Do you agree with obama's decision of approving the Military actions and targeted airstrikes on Iraqi Militants?

Posted by: discomfiting

  • Yes!

  • No!

67% 12 votes
33% 6 votes
  • We don't need to send troops yet, but we can't do nothing.

  • Sure, why not. We've already screwed the pooch there, why not keep thrusting with vigor?

  • This could prevent ww3, ISIS has plans to invade Israel, not easy of course but with enough support can be a million times bloodier than what happened with Gaza.

  • We shouldn't invade with American troops, but an air strike would help us out a bit.

  • I think it is a good idea because many Christians and inconnent people are being killed.

  • Is there any oil left there? If so then why not!

  • It is killing people. Killing people is bad. American government is not going to try to make peace, just like it never did before; It will only make sure the war gets even worse, because it is the most profitable.

  • ahahahahha it's like starting a fire and then taking the credit for putting it out. They are the one's who's actions led to the creation of ISIS. They obliterated the little society Iraq used to have and now their blaming the symptoms for the disease. This is just another excuse for them to take control of their oilfields as well as to pressure Iran to do whatever they want.....again

  • we have been there for 15 years killing more than a million. we have lost 5000 American troops I knew its just air strikes ,but it could lead back to troops being sent in once again. So I say just back out and let them deal with THERE PRODLEMS.

  • Why don't we just let the region do whatever it wants? The US has clearly shown that they cannot establish a functioning government in that country. Stop wasting money and leave the place alone. Remember. You Americans took up arms against your own oppressive overlord once. Give these men a chance. I am not saying I support the ISIS, but seriously, maybe they can finally bring peace to the country. I mean, so many other uprisings have been supported by the US in the recent and far off past.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Preston says2014-08-08T10:22:22.0272610-05:00
Eh
discomfiting says2014-08-08T10:25:53.7502892-05:00
I'm sorry but "eh" is not an option on this poll-- it is either 'yes' or 'no'.
Logical.Assasinator says2014-08-08T11:39:32.4589937-05:00
If he gets congressional approval, then YES! Otherwise it may be a violation of the War Powers Act.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T13:57:08.5879907-05:00
Iggy's comment under "no" is factually inaccurate. The oil companies already have control over the vast majority of the oil wealth in Iraq. Bombing ISIS barracks and weapons depots isn't really going to make a difference in the hegemonic control of the region. It will, however, help damage ISIS in Iraq, which has for over a decade been the place where terrorism goes to thrive and then die. This is preferable to the terrorist groups moving further west in vast numbers. Make a killing field of Iraq, and the fools will continue to pour resources into the area, rather than making concentrated pushes into less deadly (more American civilian friendly) areas, such as central Turkey and south eastern Europe. It would be much more difficult to wipe out an insurgency in Hungary, if ISIS decided to make a logical tactical choice. The lucky thing is these terror groups seldom have a hierarchy set in stone, and leadership is fluid. They don't get marching orders like a standard army, so they have less coordination. ISIS will die out, we just have to make sure they don't kill so many civilians before they do. But in order to do that properly, we need to cooperation of the middle-eastern governments. We already have Iran in the bag, they hate ISIS with all the fire and fury of a Jihad. We need the Saudis and the Pakistanis to do their part. And we need Israel to calm the fudge down and stop committing genocide.
dmussi12 says2014-08-08T13:57:18.0270285-05:00
The two 'no' votes obviously think we are in their for our own benefit. To get oil and money. Do you actually know how much mid-east oil comes to the US? It's something like 11%. Europe gets 10%, and Asia gets 71%. Why does most of that oil go to Asia (mainly China) when they have no troops there helping stabilize the region? The US is doing a big favor to the rest of the world by keeping the Middle East as stable as we can, especially while we could easily get way more out of it than we currently do.
iggy1993 says2014-08-08T14:14:15.4591558-05:00
@The_immortal_Emris your argument doesn't make much sense either, the fact is that ISIS is using US weapons, which they most likely bought from the US(or some co-op segment of it's government) and saying that if they were smart they'd move operations doesn't make sense. The fact is that they don't have a choice, the only region where they can successfully recruit their army is in this extremely anti-western region. Also this is the only place where they can get at least some local support. And while the oil fields are being controlled by western companies at this moment I believe that it's more than obvious that the agenda that suits the US is to ensure a lack of stability in the entire region- this is mainly to ensure that Iran will not attempt to change it's petrodollar status again, think about it. Why else would they be actively pushing for conflict in the entire region? First suddenly the Syrian government is a dictatorship, then coincidentally Hamas "attacks" poor little Israel, this right after mass civil unrest in Egypt (where they've more than obviously placed their man on top) Then out of what it seems like nowhere a terrorist group brutal like no other appears and does exactly what they need it to do to get what they want. It all only makes sense if you factor in outside influences. Not to mention that there is evidence that they have had a hand in getting almost all of these sides weapons. Not to mention that this all happens right about the time when Russia (the main force stopping their attack on the middle-east) is involved in a second wannabe cold war. While at the same time for the first time since the 80s giving countries an actual alternative to the dollar and the IMF (the new BRIC projects) Throughout history there has been an obvious pattern that when one entity is far superior to all others in waging war, it doesn't not use that superiority to further it's goals. If they keep the region caught up in war, they won't be able to make the next logical step of ditching the dollar and the US all together for a more economically beneficial alternative.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T14:16:15.4076522-05:00
The_immortal_Emris your argument doesn't make much sense either, the fact is that ISIS is using US weapons, which they most likely bought from the US(or some co-op segment of it's government) 1.They stole them from the Iraqis. 2. You have nothing to support this claim, as it is wrong.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T14:17:39.1249107-05:00
"and saying that if they were smart they'd move operations doesn't make sense. " Which is why I didn't say that. I said if they were tactically clever, they would attack locations which have a favorable opinion of the US, which would prevent the US from attacking them with drones and bombs, due to collateral damage. I would think, with the goings on in Palestine right now, you would be able to see the reality of my statement.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T14:18:56.6960522-05:00
ISIS has tremendous recruitment support across the middle east. They did not originate in Iraq, and Iran has been battling them for some time. They recruit across the the middle east, and they could easily bring those combatants to central and eastern Europe.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T14:20:29.6985909-05:00
". And while the oil fields are being controlled by western companies at this moment I believe that it's more than obvious that the agenda that suits the US is to ensure a lack of stability in the entire region- this is mainly to ensure that Iran will not attempt to change it's petrodollar status again," The Iran patrodollar concern is viable, but the region needs no help from the US to remain unstable. ISIS is actually creating instability, which is much of the reason why the US is involved in stomping them out. We do not wish to have instability in our client state of Iraq.
iggy1993 says2014-08-08T14:25:20.5960829-05:00
That is if we assume that their real goal is actually to attack the us, I'm claiming that they are just another pet project of the CIA. And as far as the "stealing of weapons" argument goes: http://rt.Com/op-edge/168064-isis-terrorism-usa-cia-war/ ISIS just seems like another in a long line of false flag ops to ensure that they have all the justifications they need to do what they want. It's the only logical way to explain their actions, and I don't think an organization of that magnitude would have been able to do what they are doing if they were as disorganized as you think they are.
iggy1993 says2014-08-08T14:29:11.8262543-05:00
Saying that they are incopetent means also saying that the US is, I mean they have admitted to spying on the whole world, launching a campaign to strip their own citizens of the very rights that their country was founded on, WITHOUT them knowing it. And then I have to believe that they can't catch an unorganized, paramilitary organization like ISIS? Doesn't that seem a bit far-fetched to you? I recommend you read the book "the Phoenix Project" it clears things up a bit.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T14:29:52.0582053-05:00
In fact, a stable, powerful Iraq was one of the main objectives of the war. A powerful Iraq keeps Iran in check.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T14:37:50.9718150-05:00
"Why else would they be actively pushing for conflict in the entire region? First suddenly the Syrian government is a dictatorship, then coincidentally Hamas "attacks" poor little Israel, this right after mass civil unrest in Egypt (where they've more than obviously placed their man on top) Then out of what it seems like nowhere a terrorist group brutal like no other appears and does exactly what they need it to do to get what they want." This statement has so much that is incorrect, it is saddening to me. There are several misconceptions which are downright untrue and I will now attempt to point them out. 1. Iran is not actively pushing conflict in their own region, quite the opposite. They are even trying to help Iraq quell the militant uprising, which is doing wonders for the relationship between the two nations, surprisingly. Http://www.Thenewamerican.Com/world-news/asia/item/18852-irans-revolutionary-guards-fighting-isis-in-iraq 2. Hamas and Israel have been at eachothers' throats for years, Bebe was just waiting for an excuse to attack them, and they were waiting for Egypt and Syria to be too weak, or too indecisive to retaliate. 3. The US has not placed anyone at the top in Egypt. The Obama administration was not pleased when they elected Morsi, and they were even more displeased to see him ousted, however they have enough clout with the Egyptian military to keep the peace while an actual democratic election is held. This is how democracy comes to be. It's a struggle. 4. ISIS did not come out of nowhere, they have been in operation for some time, but they were one of many organizations. As each organization loses men and momentum, the recruits move or re-brand to another terror group. Many of those ISIS members are former Al Qaeda. The group, in its original form, was composed of and supported by a variety of Sunni insurgent groups, including its predecessor organizations, the Mujahideen Shura Council, the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) and Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), the insurgent groups Jaysh al-Fatiheen, Jund al-Sahaba, Katbiyan Ansar Al-Tawhid wal Sunnah and Jeish al-Taiifa al-Mansoura, and a number of Iraqi tribes that profess Sunni Islam. ISIS grew significantly as an organization owing to its participation in the Syrian Civil War and the strength of its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. They got their start 14 years ago, however, so they are not new.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T14:48:02.0043654-05:00
"That is if we assume that their real goal is actually to attack the us, I'm claiming that they are just another pet project of the CIA." That goes against all of the facts, really. And seeing as they have almost created a defacto state out of the regions they occupy, I'd say it was a tremendous mistake if the CIA had any involvement. There just isn't any reason why the CIA would have been involved with them. They literally stand against everything the CIA and the nation have been fighting against. These aren't the 1960s Taliban, these are well trained and armed militant rebels from the entire region. They come from far too many backgrounds and cultural locales to be influenced directly by the IC.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T14:49:10.7148168-05:00
http://rt.Com/op-edge/168064-isis-terrorism-usa-cia-war/ ISIS This is the official state news from Russia. It honestly cannot be trusted. You would be better served reading Al Jazeera, as they are neither state run, nor culturally indebted to the middle east. Http://www.Aljazeera.Com/indepth/opinion/2014/08/islamic-state-iraq-minorities-20148114244751872.Html
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T14:52:41.7984168-05:00
Russian state news has a direct desire to see US interest hurt across the globe, I would suggest not reading any rt. News if you want actual coverage. Or at least take it with a huge grain of salt. "ISIS just seems like another in a long line of false flag ops" Such as? We have not engaged in that many false flags in the last decade. Aside from some domestic endeavors. " to ensure that they have all the justifications they need to do what they want." But what "they" want, they had, until ISIS arose out of Syria and Kurdistan. "It's the only logical way to explain their actions, and I don't think an organization of that magnitude would have been able to do what they are doing if they were as disorganized as you think they are." They are a mighty organization in number and in passion, but they do not have sophisticated leadership structure, nor do they have an official war plan, aside from occupation and death. Their existence is not a positive thing for American regional interests. It would be counter productive for our CIA to prop up another enemy in the region we pacified for oil.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T14:56:23.3173121-05:00
"Saying that they are incopetent means also saying that the US is, I mean they have admitted to spying on the whole world, launching a campaign to strip their own citizens of the very rights that their country was founded on, WITHOUT them knowing it. " I never claimed ISIS was incompetent. I claimed they were disorganized. There is a stark difference. The US is arguably incompetent where foreign policy is concerned. The Bush administration certainly was. I assume by "they" you mean the US admitted to spying, yes, after Snoweden exposed it. They did strip our rights away, but the legislators knew it. The jingoism of the Bush administration post 9/11 pressured them into voting it through anyway. We could demand a repeal of the Patriot act, as we did when Obama was campaigning, but the President likes his power, and always will, no matter who is in office. Regardless, this has nothing to do with the nature and origin of ISIS.
iggy1993 says2014-08-08T14:56:50.7575362-05:00
This conversation seems to have gone off in the direction of I say black, you say white..........There is no point in arguing when everything I say, you take as just false............It's naive to think that the US doesn't have anything to do with this when their interest are at stake. They seem to be more than ready to start a world war against Russia over Ukraine but let what you call a revolutionary organization with the sole intent of destroying them flourish under their noses? That's magical thinking.... And I can give you many more US based sources if you want, I'd never take one side as truth.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T14:58:33.0521007-05:00
"And then I have to believe that they can't catch an unorganized, paramilitary organization like ISIS?" A lack of organization does not denote weakness. The Russian army during WWII was uncoordinated and unorganized, but it was mighty indeed. You act as if this is a small region we're discussing. You act as if we have boots on the ground to prevent the spread of the ISIS recruitment drives. We cannot police the world, we cannot catch every militant in every hovel in every town. Especially when we have pulled our boys out. To claim we have this ability is not accurate.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T15:00:21.4497856-05:00
"It's naive to think that the US doesn't have anything to do with this when their interest are at stake. " It is silly to think the US intelligence community is actively undermining the US interests in the region, which is what you are suggesting.
iggy1993 says2014-08-08T15:04:29.6281578-05:00
We disagree on what their means to their goals are. This is because we trust completely different sources, so whatever you say I'll just think of as naive, and I'm guessing that you think the same about me............No matter how much we argue against each other, there will not be a definite victor. Although it's nice to for once have an argument about what form of control the US is using, rather than weather it is at all.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T15:04:47.8337079-05:00
"They seem to be more than ready to start a world war against Russia over Ukraine but let what you call a revolutionary organization with the sole intent of destroying them flourish under their noses?" This is apocalyptic fear rhetoric. Economic sanctions are not the path to WWIII, quite the opposite. They are how the modern world handles issues which would have previous to nuclear arms, lead to full-scale conflict. Now we wage war with dollars. Where did I ever claim ISIS's sole intent was to destroy America? Their intent is to form a Caliphate. They enjoy hurting US interests too. They don't realize though, that they are fighting an impossible battle, because they will lose when the regional powers become annoyed with the bleed over damage. Iran is already sick of them. The Syrian's hate them. Southern Iraq hates them. The Saudis need only suffer economically to get involved. Egypt hates them, but can't do much without a functional government, and with Israel stomping Palestine. Meanwhile, no one seems to be fighting for the Arabic peoples, except for the terror cells, which is discocnerting on an entirely different level.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T15:05:27.7750527-05:00
"We disagree on what their means to their goals are. This is because we trust completely different sources, so whatever you say I'll just think of as naive, and I'm guessing that you think the same about me" Not at all, I think you've been misinformed by propaganda.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T15:07:31.8864627-05:00
I have been a student of US foreign policy since I first read Noam Chomsky's The Fateful Triangle. I would recommend it to ANYONE who wishes to better understand the current conflict between Israel and Palestine. Chomsky has a way of cutting through the BS like no one I have ever read before, save for Benjamin Franklin.
iggy1993 says2014-08-08T15:09:05.9411451-05:00
And I think you have been, as I've said, it's a matter of what sources you trust and how you interpret the info. And their now pushing for a NATO intervention in Ukraine, the Russians have already stated that they will respond to that with nukes.......
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T15:12:56.8251114-05:00
"And their now pushing for a NATO intervention in Ukraine, the Russians have already stated that they will respond to that with nukes" That's more fear mongering. NATO simply stated Russian intervention is "unacceptable", and Russia responded with "NO YOU ARE UNACCEPTABLE" which has been their basic strategy since the beginning. They have not threatened nuclear force that I have seen.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T15:14:57.9770412-05:00
That is not to say Russia is not gearing up to move on eastern Ukraine. "We're not going to guess what's on Russia's mind, but we can see what Russia is doing on the ground -- and that is of great concern. Russia has amassed around 20,000 combat-ready troops on Ukraine's eastern border," NATO's Lungescu said. Http://www.Rferl.Org/content/ukraine-polish-pm-donald-tusk-warns-russian-intervention/26516614.Html
iggy1993 says2014-08-08T15:17:08.9259594-05:00
That's not true, they've said on more than one instance that they will not tolerate a foreign force getting involved in the conflict, and that they have no intention of competing in conventional warfare with western powers. On a later date they have said that they will resourt to nukes if it comes to an military attack on their citizens. Now I'm no mind reader so I don't know if it's a bluff or not however is doesn't seem like the kind of bluff that one would make lightly....
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T15:18:04.6346307-05:00
I have not seen a single report of that. Please cite your sources.
The_Immortal_Emris says2014-08-08T15:20:47.0493540-05:00
The only source I see for this is on Russia's state TV propaganda, but it is certainly not something the Russian government has said toward other governments. Propaganda in the state run media is not the same as diplomatic policy . Http://www.Dailykos.Com/story/2014/03/17/1285251/-Putin-Propagandist-Threatens-US-with-Nuclear-Annihilation-over-Ukraine#
iggy1993 says2014-08-08T15:27:39.9713902-05:00
Give me some time to find it on English......And I didn't mean that although he was shortly after promoted to the official Kremlin media correspondent..... Also here is an indirect threat- http://www.Westernjournalism.Com/nuclear-alert-russian-bombers-penetrate-us-airspace-16-times-last-10-days/ This by itself should not be taken lightly. And just for the record, I'm not one of those people who think that WW3 is coming, I just think that the US is taking things too far....
iggy1993 says2014-08-08T15:30:00.0331881-05:00
Here is one of the first one's although this isn't the one I was referring to, this only mentions the US military. Http://en.Ria.Ru/military_news/20131211/185462951/Russia-Warns-of-Nuclear-Response-to-US-Global-Strike-Program.Html

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.