Cranky Clinton responds to Jim Webb

BULLY BOY PRESS &   CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE

WITH FORMER U.S. SENATOR AND ONE TIME DEMOCRATIC PARTY PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION SEEKER JIM WEBB CRITICIZING HER HANDLING OF LIBYA, CRANKY CLINTON STRUCK BACK IN COMMENTS TODAY TO THESE REPORTERS.


BULLY BOY PRESS &   CEDRIC'S BIG MIX EXCLUSIVE, MUST CREDIT BULLY BOY PRESS &   CEDRIC'S BIG MIX .


"AS SOMEONE WHO ONCE TRIED TO ENLIST IN THE MARINES," CRANKY CLINTON TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "OR THE ARMY -- MAYBE IT WAS THE ARMY -- IT WAS THE SEVENTIES -- WHO REMEMBERS AFTER ALL THESE YEARS?  BUT AS SOMEONE WHO WAS ALMOST  A VETERAN, I TAKE UMBRAGE AT PEOPLE LIKE JIM WEBB WHO HAVE NEVER SERVED DARING TO CRITIQUE MY FOREIGN POLICY STANDS."

REMINDED THAT, IN FACT, JIM WEBB HAD SERVED IN VIETNAM, CRANKY CLINTON ROLLED HER EYES.

"LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING," CRANKY SNARLED, EYES BLAZING, "IT'S PEOPLE LIKE JIM WEBB THAT LOST THAT WAR.  IF I HAD SERVED IN VIETNAM, THAT COUNTRY WOULD BE A BARREN DESERT BY NOW AND THE WHOLE WORLD WOULD TREMBLE AT THE THOUGHT OF FURHER CLINTON!"


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



Thursday, the Arab Leauge weighed in on a matter that's caused controversy throughout this month: Turkish troops in Iraq.  TODAY'S ZAYMAN brings everyone up to speed:



Earlier in December Turkey sent a contingent of additional forces to bolster its military presence in the Bashiqa camp near Mosul to train local forces in the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). The move prompted a backlash in Iraq, sparking a diplomatic spat between Ankara and Baghdad. Last week, the Iraqi government brought the issue to the UN Security Council to demand the unconditional and full withdrawal of Turkish troops.
At first, Ankara said it deployed forces in coordination with the central government in Baghdad. The Iraqi authorities said they had never invited such a force and it happened without its approval and knowledge. To defuse tension, Ankara partially withdrew its forces from the camp and re-stationed them further north in the Kurdish region.
Unsatisfied with that, Baghdad pressed for the withdrawal of all Turkish troops, a demand yet to be met.


And yesterday?  SPUTNIK reports, "Turkey must withdraw immediately all its troops from Iraq without any preconditions, a statement unanimously adopted by members of the Arab League said Thursday."  AFP notes:

The Turkish deployment "is an assault on Iraqi sovereignty and a threat to Arab national security," they said in an Arab League statement after meeting at the pan-Arab bloc's Cairo headquarters.
Arab League deputy chief Ahmed Ben Heli read out the statement at a press conference, in which he added that the Turkish troops "increased tumult in the region."


Iraq's Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari reports SPUTNIK, told the Arab League, "We are not threatening for now. But if our security and integrity is continued to be threatened, I will use all legal means to respond to the attack. Every option is on the table."





The issue had been raised most recently at the US State Dept's Monday briefing moderated by spokesperson John Kirby.



QUESTION: Iraq, John? On the situation in Bashiqa. Last Friday --

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: Last Friday, the President Obama made a phone call with Turkish President Erdogan on this issue again. And according to the readout, the U.S. side urged the Turkish side to withdraw all its forces from Iraq. Do you have any update on this? Is – the withdrawal is achieved over the weekend, according to your --

MR KIRBY: If what was achieved?

QUESTION: The withdrawal of the Turkish forces is achieved?

MR KIRBY: I don’t have an update on Turkish military movements. I think you should – I would refer you to the Turkish Government for specifics on that. What we have said is we’re encouraged by the dialogue between the two countries, and we’ve seen the reports of Turkey’s intent to withdraw. We welcome that, because the third point I’d say – we’ve always made this clear – is that whatever military activity is going on inside Iraq needs to be done with the approval of the sovereign Iraqi Government. And so our view is we want this worked out bilaterally between the two countries. We’re encouraged by the dialogue that they’ve had and the progress they seem to have made. But I can’t give you a up-to-date tick-tock on exactly where Turkish troops are right now. I don’t know.

QUESTION: Yeah, but the Iraqis brought this issue to UN Security Council also. It’s not anymore a bilateral issue. So as a chairman of the council – I mean this month, U.S. – what is the U.S. position on this issue? Is there any timeframe for the withdrawal, for example, or I mean – because the Iraqis are – I mean, it’s said that – Foreign Minister Jafari – they will carry on the process until the full withdrawal is achieved.

MR KIRBY: I understand. And they have every right to pursue their sovereign ends the way they believe they need to pursue them. Our view is that we would prefer to see this worked out bilaterally. It appears that that is what is happening, and we want to see that continue.

QUESTION: No. If there will be no withdrawal until a specific time, there will be a condemnation from the council, for example? Any specific --

MR KIRBY: I’m not going to speculate about an action the council hasn’t taken yet. And I don’t speak for the UN. I know we’re the president, but I speak for the State Department and for Secretary Kerry. Our view is we want this resolved bilaterally. They continue to have discussions and talk through this, and we think that’s the right approach. But as exactly where Turkish troops are right now, you’d have to talk to the Turkish Government.

QUESTION: Yeah. Last one on this. One of the arguments that the Turks raised on this issue: If the Turks will withdraw from the region, ISIL is – will be replacing the Turkish forces in the region. Is it a reasonable argument, do you think? I mean, can ISIS, for example, fulfill the gap in the region after the withdrawal?

MR KIRBY: As I understand it – and again, I’m not going to speak to Turkish military activities. But as I understand it, it’s a training presence that they have there. And I don’t know of any – of any training mission that ISIL’s taken on with respect to forces in northern Iraq, so I don’t see how you can compare the two. But again, you’d have to talk to Turkey about what they’re doing with their troops and on what timeframe.

We continue to want to see the sovereign integrity of Iraq respected and for military activity inside Iraq to be done with the full approval of the Abadi government, as ours is. And we want these two countries to work this out between themselves. Again, they appear to be doing that and we’re encouraged by that. Okay?



John Kirby lies on behalf of the State Dept -- there's no polite way to put it.

When Turkey began bombing northern Iraq (again) this year, Iraq's government objected and the US State Dept -- and Kirby himself -- gave Turkey a pass.  They did more than that.  Kirby went on record stating Turkey had a right to bomb northern Iraq in order to 'protect' and 'defend' itself.

That was Turkey's "right," according to Kirby and the US State Dept but Iraq does not appear to have the right to insist Turkish troops leave Iraq -- not in the eyes of the State Dept.


This should not be a 'both sides' issue.

Does a nation-state have the right to demand foreign troops leave its territory or not?

If it does have that right -- and the history of law and treaties says it does -- then the only answer is for the US government to support the legal right of Iraq's government to demand that Turkish troops leave Iraq.

This is not a gray area.

This is established law that's been in place for centuries.



RECOMMENDED: "Republicans and Democrats, Debate This! How To Sto..."
"Reporting, Rebelling, and Truth-Telling"
"Don't You Dare Give This Book As A Holiday Gift"
"Moving Forward"
"If I Were President (David DeGraw)"
"Iraq snapshot"
"Ibrahim and Haider feel failed by the world (parti..."
"Where things stand"
"The front groups"
"dempsey tosses it back at rhimes"
"Christmas"
"Sometimes you need to step back"
"Where are my TV shows?"
"TV Land's big mistake"
"Music, Franco, TV cult movie"
"Burt Reynolds"
"Hillary's lies documented"
"THIS JUST IN! CRANKY'S JUST LIKE YOUR DRUNK UNCLE!"
"3 Ways Hillary Is Like Your Drunk Uncle"

3 Ways Hillary Is Like Your Drunk Uncle

BULLY BOY PRESS &   CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE

SHE'S NO ONE'S ABUELA BUT SHE'S EVERYONE'S DRUNK UNCLE.

CRANKY CLINTON HAS DEMONSTRATED SHE WILL SAY ANYTHING -- JUST LIKE YOUR BOOZED UP UNCLE THIS HOLIDAY WEEKEND.

SECOND, SHE'S AN EMBARRASSING PIG WHO NEVER REALIZES IT THOUGH EVERYONE AROUND HER DOES.

THIRD, SHE SMELLS A LOT LIKE HER OWN SICK.


FROM THE TCI WIRE:




What I'm trying to say is
It's time 
To get in the way
It's crazy 
That this thing is still going on
I can't believe
This thing's still going on 
And it goes
Na na na na na na 
I hate the war
Na na na na na na 
I hate the war
Na na na na na na
I hate the war
-- "I Hate The War" (written by Greg Goldberg, on The Ballet's Mattachine!)


This morning on CNN, reciter Barbara Starr made an ass out of herself with a recitation of factoids about Iraq which included 500 Islamic State fighters were thought to be holed up in Ramadi and that Haider al-Abadi, prime minister of Iraq, had amassed 10,000 troops to take them on as the Iraqi forces finally may be about to enter Ramadi (the last five months have been non-stop failure for them in this mission).  [In a report on CNN in the afternoon, she dropped the number of Islamic State fighters in Ramadi to 350.]  She failed to note how ridiculous the odds yet again were -- 20 Iraqi forces for ever Islamic State member and though she was eager to note that there was resistance in Iraq to US forces, she failed to pin down where that resistance comes from.

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has signaled to the US government that he himself is willing to have US forces on the ground in combat.  He's also said this would be a hard sell.

Why?

Kurds?

Are the Kurds wanting the US out of Iraq?

Nope.

Okay, then the Sunnis?

Nope.

The Sunnis have been wanting more US involvement for years now.

The why of that goes to the hard sell.

Sunnis have argued more US involvement could end the persecution of the Sunnis.

Persecution by whom?

Hard line, radical Shi'ites.

Such as the one who leads the Bard terrorists -- popularly referred to as the Badr militia or Badr brigade.

(And let's all pretend we've never heard of the Badr brigade's death squads.)

I don't want US troops on the ground in Iraq.

And reasons for that desire include that this is Iraq's battle and the US government needs to stay out of it (and stop propping up the figure head government that they have imposed).

But Shi'ites like Bard terrorist leader Hadi al-Amiri don't want US forces on the ground for a different reason.

Their actions in 'liberated' areas have been destructive -- to put it mildly.

They have carried out attacks on Sunni civilians in the name of 'revenge' (the Islamic State is a Sunni organization).  They have burned Sunni homes, they have looted.

And they have killed for sport.

As Kirk H. Sowell noted in August at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace:

Badr—founded in the 1980s in Iran, its continued supporter—is not only the most important of the various armed groups composing the Popular Mobilization Forces (Hashd). It also symbolizes how Iraqis’ hopes for a democratic country governed by the rule of law have given way to a political system that is expressly sectarian and increasingly resembles a garrison state. No other militia-political party was better prepared to capitalize on the collapse of Iraqi security forces in northern Iraq last June. Badr’s military commander, Ameri—who tried and failed to get an appointment as minister of defense or interior, in part due to U.S. opposition—has been transportation minister since Maliki’s second cabinet and is now a parliamentarian. Under the new government of Haider al-Abadi, Ameri was able to get a member of his party, Mohammed Salem al-Ghabban, confirmed as interior minister. Prior to leaving office, Maliki had made Ameri the military governor of Diyala—an informal appointment usually described euphemistically as al-masuul al-amani (the security official)—which he remains to this day.
Ameri, now on leave from parliament, has captured far more renown in his militia commander role than he ever did as a cabinet minister. In October 2014, Ameri was often described as the “leader” of the militia-led offensive to subdue Jurf al-Sakhr, a mostly Sunni area south of Baghdad, and consolidate Shia control around the capital. By February 2015 Badr had secured Diyala, whose narrow Sunni Arab majority is nestled between Baghdad and Iran. Badr and other militias sustained criticism that they were engaging in retribution attacks and attempting to cleanse the Sunni population from these areas. But the ministry of human rights—also held by a Badrist, Mohammed Mahdi al-Bayati—sent a senior official to speak at Badr’s February 16 celebration of their victory in Diyala and defend the conduct of the Badr-led Hashd.
Ameri’s military preeminence continued in March with the launch of the operation to liberate Tikrit and northern Salahuddin. Iran, through Badr, initially played more of a role in the offensive than Iraqi leaders did, and photos of the infamous Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani sometimes appeared alongside Ameri himself, dominating media coverage. Yet the militia-led offensive was forced to step back from Tikrit to let the U.S.-led international coalition conduct airstrikes against dug-in jihadis, allowing the formal security services—army and federal police—to lead the liberation of the city. Although Prime Minister Abadi initially held back the militias in Anbar out of fear of sectarian conflict, he gave way after the security forces defending the provincial capital of Ramadi collapsed on May 17. Ameri promptly took the lead as “field commander” of the new Anbar offensive, only to decide in early June—apparently entirely on his own—to shift focus to Fallujah, which lies between Ramadi and Baghdad. 

The videos of abuse are all over the internet.

Briefly, they were of momentary interest -- remember that?

No?

From the March 23rd snapshot:

ABC News aired an important report March 11th and a second one March 12th. March 12's report is transcribed below:



David Muir: Now to new fall out after our ABC investigation last night. It involves the fight against ISIS known for those awful videos, lining up their victims on the beach.  And now a new concern.  Are some of the Iraqi forces -- trained and paid for by US taxpayers -- using techniques that are just as brutal?  Well the State Dept tonight responding to our report and ABC's chief investigative reporter Brian Ross back on the job tonight.

Brian Ross:  The State Dept called these scenes today serious and disturbing.  Brutal images of what appear to be Iraqi forces and militias carrying out, celebrating, torture and beheadings.  In this torture scene, two US weapons against the wall. This video shows two civilians, pleading for their lives, about to be shot dead.  A man with an American supplied weapon walks by, a gunman with what appears to be the insignia of Iraqi Special Forces caught on tape.

US State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki: Their behavior must be above reproach or they risk being painted with the same brush as ISIL fighters.


Brian Ross:  The Pentagon says it has already cut off money to some Iraqi units because of gross human rights violations.  But Senator Patrick Leahy says the ABC News report shows the government should cut off money to more Iraqi units.

Senator Patrick Leahy: When you look at at the videos and look at the uniforms being worn, do we really want to say the US condones that?

Brian Ross: US officials tonight tell ABC News that America's top military leader Gen Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, has repeatedly warned Iraqi leaders about the conduct of the Iraqi military and the militias that fight with them -- especially because the US is sending $1.5 billion to the Iraqi army and almost 3,000 American troops to help train them.

             

So where was the call for the White House to stop supporting War Crimes?

Where was the call for the White House to stop looking the other way?

Thirteen days ago, ABC News first reported that.

ABC News was reporting on them much to the displeasure of the White House -- and then the story was disappeared.

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Reciting Iraq -- don't mistake it for reporting"
"The historic unmentioned"
"Hejira"
"Isakson Highlights 2015 Accomplishments for Vetera..."
"A Scientific Means for Islamic Military Alliance t..."
"Joe Biden, you threw us to the she-wolf!"
"So dishonest"
"Jodie Foster films"
"I don't mind funny"
"That awful Hillary Clinton"
"Sick of TV"
"Sam Seder -- remember the coward?"
"the joke that is bob somerby"
"At least I can own reality"
"Cranky Clinton is a nightmare"
"THIS JUST IN! HE HAS HIS FANTASIES!"
"At least one huge lie a decade from Brock"

At least one huge lie a decade from Brock

BULLY BOY PRESS &  CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE

SERIAL LIAR DAVID BROCK WAS MOST OUTRAGEOUS IN THE 90S BY SMEARING ANITA HILL AS A LIAR.

IN THE '00S, HE LIED ABOUT MICHELLE OBAMA AS HE SPREAD RUMORS OF A NON-EXISTENT VIDEO OF HER TALKING ABOUT GETTING "WHITEY."

IN THE '10S?

HE PROJECTS HIS PERSONAL RAPE FANTASIES OF BARACK OBAMA OFF ON DONALD TRUMP.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, LIAR BROCK TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "I NEED TO GET F**KED.  REALLY, REALLY BAD.  BUT THIS MARTHA WASHINGTON HAIR DO TENDS TO TURN THE FELLOWS OFF."

FROM THE TCI WIRE:


Tonight at St. Anselm College in New Hampshire, the three candidates vying for the Democratic Part's 2016 presidential nomination -- Bernie Sanders, Martin O'Malley and Hillary Clinton -- took the stage for a debate broadcast by ABC NEWS and moderated by Martha Raddatz and David Muir.   Isaiah live cartooned the debate.  He offered "What Bernie Wants for America"




He also offered "Who's Debate Is It Anyway?"



And he offered "Hillary's Debate Strategy."






Fact checking took place after the debate.  The biggest liar?

Apparently Hillary Clinton.  CNN offers:

Reality Check: Clinton on ISIS using Trump videos

By Kristen Holmes, CNN White House producer

Speaking about Donald Trump's proposed ban on Muslims entering the United States, Hillary Clinton said Saturday that ISIS was using video of the businessman to recruit fighters.

"They are going to people showing videos of Donald Trump insulting Islam and Muslims in order to recruit more radical jihadists," Clinton said of the GOP frontrunner during the third Democratic debate hosted by ABC.

It is difficult to speak to all of ISIS's communication, some of which happen in the open on social media sites but others hidden in what's known as the "dark web."

While there have been some tweets and comments posted on ISIS-supported social media referencing Trump's rhetoric, according to information sent recently by SITE Intelligence Groups, there is no evidence that ISIS itself has released videos featuring Trump.

Neither ISIS' main media outlets, nor any ISIS affiliates, have used footage capitalizing on Trump's anti-Muslim language, according to Laith Alkhouri, the co-founder and director of Flashpoint, a group that monitors jihadist activity online. However, Alkhouri noted in comments to CNN on Saturday that Trump's comments do play directly into the recruitment playbook and he has no doubt eventually it could be referenced in official ISIS communications.

Alkhouri said the comments have also been mentioned in top tier ISIS web forums in the dark web. Not too heavily discussed, but they were definitely part of the "news feed, if you will," Alkhouri said.

The Clinton campaign directed CNN to an NBC News story published on December 8, in which the executive director of the SITE Intelligence Group says of ISIS: "They love him from the sense that he is supporting their rhetoric."

"They follow everything Donald Trump says," Rita Katz told NBC. "When he says, 'No Muslims should be allowed in America,' they tell people, 'We told you America hates Muslims and here is proof.' "

Ultimately, however, there is no evidence of ISIS using videos of Donald Trump for recruitment.

Verdict: False

Angie Drobnic Holan (POLITIFACT) also covered the claim:



"We also need to make sure that the really discriminatory messages that Trump is sending around the world don't fall on receptive ears," Clinton said. "He is becoming ISIS's best recruiter. They are going to people showing Donald Trump insulting Islam and Muslims in order to recruit more radical jihadists."
Not having heard that before, our eyebrows went up when we heard Clinton’s comment, and we weren’t alone. The Twittersphere, on both the right and the left, picked up on Clinton’s statement and questioned whether she had any evidence for it.
Extensive Google searches did not turn up any evidence. And the response from the Clinton campaign did not point to any specific videos.
The campaign pointed to an NBC News article that quoted Rita Katz of the SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors the social media activities of Islamic terrorist groups.
"They love him from the sense that he is supporting their rhetoric," she said. "They follow everything Donald Trump says. When he says, 'No Muslims should be allowed in America,' they tell people, 'We told you America hates Muslims and here is proof.' "
The article also quoted David Phillips, director of the Program on Peace-Building and Rights at Columbia University's Institute for the Study of Human Rights, saying that "Trump's incendiary anti-Muslim comments will surely be used by ISIS social media to demonize the United States and attract recruits to fight in Iraq and Syria."
But while such quotes support the notion that ISIS could be making recruiting videos, or will do so, they do not support Clinton’s contention -- offered in the present tense -- that they are currently doing so.
Vox.com tweeted at J.M. Berger, author of the book ISIS: The State of Terror, and Berger tweeted back, "I would be surprised if they had and we didn't hear about it in a big way."

For now, it seems that Clinton has turned speculative left-of-center rhetoric into fact. At PolitiFact, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. We’ll update our fact-check in the event solid evidence emerges. But for now, that evidence does not exist. The Clinton campaign did not provide any evidence that this is already happening -- only that it could be happening, or that it may in the future. If ISIS was using Trump for recruitment videos, we would expect a frenzy of media coverage over it. We rated this statement False.  


Glenn Kessler and Michelle Ye Hee Lee (WASHINGTON POST) also note the claim:

As evidence, the Clinton campaign pointed to an NBC News report quoting Rita Katz, executive director of the SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors social media activities of Islamic terrorist groups, that Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric was a great recruiting tool for ISIS.
“They love him from the sense that he is supporting their rhetoric,” Katz told NBC. “They love him from the sense that he is supporting their rhetoric.” She added: “They follow everything Donald Trump says. When he says, ‘No Muslims should be allowed in America,’ they tell people, ‘We told you America hates Muslims and here is proof.’”

But Katz did not specifically refer to a video, only to social media. We couldn’t immediately find evidence such a video yet existed.




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Statement from Pentagon Press Secretary Peter Cook..."
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "What Bernie Wa..."
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Who's Debate ..."
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Hillary's Deba..."
"It's On!! Sanders Vs DNC (David DeGraw)"
"The ghosts of Christmas TV past, present and futur..."
"The MC5 and The Grande Ballroom on DPTV!"
"Those amazing precision bombs!!!"
"UN Security Council to hold emergency meeting on I..."
"I like Norman Pollack but . . ."
"Hagel's talking"
"Redwashing and Naomi Klein"
"Barack is so out of it"
"She's disgusting"
"Penny Pig Pritzker"

• Truest statement of the week
• Truest statement of the week II
• A note to our readers
• Editorial: Oh now he favors protests
• TV: The Hillary Clinton Rules
• Live Cartooning the New Hampshire Democratic Debat...
• Idiot of the Week
• Truth in the New Hampshire Debate
• Tweets of the week on the theft of last week
• Quiz: Who talked about diplomacy in the New Hampsh...
• This edition's playlist
• Isakson Highlights 2015 Accomplishments for Vetera...
• Remarks by the President on the Military Campaign ...
• Highlights

"THIS JUST IN! DAVID MUIR EXPLAINS!"
"He found her scary"
"Let's tell the truth Martin"

He found her scary

BULLY BOY PRESS &  CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE

ONE DAY AFTER ABC NEWSY AND ENTERTAINMENT'S DAVID MUIR LET CRANKY CLINTON WALK ALL OVER HIM IN THE NEW HAMPSHIRE DEBATE, MUIR REVEALED WHAT ACTUALLY WENT DOWN TO THESE REPORTERS.

"SHE'S JUST SO SCARY!" HE EXCLAIMED.  "SOMETIMES, THAT WATTLE UNDER HER NECK WAGS SO FIRMLY YOU THINK IT'S GOING TO BREAK OFF AND HIT YOU IN THE FACE.  OTHER TIMES, YOU JUST THINK SHE'S GOING TO TALK YOU TO DEATH.  IT WAS VERY SCARY. I HAVEN'T WET MY BRIEFS SO MUCH SINCE I SAT THROUGH R.L. STINE'S GOOSEBUMPS."

FROM THE TCI WIRE:


In Baghdad, on Wednesday, Carter took questions from the press.



Q: (inaudible) -- clarification -- (inaudible). When you announced the -- (inaudible) -- last week to the Congress, you put it in the context of the Ramadi fight. Are you saying now that the use of American Apaches to support the Iraqi forces and their (inaudible) advisers -- (inaudible) -- level is -- are steps that are unlikely to happen during the battle of Ramadi and will be perhaps taken up for a future engagement?

SEC. CARTER: They certainly might be taken up for a future engagement. And I am telling you that it's not either General MacFarland's judgment or the prime minister's judgment that they're needed right now for the completion of the fight in Ramadi. That does not mean that they wouldn't -- they won't make a difference sometime in the future.

And so, the offer of the United States when circumstances suggest it, and subject to -- always to Iraqi approval, our willingness to do more, including the use of Apache helicopters. So that's the situation.

(CROSSTALK)

Q: Mr. Secretary, there is some reluctance among some Iraqis to have a larger U.S. or coalition footprint on the ground here in Iraq. Did you discuss that with either the minister or the prime minister? And what is their assessment of how much more they could accept?

SEC. CARTER: We didn't discuss specifically, no, numbers. We did discuss the opportunity for the United States to do more. Now, you know, the ways that we uniquely contribute and can uniquely contribute to Iraqi battlefield success is by training Iraqi units, providing air support to Iraqi units, and possibly operating with Iraqi units to advise and do other things like that; not to replace them.

So I don't think in any case that the numbers were a part of the conversation -- numbers, per se. But I just want to be clear, numbers aside, we were talking about the opportunities that will arise in the future to increase the American contribution to Iraqi success here, and both he and I anticipate that those circumstances will arise as Iraqi troops move north to Mosul, and we're prepared to increase our contribution.



The US government has Lt Gen Sean MacFarland doing daily meetings in Iraq and they had Secretary of Defense Ash Carter visiting this week.

The White House still, however, struggles to seriously work on the political aspect.

Wednesday, December 16th in Baghdad, Carter did remark, "By the way, while I'm rattling on, I should say it's actually a whole-of-government too, because there's a political side to this, right, all these societies. And really importantly for us, there's a law enforcement, homeland security, intelligence, you know, my colleagues around the U.S. government matter in this, as well as everyone. That's a whole government approach."


That's the only time he noted the political aspect.

In fairness to Carter, he's the Secretary of Defense, not the Secretary of State.

But it does underscore the lack of importance the White House has placed on diplomacy.


Yes, June 19, 2015, US President Barack Obama insisted in public that only a political solution could solve Iraq's various crises.

But it was just empty lip service as evidenced by the refusal to emphasize diplomacy.


Repeatedly, Barack has acted as though the answer -- the one and only answer -- was military.


In keeping with that one-note approach, the US Defense Dept announced today:




Strikes in Iraq
Attack, bomber, fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 11 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of Iraq’s government:
-- Near Fallujah, one strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL sniper position, an ISIL tunnel, two ISIL heavy machine guns and an ISIL rocket-propelled grenade and wounded an ISIL fighter.
-- Near Hit, one strike destroyed an ISIL homemade explosives cache.
-- Near Kirkuk, one strike destroyed an ISIL excavator.
-- Near Mosul, two strikes struck multiple large ISIL tactical units and three suicide bombers and destroyed 12 ISIL machine guns, 13 ISIL fighting positions, six ISIL vehicles and an ISIL vehicle bomb.
-- Near Ramadi, four strikes struck three separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL machine gun, three ISIL fighting positions, five ISIL buildings, three ISIL staging areas and an ISIL vehicle bomb.
-- Near Sinjar, two strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed three ISIL fighting positions and an ISIL machine gun.

Task force officials define a strike as one or more kinetic events that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative, effect. Therefore, officials explained, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIL vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against buildings, vehicles and weapon systems in a compound, for example, having the cumulative effect of making those targets harder or impossible for ISIL to use. Accordingly, officials said, they do not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target.



RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Stepping away from Iraq for one entry"
"Mosul's dam crumbling, Ash Carter in Iraq"
"Not a fan of a dogpile"
"Tarantino needs to grow the hell up"
"Cranky Clinton can't run from her lies"
"That sexist Rock & Roll Hall of Shame"
"Sexist Jann Wenner overlooks Janet Jackson again"
"Stop buying Rolling Stone and Men's Health"
"Appalling"
"john feffer, shut the f**k up"
"Finally"
"Well look who got paid off for services rendered"
"THIS JUST IN! NOW THAT'S JUST DISGUSTING!"
"Cranky Clinton between the sheets"