Enter your email address to subscribe to Irregular Times and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 485 other subscribers

Irregular Times Newsletters

Click here to subscribe to any or all of our six topical e-mail newsletters:
  1. Social Movement Actions,
  2. Credulity and Faith,
  3. Election News,
  4. This Week in Congress,
  5. Tech Dispatch and
  6. our latest Political Stickers and Such

Contact Us

We can be contacted via retorts@irregulartimes.com

Obama Takes The USA Back To War In Iraq

back in iraqPresident Obama announced last night that the United States of America will be taking part in the civil war in Iraq on the side of Shiite combatants. American involvement in the Iraqi civil war will begin with bombings of Sunni combatants.

The American military has been in Iraq since 1990 – that’s 24 years. In all that time, America’s war machinery hasn’t brought Iraq peace, stability, or an ethical democratic government.

Where will American fighting in Iraq turn next?

From Code Pink: “The people of Iraq need peace, reconciliation, development and a truly representative government, free of US and other foreign interests.”

From Iraq Veterans Against The War: “Those of us who were there know first hand that US military solutions in Iraq do not serve the interests of the Iraqi people. We advocate for the self-determination of all people, in this case the people of Iraq. Any solution to this crisis must come from them.”

From Peace Action: “This gut-wrenching situation in Iraq does not justify the U.S. escalation of the civil war, entailing certain if unknown disastrous unintended consequences, as we’ve seen before in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and elsewhere.”

11 comments to Obama Takes The USA Back To War In Iraq

  • Charles Manning

    If U.S. “exceptionalism” has any legitimate meaning, it means we have an international responsibility to at least attempt, through our vast resources (mostly held by the 1%), to prevent genocide, encourage people everywhere to resolve their differences peacefully, and protect their fundamental rights. The U.S. war in Iraq furthered none of those principles, but neither did it negate them. If Obama, acting legally, in concert with the rest of our government and other nations, can save the stranded refugees, I say do it, but without slaughtering other people in the process. That means we have to approach this endeavor by announcing that no military action will be taken against anyone who honors the commitment to protect and save those non-combatants who otherwise face imminent death. If our country acted in this way, some progress could be made in restoring the terrible loss of moral and legal standing that we’ve suffered in the past 40 or so years. Right now, I don’t trust Obama and the rest of the U.S. government to carry this mission out in that way.

  • Dave

    Don’t trust Obama? It’s gotten to the point where I think nobody trusts anything he says, nor even listens to him for that matter.

    As for the “country” of Iraq, here in the U.S. and elsewhere in the West, there is the incorrect notion that all the so-called ‘nations’ of the Middle East are sovereign nations. There is only one nation in the Muslim mind, the Islamic Nation. The borders in the Middle East are arbitrarily set by Western nations through the U.N., and some are the remnants of Ottomans and such, and this error in our understanding of the tensions in the region keeps our State Department clueless. There will always be war in the region as long as Islam remains divided, which will be forever.

    Western nations have no interest in the region outside of keeping oil flowing to non oil producing countries. One might think U.S. policy toward Iraq should be to let them sink into the fourth century and bring military solutions only if their squabbles disrupt international commerce, but in actuality that is what we have historically done. Think Sadam Hussein. That ruthless tyrant killed many of his own people (and kept them through his ruthlessness from killing one another), but when he threatened the world’s oil supply he quickly became history.

    • Jim Cook

      Dave, have you polled all Muslim people to figure out what “the Muslim mind” thinks, or did you get that idea from a specific, particular source? If so, please name the source.

      • Dave

        Read about Qutb. Educated in the U.S., he is largely responsible for the political resurrection of the Imams (holy men) of Islam throughout the Middle East after the breakup of the Ottoman empire. He was disgusted by what he thought was the moral laxity in American and Western society and believed that modernization in the Middle East would bring the same “decadence” that he witnessed here. He was executed by Egypt’s Nassar in the 1960’s but his movement was already under way. The mayhem in that region is today the result of the vision of Islam as a nation stretching from North Africa to India and beyond. Hence the overthrow of Nassar, Mubarak, the Shah, etc and the attempt to overthrow Assad. Iran is the template for what is to follow throughout the region. The Muslim Brotherhood (Qutb’s brainchild) in Egypt attempted to duplicate what happened in Iran. ISIS in Iraq shares the same vision.

        I would caution anyone who hears that wars out there in the world are the result of U.S. foreign policy to check their American-centric thinking and to understand that other peoples of the world do things for reasons that are entirely their own. Not everything is about us and J. is making that point pretty clearly with this post.

        • Jim Cook

          Well, OK, Dave, but that’s one strain in a vast field of Islam, not “the Muslim mind.” I know some other Muslim minds whose owners would say something very different.

          • Dave

            Why is the “vast field” of Islam not demonstrating for moderation among their brethren? Organisations such as CAIR only speak moderately when political balance is necessary so as not appear zealous.

            The more or less Westernised citizens of Egypt are renouncing the warlords but they will not win in the end. Look at Iran. Educated, sophisticated, Westernized, it fell under the movement to bring the Ayatollah from exile in Paris. As I said, success there has given Muslims in the Middle East hope of establishing Islam throughout the region. They believe this is their time.

            There are exceptions of course, that is the Muslim minds you say you know, but I think they will be irrelevant as this thing plays out.

            • J Clifford

              Probably, Dave, the same reason that the vast field of Christianity didn’t demonstrate for moderation when their church was torturing people to determine whether they were witches. Probably the same reason that the vast field of Christianity doesn’t protest against the corrupt scheme to funnel public money into churches through the White House Office Of Faith Based Initiatives, and doesn’t protest when their churches are turned into campaign organizations in election years. It’s probably the same reason that the vast field of Christianity is now going wholeheartedly in favor of American re-entry into civil war in Iraq, because it’s to save a Christian population.

              Is the “vast field” of Christianity protesting the abuses against children conducted by members of the Quiverful homeschooling movement? No. Why, Dave? Why?

              The “vast field” of any group is damned selfish. Any group. Don’t think for a second that it’s only Muslims, Dave. Somewhere in your tradition, isn’t there a saying about taking a beam out of your own eye before you… oh, never mind. Go ahead and punch the other cheek, Dave.

              • Dave

                Oh, that witch thing. My apologies. Should have never let that happen.

                I think, J., that if you re-read my comments you will will be hard pressed to find any cheek smiting. Over the years I have read a good bit on topic and thought I’d share some history of the region. My comments were offered in the spirit of “this is why things in the Middle East are so tangeled and why I think we have no solutions for it” and not in a spirit of stone throwing. I will stand by what I have said about Islamic intransigence, (and your are correct, intransigence can be found anywhere) but I don’t see it as a “punch in the cheek.” Keep calm and carry on.

  • J Clifford

    “We’re not going to let them create some caliphate,” Obama said yesterday.

    So now the USA is in the business of dictating political arrangements for other countries in the Middle East? How far is Obama willing to go to prevent that caliphate he refers to from being created?

  • Tom

    “Look lock we’ come full circle, dun it?”

    i’m sure Cheney will pooh-pooh it as being “too soft on ‘em” – imagine his sneering face muttering something about “whatsa sensa havin’ nukes if y’ain’t gonna use ‘em?” on a Sunday yak show.

    U.S. foreign policy is run by psychopaths now. We’re the hated bullies of the world, involved in the Ukraine, backing Israel’s massacre of civilians, and now Iraq 2.0.
    [i’m sure you’ve seen the articles mentioning that Russian bombers have been invading U.S. airspace for the last 10 days. Gee, I wonder why?]

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/08/back-iraq-jack.html

    President Obama may want us to sympathize with patriotic torturers, he may turn on whistleblowers like a flesh-eating zombie, he may have lost all ability to think an authentic thought, but I will say this for him: He knows how to mark the 50th anniversary of the Gulf of Tonkin fraud like a champion.

    It’s back in Iraq, Jack! Yackety yack! Obama says the United States has fired missiles and dropped food in Iraq — enough food to feed 8,000, enough missiles to kill an unknown number (presumably 7,500 or fewer keeps this a “humanitarian” effort). The White House told reporters on a phone call following the President’s Thursday night speech that it is expediting weapons to Iraq, producing Hellfire missiles and ammunition around the clock, and shipping those off to a nation where Obama swears there is no military solution and only reconciliation can help. Hellfire missiles are famous for helping people reconcile.

    Obama went straight into laying out his excuses for this latest war, before speaking against war and in favor of everything he invests no energy in. First, the illegitimate government of Iraq asked him to do it. Second, ISIS is to blame for the hell that the United States created in Iraq. Third, there are still lots of places in the world that Obama has not yet bombed. Oh, and this is not really a war but just protection of U.S. personnel, combined with a rescue mission for victims of a possible massacre on a scale we all need to try to understand.

    [concludes]

    Obama promises no combat troops will be sent back to Iraq. No doubt. Instead it’ll be planes, drones, helicopters, and “non-combat” troops. “America is coming to help” finally just sounded as evil as Reagan meant it to, but it was in Obama’s voice. The ironies exploded like Iraqi houses on Thursday. While the United States locks Honduran refugee children in cages, it proposes to bomb Iraq for refugees. While Gaza starves and Detroit lacks water, Obama bombs Iraq to stop people from starving. While the U.S. ships weapons to Israel to commit genocide, and to Syria for allies of ISIS, it is rushing more weapons into Iraq to supposedly prevent genocide on a mountaintop — also to add to the weapons supplies already looted by ISIS.

    Of course, it’s also for “U.S. interests,” but if that means U.S. people, why not pull them out? If it means something else, why not admit as much in the light of day and let the argument die of shame?

    Let me add a word to the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs spokesman David Swanson, who is not me and whom I do not know: Please do keep pushing for actual humanitarian aid. But if you spoke against the missiles that are coming with the food, the reporters left that bit out. You have to fit it into the same sentence with the food and water if you want it quoted. I hope there is an internal U.N. lobby for adoption by the U.N. of the U.N. Charter, and if there is I wish it all the luck in the world.

  • Peregrin Wood

    Dave, where is the “vast field” of Christianity, now that Alabama Christians are calling for the murder or exile of atheists there? http://irregulartimes.com/2014/08/12/alabama-christians-call-for-stoning-lynching-and-shooting-of-atheists/

    What does Christian silence about this say about the “Christian mind”, Dave?

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>