on the ground which it can use to get up to date and precise information. The data gained from the air is also used to pinpoint possible targets where airstrikes can be carried out. "
The editorial board of the Oman Tribune offers:
At this point in time it is impossible for thousands of Iraqi troops to overwhelm even a few hundred well-trained, well-equipped and highly motivated fighters of the Baghdadi militia. The blame for this must go to the Americans. When Obama announced the end of the deployment of US forces in Iraq, not much was done to ensure that the country would be handed over to the safe hands of well-trained Iraqi forces with the latest armaments. It seemed at that time that the Americans were in a hurry to get out to justify the Nobel Prize for Peace that Obama won as soon as he became president. And today, Iraq is paying a heavy price for American myopia. Much more will now have to be done to ensure the war in Iraq turns against the extremists. Who knows as time passes, more and more American soldiers might be needed in Iraq. And Obama, under heavy pressure after the horrifying loss of his Democrats in the recent Congressional elections, will have no other option but to send more troops. Or else without having any legacy to shout about, he might become the most unpopular American president in recent times. Afghanistan, after the withdrawal of US forces at the end of the year, might add to his woes. But it may not be as bad as Iraq since about 10,000 western forces will remain to advice and train Afghan soldiers who are also said to be ill-trained and ill-equipped and without effective weapons. In fact, the Americans have destroyed a lot of military equipment there, fearing that ill-trained Afghan troops would lose them in battle to the Taliban.
In Iraq especially, it is doubtful if there will be a decisive outcome on the battlefield. Perhaps it is time the government of Prime Minister Haider Al Abadi works hard for a political solution. He has made a start by wooing disgruntled elements many of who support the Baghdadi militia and have even joined it. This task is going to be tough. But Abadi will have to try hard for the sake of ensuring that his country remains a single entity and enjoys peace in the long term. The Americans will have a role to play in this by being a reliable partner and provide stability to the government. Running away like the last time will mean more trouble for the Middle East. And, having a stake in the region, they will doubtlessly be hit hard.
Barack's non-plan stared with a few hundred US service members going into Iraq and rose to 1500. That's right 1500. Huffington Post needs to grasp reality. To mock Senator John McCain, they felt the need to say AP estimates it's 1400. Yes, but they don't include the 100 Special Ops service members the White House and the Pentagon have previously acknowledged were sent into Iraq.
So from a few hundred it went up to 1500 and last week Barack announced that figure would now double to 3,000. Bill Van Auken (WSWS) reports:
The Pentagon has dispatched at least 50 US troops, including “advisers” and “force protection” forces, to Iraq’s embattled western province of Anbar, 80 percent of which is reportedly under the control of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
The elements that arrived Tuesday are the advance team for a much larger deployment, which will include the bulk of the 1,500 additional troops whose dispatch to Iraq the Pentagon announced last week, effectively doubling the American forces on the ground in the country.
Anbar, which is predominantly Sunni, was the scene of the bloodiest fighting during the more than eight-year US war and occupation, which ended in 2011. It had risen in revolt against the Shia sectarian government of former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki last year, paving the way for the rapid advance of ISIS and routing of the corrupt and crumbling US-trained Iraqi army.
The US military’s advance team has been sent to the sprawling desert Al-Asad air base, which was a principal hub for US military operations during the 2003-2011 occupation before it was turned over to Iraqi security forces.
AFP notes, "The deployment raises the risk of potential American causalities if the Baghdadi militia group overruns an Iraqi air base there or if it manages to down an American helicopter with a shoulder-launched surface-to-air missile, though US officers insist those are remote scenarios." Jeff Schogol (Military Times) adds, "About 50 U.S. troops have deployed to Al-Asad Air Base conducting a site survey to see if U.S. advisers can use the installation to support the Iraqi military, said Navy Cmdr. Elissa Smith, a Defense Department spokeswoman."
Al-Asad Air Base . . . Why does that strike a chord right now?
Oh, yeah, Iraq's Speaker of Parliament is Saleem al-Jobouri was just there as he was visiting Anbar Province to examine conditions there. All Iraq News reports his bodyguards stopped an "assassination attempt in Ain al-Assad Military Base" today.
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"'Improved' Iraq: Civilians killed in air strikes,..."
"Kishore tells the truth yet again"
"Arrow (not a great episode)"
"Feet to the fire?"
"revenge - the good"
"I have been played"
"The news Janis Ian couldn't (and can't) face:"
"Parry refuses to let go of the crazy"
"THIS JUST IN! PARRY'S GONE NUTS!"
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
A DESPONDENT ROBERT PARRY, HAIR UNKEMPT, CLOTHES STAINED -- IN OTHER WORDS, USUAL APPEARANCE, IS RECEIVING VISITORS AT THE SIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL NOW THAT HE IS NO LONGER UNDER PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION.
THE FORMER JOURNALIST GRABBED HEADLINES LAST MONTH WITH HIS CLAIM TO BE PREGNANT WITH THE CHILD OF FADED CELEBRITY BARRY O.
THOUGH MANY WHO HAD DISCOVERED THEY HAD AN IMPACTED COLON WOULD BE SHEEPISH, PARRY'S DOUBLING DOWN INSISTING THAT HE WAS PREGNANT AND THAT THE SECRET SERVICE REMOVED THE BABY "AND ARE SERVING BITS AND PIECES IN ONE OF MICHELLE'S PUBLIC SCHOOL LUNCHES!"
THE ORDERLIES CAME IN TO STRAP PARRY DOWN AS HE CONTINUED SCREAMING.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
US President Barack Obama appears to have only one answer: Bomb and bomb again.
Alsumaria reports a bomb southeast of Baghdad left two people injured, a central Baghdad roadside bombing left four people injured, a northern Baghdad bombing left 3 people dead and ten more injured, an attack involving 3 Baiji suicide bombers left 7 civilians dead, and a Tarmiya suicide bomber took his own life and the lives of 2 Iraqi soldiers with seventeen more left injured. National Iraqi News Agency reports a Kirkuk roadside bombing killed 1 person and left seven more injured, a roadside bombing near Buhriz left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and two more injured, and 1 corpse was found dumped in eastern Baghdad.
In addition, despite Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi's September 13th promise to end the military's bombing of residential neighborhoods in Falluja, the bombings continue. NINA notes one family (woman, man, child) were killed in the latest bombings and seventeen more people were injured. Again, this is the Iraqi military doing the bombing -- not the Islamic State.
Falluja is in Anbar Province, it is a Sunni dominant city. Sunnis feel targeted in Iraq -- by their own government. Loveday Morris (Washington Post) notes how this issue is impacing current realities:
In a flurry of meetings in recent weeks, tribal leaders have demanded that Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi address problems of missing weapons and lack of support as they hold out against extremists in the face of mass detentions and executions. Hundreds of tribesmen have been summarily executed in the western province of Anbar over the past month, with hundreds more rounded up north of Baghdad.
The slayings have underscored the predicament of Sunni tribes that have resisted Islamic State extremists, often with little help from the central government. The killings threaten to undermine the government strategy of mobilizing the Sunni tribes against the Islamic State in the tribes’ areas — a key pillar in efforts to crush the militants.
“We demand that the government does something,” said Sheik Naim al-Gaoud, a tribal leader with the Albu Nimr. “We feel that we have been abandoned and neglected.”
Sunnis feeling targeted is not paranoia. They are targeted. Even the Associate Press grasps that as they point out today, "The vengeance that Iraq’s Shiite militias mete out as they fight the Islamic State group can be just as brutal as that of their sworn sectarian enemies."
For those who need visuals and/or specifics, follow these Tweets.
Video terrifying Bashar soldiers shooting at child trying to save his sister https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=cceu478rN_c#t=0 …0 replies 35 retweets 22 favorites
The refugee crisis and the violence just keeps going and increasing.
Barack's so-called plan hasn't stopped the violence at all.
Today, US Senator John McCain compared Barack's so-called 'plan to "another war we lost, myf riend, and that was the Vietnam War." Meanwhile, Phil Mattingly (Bloomberg News) reviewed "The Phases of Obama's Iraq War" and concluded:
Many of the questions that were raised back in June still sit unanswered: How long will the operations take? How will U.S. troops on the ground to advise and assist stay out of combat operations? Will the Iraq security forces ever be able to carry their own weight? Obama administration officials acknowledge that the strategy is still far from a sure thing, especially the Syria component.
For Obama, it's an evolving strategy, one that has brought the U.S. into deeper engagement each step of the way.
For Obama, it's an evolving strategy, one that has brought the U.S. into deeper engagement each step of the way.
And while Barack clearly has no answers, neither does Iraq's Prime Minister. Reuters notes, "Iraq's Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi said on Tuesday he intends to remove concrete barriers from Baghdad, despite little sign of a respite from car bombs they were designed to thwart, and give a greater role to the Interior Ministry in securing the capital." Well, if he actually does it, that will put him ahead of Nouri al-Maliki who, shortly after becoming prime minister (in his first term), announced the walls were coming down (2006) but it would be years before even a few did.
On those walls, I'm surprised the US Congress (among others) aren't suggesting any walls taken down be moved to Camp Hurriya to help protect the Ashraf community.
There is no 'plan.'
But there is plenty of room for failure -- daily and long term. Press TV (link is text and video) reports US professor Stephen Zunes has stated, "Due to the bad reputation US forces had in Iraq during the occupation, US forces may end up creating a backlash that could inadvertently strengthen ISIS. [. . .] It was US policies which helped lead to the rise of ISIS originally so it raises serious questions as to whether a return of US forces will actually make things better."
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Senator Patty Murray: We have all made a promise t..."
"New Veterans Lead In Veterans Day Events Across Th..."
"House Veterans Affairs Committee Chair Jeff Miller..."
"Senator Bernie Sanders' Veterans Day remarks"
"Veterans Day Message from Paralyzed Veterans of Am..."
"Veterans Day Deals Begin at 1100 Hours (On The Bor..."
"Is the State Dept violating social media guideline..."
"i hate the flu"
"The Newsroom yawn"
"Fox entertainment does something right"
"Ralph Nader has another epic fail"
"The Mindy Project and Rhea"
"Gravy in the Kitchen"
"A few more thoughts on Janis Ian's meltdown"
"Parry did not give birth"
"THIS JUST IN! YET AGAIN, PARRY WAS FULL OF S**T!"
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
A VERY DEPRESSED ROBERT PARRY CONTINUES TO BE A PATIENT AT THE SIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL.
BUT WHILE THE ONE TIME JOURNALIST WHO CLAIMED TO BE THE MISTRESS OF FADED CELEBRITY BARRY O WENT TO THE HOSPITAL SUNDAY TO GIVE BIRTH TO WHAT HE SAID WAS THE CHILD OF THE PRESIDENT, THINGS HAVE GONE DIFFERENTLY THAN EXPECTED.
"IMPACTED COLON" IS WHAT HOSPITAL SOURCES TELL THESE REPORTERS.
PARRY WAS NEVER WHAT ANYONE WOULD CALL SKINNY, OR SLIM, OR EVEN STOCKY. HE WAS ALWAYS A BIG GUY.
AND HIS GIRTH HAD INCREASED OVER THE LAST MONTHS -- BUT DUE TO AN IMPACTED COLON, NOT PREGNANCY.
PARRY IS SAID TO BE DEPRESSED, ON BED REST AND DEMANDING TO EITHER SEE BARRY O OR ELSE BE SERVED "SEVERAL" ICE CREAM CAKES "TO NURSE THE PAIN."
WHAT IS KNOWN IS THAT PARRY IS NOT PREGNANT.
NOR WAS EVER PREGNANT.
PARRY WAS JUST FULL OF S**T -- APPARENTLY MORE SO THAN USUAL.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
If you're the Christian Science Monitor, you can't do actual reporting so you have to find 'click bait.' You can read the latest garbage from the paper by clicking here and going to Yahoo (thereby not giving CSM a click for their 'click bait').
A busy body by the name of Richard Brunt wonders -- from Canada -- what were Americans thinking last Tuesday?
I believe I've said this already but tend to your own gardens.
I really don't give a s**t what some Canadian thinks of American elections.
I don't make a point to stick my nose into their elections.
But for someone that thinks something awful took place, exactly how long is Canada going to keep conservative Stephen Harper on as prime minister?
And are you ever going to get off your lazy asses and demand that asylum be granted to War Resisters?
And what about fracking? Isn't that your leading export of late: Socially damaging policies?
Speaking of, how far along have you gotten with regards to addressing the very real complaints of indigenous peoples in Canada?
You just want to talk about how "groovy" you think Barack Obama looks in sun glasses?
Well just because you're letting the precum pool in your pants doesn't mean you need to share your erotic fantasies with the rest of us.
Brunt's so busy jizzing while moaning Barack, he actually writes, "Obama brought soldiers home from Iraq."
For example, he brought these two home last month -- in body bags.
That's Lance Cpl. Sean P. Neal (photo from Facebook). We noted his death in October 25th snapshot.
That's Cpl Jordan Spears (photo from Marine Corps). Last month, he was reclassified as the first death in 'Operation Inherent Resolve.'
Apparently, Brunt's been too busy jacking off to light bondage fantasies of Barack disciplining him to pay attention to actual events in the real world -- including the fact that 'Operation Inherent Resolve' has already claimed the lives of 2 American service members.
While Brunt sees accomplishments worth bragging of, the Chicago Tribune's Steve Chapman seems less inclined to shine it on, "The United States is still involved in a 13-year-old war in Afghanistan, and President Barack Obama has undertaken a new one against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, just three years after he withdrew the last of our troops from Iraq. The administration is also carrying on a drone missile campaign -- which looks eerily like war from the receiving end -- in Pakistan and Yemen."
Brunt also seem to forget that his own government is taking part in the bombing of Iraq.
Maybe if he spent a little less time trying to trash the American people for how they voted (or not voted -- most Americans eligible to vote elected not to vote in last Tuesday's elections), he'd be able to effect some change in his own government?
Or at least not appear so pathetic and envious that he obsesses over his neighbors instead of living his own life.
Or ignorant of what's going on in Iraq, how the Iraqi people continue to suffer and how Barack keeps sending in more US troops.
What Brunt avoids, Jon Stewart took on in tonight's The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (Comedy Central). Excerpt:
US President Barack Obama September 18th: I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil
Jon Stewart: Yes! If American troops are going to be fighting, they're going to be fighting on our soil! Against . . . Wait a minute. It's comforting to hear our president say on national television there will be no combat troops in Iraq.
News Anchor, November 7th: Today, President Obama authorized the deployment of 1,500 more US troops to Iraq to help with the fight against ISIS.
Scott Pelley, November 7th: With this expansion, the number authorized has grown from 275 in June to 3100 tonight.
Jon Stewart: What the f[bleep]! You said no troops in Iraq! And in five months we've increased the number of US troops in Iraq by ten times. At this rate, by 2016, everyone in the world will be in Iraq fighting ISIS! We're going to have to recruit people from ISIS to fight ISIS. And those troops are boots on the ground! You said no boots on the ground! The ground would get no boots!
Barack, September 18th: The American forces that have been deployed to Iraq do not and will not have a combat mission in Iraq. Their mission is to advise and assist our partners on the ground.
Jon Stewart: Oh, I'm sorry, that's my mistake. I'm sorry. So it's not 3,000 troops, it's 3,000 advisors. Okay. Well, you know, that's a lot of advice.
Even Democracy Now! addressed Barack's decision to deploy more US troops to Iraq (link is text, audio and video):
AMY GOODMAN: Well, for more, we go to Raleigh, North Carolina, where we’re joined by Matthew Hoh, senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, former State Department official who resigned in protest from his post in Afghanistan over the U.S. policy there in September 2009. Prior to his assignment in Afghanistan, Matthew Hoh served in Iraq. From 2004 to ’05, he worked with a State Department reconstruction and governance team in Salah ad-Din province. And from 2006 to ’07, he worked as a Marine Corps company commander in Anbar province.
Matthew Hoh, welcome back to Democracy Now! Can you share your response to the increased boots on the ground?
MATTHEW HOH: Hi, good morning, and thank you for having me on. My response is, as many people, I think, in the United States, scratching their head and wondering: What are we doing? What does the United States government really think it’s going to accomplish by putting more American troops into the middle of the Iraqi civil war and into the middle of the Syrian civil war, particularly coming off of 13 years of war in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya, in Somalia, in Yemen, etc.? So, my response, Amy, is more or less the same as most people’s, of a—very concerned and, you know, lack of a better phrase, this is crazy.
AMY GOODMAN: Speaking to CBS’s Face the Nation, President Obama insisted U.S. troops will focus on training Iraqis to fight ISIS and coordinating airstrikes, rather than engaging in active combat.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: What hasn’t changed is, our troops are not engaged in combat. Essentially what we’re doing is we’re taking four training centers, with coalition members, that allow us to bring in Iraqi recruits, some of the Sunni tribes that are still resisting ISIL, giving them proper training, proper equipment, helping them with strategy, helping them with logistics. We will provide them close air support once they are prepared to start going on the offense against ISIL. But what we will not be doing is having our troops do the fighting.
AMY GOODMAN: President Obama refused to rule out further increases in U.S. troops in Iraq.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: As commander-in-chief, I’m never going to say never, but what, you know, the commanders who presented the plan to me say is that we may actually see fewer troops over time, because now we’re seeing coalition members starting to partner with us on the training and assist effort.
AMY GOODMAN: That is President Obama on CBS’s Face the Nation. Matthew Hoh, do you believe what he’s saying?
MATTHEW HOH: No, I don’t. And I think it’s very easy for us to revisit this in a few months’ time, just as now we’re revisiting this from several months ago, and see the increase, the graduation of entry of American forces back into the conflict. But I think it’s a slippery slope—excuse me—and that very quickly this will spin out of control for the United States. What happens when American troops are killed? What happens when we lose several young men to a suicide bomber? How is the president going to react to that? How is the United States going to react when our troops are in combat and we only have 3,000? And the president, who can’t seem to face down the same critics in Congress who are always demanding for war, the John McCains and Lindsey Graham, how is he going to face them down then, if he can’t face them down now? So, I don’t believe his words, and I think that this is going to be the beginning of an unfortunate and tragic re-entry of America back into this civil war.
Reuters reports, "The United States has deployed a team of about 50 troops to an air base in Iraq's fiercely contested Anbar province to lay the groundwork for an advisory mission at the core of its campaign against Islamic State militants, officials said on Monday." All Iraq News quotes Sha'aban al-Obaidi, Commander of the Emergency Police, declaring, "The US trainers arrived at Assad Military Base in Anbar and met with the security leaders."
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Post-9/11 Veterans React to VA’s Reorganization Pl..."
"Veterans Affairs Secretary McDonald Updates Employ..."
"Fear of the Vagina masking as anti-war"
"Memorial for audacious GI union leader (Deirdre Gr..."
"Gloria Steinem: Tired Bunny"
- Truest statement of the week
- Truest statement of the week II
- Truest statement of the week III
- A note to our readers
- Editorial: Further into Iraq
- TV: The Littlest League on Basic Cable
- The Comedic Stylings of Valerie Jarrett
- Film Classics of the 20th Century
- From The TESR Test Kitchen
- This edition's playlist
- On Wendy Davis . . .
- FACT SHEET: The Administration’s Strategy to Count...
- Memorial for audacious GI union leader (Deirdre Gr...
- The Sensory War: Powerful exhibition showing there...
Sunday, November 09, 2014
IN A LATE NIGHT SURPRISE, ONE-TIME JOURNALIST AND ALLEGED PRESIDENTIAL MISTRESS ROBERT PARRY HAS BEEN RUSHED TO THE SIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL.
WITH THE AMBULANCE SIREN WAILING IN THE BACKGROUND, PARRY TOLD THESE REPORTERS -- MUST CREDIT BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE -- THAT HE WAS "A LITTLE NERVOUS BUT HAPPY OVER ALL. I'VE TOLD THEM TO LET BARRY KNOW I'M EN ROUTE TO DELIVER OUR BABY. I WAS THINKING OF NAMES, SOMETHING CLASSY LIKE CORETTA -- AFTER CORETTA SCOTT KING. BUT NOW I'VE DECIDED TO GO WITH ARMAND DE BRIGNAC OBAMA -- YOU KNOW, IN HONOR OF JAY Z AND THE BOOZE LABEL HE JUST BOUGHT."
FOLLOWING PARRY'S CELL PHONE CALL, THESE REPORTERS RUSHED TO THE HOSPITAL IN AN ATTEMPT TO SEE HIM BUT HOSPITAL STAFF INSISTED, UNDER DOCTOR'S ORDERS, HE WASN'T BEING ALLOWED ANY VISITORS.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
He waited until after the mid-term election to announce it, but US President Barack Obama is sending more US troops into Iraq. CBS News notes, "White House officials said the timing wasn't driven by the political calendar but that the request came from the Iraqi government and was refined over the last several weeks."
Yesterday, the White House issued the following:
The White HouseOffice of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
November 07, 2014
Statement by the Press Secretary on the Deployment of Additional U.S. Military Personnel to Iraq
One of the pillars of the United States’ counter-ISIL strategy is building the capacity of local forces to take the fight to ISIL. We have been providing this support for Iraqi Security Forces through advise and assist programs; through the provision of weapons, equipment, and intelligence; and through airstrikes with our coalition partners to enable our Iraqi partners’ success. As a part of our strategy for strengthening partners on the ground, President Obama today authorized the deployment of up to 1500 additional U.S. military personnel in a non-combat role to train, advise, and assist Iraqi Security Forces, including Kurdish forces. The President also authorized U.S. personnel to conduct these integral missions at Iraqi military facilities located outside Baghdad and Erbil. U.S. troops will not be in combat, but they will be better positioned to support Iraqi Security Forces as they take the fight to ISIL.
The President took these decisions at the request of the Iraqi Government and upon the recommendation of Secretary Hagel and his military commanders based upon the assessed needs of the Iraqi Security Forces. This mission will be undertaken in coordination with multiple coalition partners and will be funded through the request for an Iraq Train and Equip fund that the Administration will submit to Congress.
In recent weeks ISIL has suffered a series of defeats in Iraq against the Iraqi Security Forces and Peshmerga, with the support of U.S. and coalition air strikes and Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, as well as U.S. military advice. The United States and its coalition partners will continue to confront the threat of ISIL with strength and resolve as we seek to degrade and ultimately defeat ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counterterrorism campaign. The President values the dedication and valor of the American servicemen and women whom he asks to carry out this mission on behalf of the American people.
Again, Barack waited until after the mid-term election on Tuesday to announce his decision.
Possibly, he was fearful of a backlash in the United States?
If so, he was mistaken, sadly.
Peace groups or 'peace' groups have bent over backwards for the baby boy they whored for in 2008.
They've refused to call him out as he's carried out more wars than Bully Boy Bush, carried on the worst policies of Bully Boy Bush and proven to be one of the worst presidents of all time.
To their credit, for a change CodePink had neither their head in the sand or a case of laryngitis and actually noted their opposition to the move:
PR:0 replies 8 retweets 1 favorite
@CODEPINK Condemns President’s Decision to Send 1,500 More Troops To Iraq: Calls for an End to Funding War: http://codepink.org/article.php?id=6950#sthash.UJb3gOq9.dpuf …
Equally true, though, they're part of a campaign to call Hillary a "bitch." (Little Denny Trainor Junior's campaign -- which won't make him man, but nothing else has either.)
To call her a "bitch" or the c-word or worse.
They think it's 'cute' and 'antiwar.'
And maybe it would be if just one damn time they called Barack a bastard (which, linguistically speaking, he is).
But they can't and they won't call Barack mean names. They can barely bring themselves to object to his war making.
And that is definition of sexism.
If their approach to protesting war was calling people curse words, then that would be their approach.
And we could examine it or amplify it or critique it or condemn or whatever.
But that's not their approach with men.
It's only how they treat women.
And when you have a double standard, that's the definition of sexism.
Since 2008, they've protested Hillary, heckled her, called her mean names and attacked everything about her.
During this time? Barack Obama has spent six years as US President.
And they've never called out the precious little baby boy.
They've applauded and cheered and said, "Look, Barack made stinky in the toilet all by himself like a big boy!"
They've applauded and cheered his every baby step towards further destruction and death.
When they look back on the last years, they'll see they've vilified a one-time US Secretary of State while letting the most powerful person in the world, a sitting US president, get away with, yes, murder (see The Drone War for the first of many examples).
Beyond issues of ethics and fairness, their past actions matter because Barack hasn't started another wave of the ongoing Iraq War in a vacuum.
He's done it because the so-called 'left' in the United States hasn't had the backbone, ethics, what have you to call him out.
If only he were a Republican (or a woman), he could be vilified by what passes for a peace movement in the United States.
Instead, so-called 'leftists' still rush to lie that Barack has 'ended' the Iraq War.
Lolita C. Baldor (AP) reports the proposal Barack's making comes with a $5.6 billion price tag and Congress is expected to begin considering it next week. Missy Ryan (Washington Post) observes, "The new training mission in Iraq echoes a much larger effort that the United States initiated after its invasion of Iraq in 2003. That years-long endeavor, which rebuilt Iraqi forces largely from scratch, cost the United States more than $20 billion." And yet Barack's rushing to spend more billions at a time when he has repeatedly attacked the safety net programs in the US (see, for example, Andre Damon's "Obama budget slashes Social Security, Medicare" at WSWS last year).
Spencer Ackerman and Tom McCarthy (Guardian) report, "Barack Obama has authorized the doubling of US troop levels in Iraq for the war against Islamic State (Isis) militants, further straining his pledge against 'boots on the ground'." And the press, with the exception of Ackerman and McCarthy, agree to pretend there are no boots on the ground and that US pilots dropping bombs in Iraq are not flying combat missions.
BBC News reports (link is video) on a reaction to the news today:
Russell Trott: Despite the lack of security on the streets of the Iraqi capital, some see the announcement of the deployment of 1,500 non-combat US troops as a fresh occupation of their land
Hamd Al Mutlaq (Iraqi Sunni law-maker): The US has sent thousands of soldiers and invaded Iraq and failed to impose security and stability in the country. What gives us security and stability is the unity of the Iraqi people. What is needed from the US is for it to help bring the Iraqi people together.
Russell Trott: More bomb blasts in Karbani a border town under siege for more than 40 days now despite the bombardment by US led aistrikes on Islamic State positions, they still control large areas of Iraq and Syria. In Kobani, they're up against [. . .] and in Iraqi Kurdistan where their own battle with the Islamic State continues, the announcement of more US troops is welcomed but not unconditionally.
Ari Harsin (Defence Comm Head, Kurdish Regional Govt): I hope that they can effectively take part in the battle and, especially, because we need the ground troops.
Russell Trott: That is something Washington has so far resisted. Three months after US forces first launched airstrike, the Pentagon believes Iraqi forces are better prepared to take on Islamic State militants on the ground thanks in part to the training they have received.
Barack is selling this as a response to a request from the Iraqi government (made weeks ago, did he only now get the message?). So it's interesting to read All Iraq News: "The Iraqi Government assured on Saturday 'the decision of sending more international troops into Iraq is welcomed despite the fact that it is too late step'."
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"FACT SHEET: The Administration’s Strategy to Count..."
"IHOP will be serving veterans on Veterans Day"
"Legionnaires prepare to honor Veterans Day"
"Sizzler Honors Veterans on Veterans Day"
"Veterans Day, the military eats free at Hooters"
"'You served your country, let us serve you' (On Th..."
"Ford Supports Honor Flight (DAV)"
"Veterans Week 2014: Vets Rising (IAVA)"
"Military Appreciation Monday "thank you" dinner at..."
"Great Clips Honors Veterans with Free Haircuts"
"On Veterans Day, IAVA Joins Starbucks, HBO and JPM..."
"Chairman Miller Statement Honoring the Life of For..."
"Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani voices concern"
" Idiot (and Liar) of the Week"
"Nihilist Neocon Christopher Nolan"
"Tater Tot Casserole in the Kitchen"
"So Barack's sending more US troops into Iraq?"
"David Corn and other useless pieces of crap"
"CounterPunch can't stop writing about men"
"Broadway World can't cover music accurately (Mamas and the Papas)"
"That fast acting western media"
"Look who got exposed"
"How To Get Away With Murder (Connor)"
"scandal - strong episode"
"How To Get Away With Murder"
"Wahlberg gears up for new film"
"The rich could stop Ebola in a day"
"Parry almost gives birth"
"THIS JUST IN! PARRY SQUEEZES OUT SOMETHING!"