Skip to main content

View Diary: Which 44 Democrats Want Another Iraq War? (194 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Every human being should care about all others. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CelticOm, artmartin

    Then the question becomes, which organizations have the power to shape a better Iraq and how?

    The answer is not always and only the US.

    But a more lively discussion of what other entities could help Iraq is missing, and would be welcome.

    Sadly, we all have to work to overcome our very human capacity for ignoring the suffering of others.

    •  The answer is the Iraqi people (5+ / 0-)

      I am a strong believer in self-determination.  Only the Iraqi people have the power to shape a better Iraq.  Get out of their way.  

      I don't go much for this caring stuff because I tend to believe we have a hard enough time caring for our friends and neighbors and when we get all distracted with pretending to care about folks we'll never see and never know thousands of miles away we tend to forget the friends and neighbors.  

      •  Some of us do "go much for this caring stuff". (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CelticOm, artmartin

        ISIS is not "the Iraqi people". They are largely non-Iraqi jihadi extremists who enjoy mass beheading civilians as policy. And posting images of the results on Twitter.

        "Get out of their way" = Slaughter away, psychopaths!

        Humans should care about all other humans. Near or far.

        We can't solve all problems always. But refusing to care about anyone outside one's own private circle means allowing any and all social evils to spread unchecked. I ain't down with that.

      •  we're all believers in self-determination (0+ / 0-)

        I have been against military involvement in the Mideast since the moment Daddy Bush began rattling sabers.  My two boys right now are 20 and 25 and had a draft ever come they'd have been prime cannon fodder.  We're in a mess Greenbell.  Black and white went out the window a long time ago and every issue is complicated.

        •  Of course it's complicated (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Dallasdoc

          It's always been complicated which is why the utterly clueless U S of A should have stayed the hell out of there.  Iraqis have to solve their own problems.  

          How would we like 300 Iraq advisors landing here to tell us how to resolve the differences between the Waco Baptists and the San Francisco Unitarians?  Or maybe they could tell the Mayor of Chicago how to resolve gang warfare?  Maybe they could help out along the border and figure out what we do with those children in detention?  

          Don't we have enough of our own problems that we cannot solve?  Who the hell do we think we are trying to solve theirs?

          •  so now go back and read my comment (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            thanatokephaloides

            again.  It was about the bill that authorized funding not about actually committing troops.  The black and white you want doesn't keep troops out because if horrors come out of some place and the American voters get outraged enough, demand action, throw Democrats out of office, we'll be in more wars than you can shake a stick at.  

            I'm talking about political reality for these legislators.  While you might believe cutting off all funding for Mideast operations will keep us out of foreign entanglements, my contention is that it could do exactly the opposite.  So let's say the Dems stand strong and vote to cut funding and something horrendous happens.  The political fallout could swing the pendulum back to the Republicans and we'd find ourselves worse than we are now.  

            I DON'T WANT US TO GO BACK INTO IRAQ.  Am I making myself clear here?  It's not fucking black and white.  I want our money spent at home but you and I have fundamental differences on the political reality required to get that.  You don't change things overnight.  You take one step at a time, make incremental change, lose some battles, come back to fight another day in order to change the huge political and social momentum of the country.

            •  I couldn't agree more (0+ / 0-)

              Thanks for bringing out this side of the discussion.  I looked at the list and found my Congresswoman voted against the second two amendments and understood that she most likely needs to do that to retain her seat in our heavily red state.  And I think it was the best move she could make under the circumstances.

              I will be there again this Saturday supporting her in her phone bank.  She's in for a tough fight, she's a freshman who just barely squeaked into her first term.

              Still trying to figure it all out

              by CindyV on Mon Jun 23, 2014 at 10:06:14 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  We broke it. And we broke the Iraqi people. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dallasdoc

        No, it wasn't sunshine and roses before we started our meddling, but the expectation that the Iraqi people should simply save themselves after what we did to them is really starting to get on my nerves.

        It bothers me when I see comments here like "Why should we care?" or, from a poster on another thread, "F*** Iraq." We should care because we are citizens of a country that destroyed a lot of lives for no reason, both here and in Iraq.

        It certainly wasn't the doing of those populating this site. But we made a complete mess of that country, and although I don't believe any good can come of further military involvement on our part, we also cannot abdicate the responsibility we bear.

        It's a complicated mess, and there is no silver bullet cure. I'm just thankful to have a president who doesn't respond as if there is.

        "Tea is soothing. I wish to be tense." - Rupert Giles

        by CelticOm on Fri Jun 20, 2014 at 10:38:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  what other entities is a question that will not (5+ / 0-)

      be answered now as the US always does step up. The point will come when the US no longer will be able to pay for all its military interventions around the world. So I imagine that the question of other entities will have to
      wait until then.

      Why would other countries step up to send their troops, warships, fighter jets, missiles, bombs, etc. when all they have to do is sit back and let the US do it, as is now happening once again?

      _______________The DOD/ War Department, which consumes 22% of the national budget, is the world's largest employer with 3.2 million employees.

      by allenjo on Fri Jun 20, 2014 at 08:17:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  US so far refuses significant Iraqi commitment. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        artmartin

        So since the US will not intervene, what then?

        The question is upon us now.

        There's a ton of talk about what, if anything, other entities will do -- Maliki, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the EU, the UN, NATO.

        It's not necessarily a question of invasion and occupation. Could diplomacy, aid, or threats by these other groups end ISIS slaughter? Let's hope a global leader finds a solution to help get Iraq back on a track toward lasting peace.

        •  significant as in...... (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Johnny Q, artmartin, schumann, Dallasdoc

          manned and unmanned fighter jets flying over Iraq 24 hours per day, six warships in the Persian Gulf and about 5,000 U.S. soldiers across the border in Kuwait - and more than 30,000 US troops in the Iraq region at sea and ashore

           - to me, Rithmck, that is not insignificant.

          US so far refuses significant Iraqi commitment.
          So where are all the other countries and their warships, fighter jets, troops?

          Standing down because the US stood up.

          _______________The DOD/ War Department, which consumes 22% of the national budget, is the world's largest employer with 3.2 million employees.

          by allenjo on Fri Jun 20, 2014 at 08:43:54 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  US "standby" forces aren't doing anything. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            artmartin

            They're just standing by.

            Obama has stated and repeated, no US ground troops in Iraq.

            If you are advocating that Obama twist arms to the UN, EU, or other nations to take the baton, then call on him to do so.

            Is that policy likely to turn ISIS back? How does it better Iraq for any nation's warships to circle around aimlessly nearby?

            •  it is not up to the US (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Dallasdoc
              If you are advocating that Obama twist arms to the UN, EU, or other nations to take the baton, then call on him to do so.
              Not  up to Obama, nor up to the US.

              Why make more enemies, why make the US any more of a target to the terrorists?

              Our aim always is to protect US interests, and I would hope that those we elect to serve, would put Americans, ordinary average Americans,  in the top category of US interests.

              An American Attack on ISIS in Iraq Could Mean Retaliation Back Home

              For the moment, the militant group has focused on expanding its reach in Syria and Iraq. But U.S. attacks could bring its gaze Westward, and with thousands of foreign jihadis among its ranks, it has the ability to exact revenge.

              _______________The DOD/ War Department, which consumes 22% of the national budget, is the world's largest employer with 3.2 million employees.

              by allenjo on Fri Jun 20, 2014 at 10:36:36 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  So you're back squarely to "I don't care". (0+ / 0-)

                That's not good enough for me.

                ISIS is an extremist jihadi organization that has already publicly stated an ambition to stage terrorist attacks in the West. It doesn't matter if we bomb them or work against them. They do not lack motivation, only the capacity. For now.

                But as a moral human being, that is secondary to me. What I see is Iraqi civilians being slaughtered and displaced by raving lunatics. To the tune of 1.5 million who have fled.

                Whatever Obama and all other powers and organizations can do to stop the killing and build peace is welcome.

                I do care. Every empathetic human being should.

                •  Well said (0+ / 0-)

                  Looks like we agree on this.  I'm not eager to see us get back into Iraq.  But I think we need to do whatever we can to curtail the bloodshed and spreading power of ISIS.

                  How we do that is really the tricky part.  The fact that Kerry was in Iraq this weekend is a sign they are trying to sort that out.  So, for now, I'm willing to trust that our leaders are working on a solution to a very messy problem.

                  Still trying to figure it all out

                  by CindyV on Mon Jun 23, 2014 at 10:11:30 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site