US Politics Thread

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
I've gotta say, this is a really misleading link, (rt.com is Russia TV, not exactly a vetted news source,) and your characterization of things is pretty biased. The State Department did their investigation, and their conclusions weren't completely absolving of Clinton, though rather nearly, but they didn't damn her, at all. Clinton has not perjured herself. (I don't think she's been under oath on any of these things. You're inventing things.) There has been no charge that she has destroyed evidence. There has been no cover-up. She is "LITERALLY in cahoots with the enablers and funders of AL QAEDA, ISIL, DAESH...." You really are making stuff up, at this point.

You think you can fool people with a snowstorm of words that no one wants to read. Don't be part of the problem. Try to be succinct, and also truthful. So far, you are neither. It's probably not your fault that you are buying into a load of crap, as you seem to take easily to anything that you run across on the internet. But if you tried a little harder, I bet you wouldn't be so snowed, yourself. Try to look a little harder at what Clinton has done, what has been determined by the State Dept. and what else is about a load of slander and character assassination. Also, please be cautious about your sources. And please remember that personal opinion should be cited as such.


RIiiiight -- RT , RUSSIA INSIDER, AND ANYTHING that ''hasn't been vetted" by your LYING government ain't news...

riiiight...the funny thing is the WHOLE WORLD knows thatis EXACTLY what makes americans live in your wonderful bubble....

yea -- that VENERABLE NEW YORK TIMES -- which SAT on the CIA'S own assessment report to BUSH that -- NO iraq did NOT have WMD'S..

coz it would COLLAPSE the ENTIRE SORRY LIE TO JUSTIFY the destruction of a sovereign country of IRAQ that has BEGUN to make the plans to SELL IT ENORMOUS AMOUNTS of OIL

OUTSIDE THE US DOLLAR..same as GADDAFFI...same AS SYRIA...

and of course -- SAME AS RUSSIA...

such a SIN is a big, the biggest NO NO to the empire of war and chaos money and war racketeering USA...whose endless printing of US dollar without any real collateral except "our say so" is how the USA ''finances" its EMPIRE

that its OWN greatest marine general SMEDELY BUTLER JR...1933

admitted "is our WAR AND MONEY RACKETEERING COUNTRY and our GANGSTERISM for our Big Boss: our super nationalistic capitalism and our cultural and economic assault on nations -- in order to gather as much of the world resources and wealth unto ourselves at the expense of others ....i served as our Chief High Class Muscle ENFORCER with our armed forces in 3 continents , suspending my own conscience -- KNOWING that what we do is.............evil..and I Will have nothing more to do with it>: "

the question to YOU moxie and your 'patriotic americans"

is this -- what are YOU going to do about it? oh -- i know...

"news from RT AND OTHERS ARE NOT PROPERLY VETTED".

in short HIDE THE HEAD IN THE SAND...it's a NICE way to feel GOOD about being the ''exceptional nation and the good guys".

roflmao!!
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
WARNING -- this report isn't VETTED by the USA MINISTRY OF ''truthiness".

====================

russia-insider.com
Looks Like George Soros Owns Hillary Clinton As Well As Angela Merkel
Patrick Cleburne (VDARE.com) 15 hours ago | 3,191 65
Of all the items I have written for VDARE.com I believe the most important was last October’s Merkel: Gone Mad—Or Bribed? GOP Example Suggests The Latter. This offered what I sincerely believe is the most plausible explanation of why a veteran political leader should suddenly engineer the destruction of her own nation. (If you think that melodramatic read Germany: Nonwhite in One Generation The New Observer January 4, 2016).

In the essay I offered some reasons to think George Soros was in the lead orchestrating this atrocity.

Some found it difficult to credit that crude financial power could exert such influence on the destiny of nations, although I cited historical examples.

Happily the American Thinker’s industrious Thomas Lifson has now proved this is so: Stunning revelation: Wikileaks hack shows that Soros called the shots on US policy toward Albania August 11, 2016

Who was in charge of U.S. foreign policy when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state? That is a legitimate question to consider in light of the most stunning revelation yet mined from the Wikileaks hack. George Soros is suggesting an intervention in domestic Albanian politics, and getting his way!

Lifson publishes facsimiles of the emails and concludes

Let us be clear here: Soros got the U.S. and other accomplices to intervene in the internal affairs of a sovereign state. Soros has long been accused of being a puppet master orchestrating world politics and markets for his own benefit. I am not certain if this is the first documented instance of his ordering an action and it being implemented by major powers, but even if there is precedent, how is this not huge news?

(Politico has rather a good piece reporting Clinton’s obedient catering to her big donors’ foreign policy interests in How Secretary of State Hillary Clinton cared for Democratic donors By Isaac Arnsdorf 01/06/16)

Financing Black riots in America, fostering the Muslim invasion of Europe…at some point the West has to ask if allowing George Soros to immigrate from Hungary was a good idea.

And if politicians who accept his money should be left in office.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,521
Reactions
14,660
Points
113
RIiiiight -- RT , RUSSIA INSIDER, AND ANYTHING that ''hasn't been vetted" by your LYING government ain't news...

riiiight...the funny thing is the WHOLE WORLD knows thatis EXACTLY what makes americans live in your wonderful bubble....

yea -- that VENERABLE NEW YORK TIMES -- which SAT on the CIA'S own assessment report to BUSH that -- NO iraq did NOT have WMD'S..

coz it would COLLAPSE the ENTIRE SORRY LIE TO JUSTIFY the destruction of a sovereign country of IRAQ that has BEGUN to make the plans to SELL IT ENORMOUS AMOUNTS of OIL

OUTSIDE THE US DOLLAR..same as GADDAFFI...same AS SYRIA...

and of course -- SAME AS RUSSIA...

such a SIN is a big, the biggest NO NO to the empire of war and chaos money and war racketeering USA...whose endless printing of US dollar without any real collateral except "our say so" is how the USA ''finances" its EMPIRE

that its OWN greatest marine general SMEDELY BUTLER JR...1933

admitted "is our WAR AND MONEY RACKETEERING COUNTRY and our GANGSTERISM for our Big Boss: our super nationalistic capitalism and our cultural and economic assault on nations -- in order to gather as much of the world resources and wealth unto ourselves at the expense of others ....i served as our Chief High Class Muscle ENFORCER with our armed forces in 3 continents , suspending my own conscience -- KNOWING that what we do is.............evil..and I Will have nothing more to do with it>: "

the question to YOU moxie and your 'patriotic americans"

is this -- what are YOU going to do about it? oh -- i know...

"news from RT AND OTHERS ARE NOT PROPERLY VETTED".

in short HIDE THE HEAD IN THE SAND...it's a NICE way to feel GOOD about being the ''exceptional nation and the good guys".

roflmao!!
The New York Times isn't vetted by my government. It's a valid news source of considerable record. I don't see what validates this RT, but if you'd like to explain to me why you think they're more than just a blog, I'd be interested to listen. It's not without merit to look at the source of information that comes across the internet. Anyone can hang a shingle, but it doesn't make them a valid source of information.

You obviously have strong opinions, but you make them rather hard to debate, as you throw so much out at once, and you also don't offer a lot of room for discussion, as you are clearly convinced by your POV.
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
The New York Times isn't vetted by my government. It's a valid news source of considerable record. I don't see what validates this RT, but if you'd like to explain to me why you think they're more than just a blog, I'd be interested to listen. It's not without merit to look at the source of information that comes across the internet. Anyone can hang a shingle, but it doesn't make them a valid source of information.

You obviously have strong opinions, but you make them rather hard to debate, as you throw so much out at once, and you also don't offer a lot of room for discussion, as you are clearly convinced by your POV.
The New York Times isn't vetted by my government. It's a valid news source of considerable record. I don't see what validates this RT, but if you'd like to explain to me why you think they're more than just a blog, I'd be interested to listen. It's not without merit to look at the source of information that comes across the internet. Anyone can hang a shingle, but it doesn't make them a valid source of information.

You obviously have strong opinions, but you make them rather hard to debate, as you throw so much out at once, and you also don't offer a lot of room for discussion, as you are clearly convinced by your POV.


ya -- the NYT isn't ''vetted" --it's just the main mouthpiece of washington DC.

as for this ''vetted" thin you bring up ?

if the rt and other you DON'T agree with that show EMBARRASSING REAL NEWS ABOUT YOUR COUNTRY ...


such as the WORLD KNOWN facts - by the day keep tumbling out -- that the USA is the BIGGEST TERRORIST enabler of them all ...


why do you take exception to a ''non-vetted" or ''properly vetted" RT or other sources - blog or otherwise --

and SUDDENLY turn around and say the NYT isn't ''vetted"

does this mean VETTED isn't important to BELIEVE your NYT ANYWAY just BECAUSE it is assumed BY YOU TO BE BELIEVAB LE


BUT THE ''un-vetted" RT or others are somehow dis-believable?

you want your cake and eat it too - it's the FAMOUS AMERICAN DOUBLE STANDARDS.

NOW -- her'es more -- the USA complains that IRAN has OFFERED russia the FREE use of iranian airfields from which russia can fly its BIGGEST bombers to save fuel and because iran is CLOSER to the EASTERN borders of SYRIA where MORE work needs to be done to destroy the terrorists YOUR country enabled --

rather than for these russian bombers (already proven - acknowledged EVEN by YOUR pentagon experts -- with barely concealed ENVY from the standpoint of professional military men) - to have to fly farther from inside russia because theya re too large for the SMALL airbase IN syria in the WESTERN end of syria -- which SYRIA HAS REQUESTED russian help for since last september ...

BOTH IRAN AND RUSSIA are STRICTLY following EVERY international law and rules and protocol INCLUDING informing the USA counterparts of what they needed to do in order to more effectively finish off the terrorists by ''many names' YOUR country enabled.

and YET USA COMPLAINS that ''this is very disturbing , it is against rules"

whose rules?!!! YOUR country has operatives INSIDE SYRIA TRAINING so-called ''moderate rebels" -- who are NOTHING ELSE but differnt named TERORRISTS...by ADMISSION of obama hismelf -- except he clings to the word "'moderate rebels" (LOL) --

being inside syria WITHOUT INTERNATIONAL LAWS PERMISSION -- AND NO PERMISSION FROM THE SOVEREIGN STATE OF syria by its LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAD!

YOU -- MOXIE -- and many americans like you -- are DEFENDING the criminality of YOUR own country!

that much is CLEAR!
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
The New York Times isn't vetted by my government. It's a valid news source of considerable record. I don't see what validates this RT, but if you'd like to explain to me why you think they're more than just a blog, I'd be interested to listen. It's not without merit to look at the source of information that comes across the internet. Anyone can hang a shingle, but it doesn't make them a valid source of information.

You obviously have strong opinions, but you make them rather hard to debate, as you throw so much out at once, and you also don't offer a lot of room for discussion, as you are clearly convinced by your POV.


I don't ''debate" i just show the FACTS. that's all-

it's YOu TRYING TO 'debate" against THE FACTS with your glib dismissals.

as for the ''venerable NYT" TIMES as well as your wonderful PBS and all that -- ALL of them the same kind of american mouthpieces...

isn't it funny they jump and march in lockstep in just about every LIE the USA governemnt throws out?

specific example:

FROM the time RUSSIA -- upon desperate request of the legitimate government of SYRIA - from the swarming thousands of ISIL , AL NUSRA, AL QAEDA ''affiliates" and derivatives , calling themselves one name or another --

financed and weaponized BY saudi arabia, qatar, enabled by turkey with ARMS from the USA -- stealing and smuggling iraq and syrian oil to increase their financing ...

were being bombed to smithereens by russia - such was the success of their operations -- which for the PREVIOUS 3 YEARS of american ''fighting terrorists' -- SOMEHOW INCREASED in numbers as they tightened their march to DAMASCUS for the USA'S "'assad must go" (because HE wouldn't stop planning to sell oil and trade OUTSIDE of the US Dollar and wouldn't LET QATAR pass oil pipelines through HIS country which the USA wants) -

that -- with russians REGULARLY posting them in vidoes to show they were doing EXACTLY what they always INFORM the americans they would do , where, what time, how long, at what height, targeting which group of terrorists, etc. etc. etc...so as to have NO misunderstanding...

COMPLETELY PROFESSIONAL about it...

what SURFACED ON AMERICAN NEWS? oh my


''AMERICAN JETS BOMBING TERRORISTS SO SUCCESSFULLY!!!"

except the PENTAGON STOLE IT FROM RUSSIANS of their own videos!! and SOLD it to YOUR public --

claiming CREDIT for an ACTUAL RUSSIAN JET filming the operation from its wing

except of course the russians instantly recognized it was THEIRS - FILED A GENTLE REMINDER to the pentagon

which forced the pentagon to ADMIT !! ROFLMAO!!!

NOW -- thepnetagon -- under questining by YOUR own congress is forced to admit it has been ''beefing up the success" of operations to make them look better than they were

for they actually could NOT produce EVIDENCE that YOUR COUNTRY is fighting terrorism -- not even by a mile or even HALF the ''success" they claim it to be -- UNLESS they COULD STEAL SOME ACTUAL FOOTAGE from russians hoping to get away with IT!!

eeeewweeee..makes my hair stand, frankly.
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
sputnik International


1034417489.jpg

Manipulated Intel Lets US Presidents Escape Blame for Starting Wars
© REUTERS/ Ali Hashisho
Politics
03:20 18.08.2016(updated 04:13 18.08.2016) Get short URL
337340
Allegations that US Central Command (CENTCOM) analysts manipulated Daesh intelligence assessments could indicate attempts to provide a false justification for future wars, National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower William Binney told Sputnik.


WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — On August 11, CENTCOM spokesman Commander Kyle Raines confirmed that CENTCOM is investigating a US House of Representatives Joint Task Force report that alleges the command manipulated intelligence on the US fight against the Daesh.

1032488289.jpg

© Sputnik/ Alexander Kovalev
US Forces Conduct 9 Airstrikes in Libya in Support of Anti-Daesh Operations
"That [intelligence manipulation] is so that they can justify their decisions based on that faulty intelligence," Binney, a veteran US government cryptanalyst, said on Wednesday.

The investigation has aroused concern among senior US political figures. In a statement last week, US Senator Kelly Ayotte demanded that CENTCOM officials be held accountable if the allegations are shown to be true.

US leaders like Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush welcomed any intelligence assessment, however dubious or unfounded, that supported decisions they had already made to undertake aggressive or otherwise controversial security and military policies, Binney explained.

The provision of such desired intelligence "means they avoid any responsibility or accountability," he pointed out.

1019430704.jpg

© Flickr/ fortytwenty
US Routinely Manipulates Intelligence to Justify Engaging in Conflicts - Anti-War Activist
As a result, Bush could defend his decision to invade Iraq in 2003, or Obama could justify toppling the Libyan leader Muammar Gadaffi in 2011 or providing massive support for rebel forces seeking to overthrow the government of Syria, Binney recalled.
"Of course, the president and others can always say that they based their decision on the best information they had at the time."

The practice of tailoring false and unsubstantiated intelligence for US leaders had precedents going back at least half a century, Binney remarked.

"It would be similar to the faulty intelligence used to start a war in Vietnam."

William Binney is a cryptanalyst and mathematician, and for 30 years he was a senior analyst at the NSA, where he was regarded as one of the best in the agency’s history before he exposed major aspects of its blanket surveillance programs.

William Binney is also the original system architect of the USA NSA itself.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,521
Reactions
14,660
Points
113
You seem rather hysterical. I'm not sure how you even want anyone to enter into a debate with you. But post away, if it makes you happy.
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
sputnik International

1016732818.jpg

US Intelligence Assessments Fully Corrupted by Wish to Please Boss
© AP Photo/ J. Scott Applewhite, File
Politics
04:21 18.08.2016Get short URL
17840
The entire US intelligence assessment apparatus has been undermined by a pervasive culture of providing the country’s military and political leaders with false and misleading conclusions that they want to hear, retired Canadian diplomat Patrick Armstrong told Sputnik.


WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — US Central Command (CENTCOM) is investigating a US House of Representatives Joint Task Force report that alleges the command manipulated intelligence on the fight against the Daesh terrorist group, CENTCOM spokesperson Kyle Raines told Sputnik on August 11.

1034417298.jpg

© REUTERS/ Ali Hashisho
Manipulated Intel Lets US Presidents Escape Blame for Starting Wars - NSA Whistleblower
"The entire government structure in the United States has been completely corrupted, over time but especially during the Obama administration," Armstrong, a specialist on the Soviet Union and Russia who previously served as political counsellor in the Canadian Embassy in Moscow, said on Wednesday.

The investigation has aroused concern among senior US political figures. Last week, US Senator Kelly Ayotte said that CENTCOM officials must be held accountable for manipulating intelligence about the coalition’s efforts to defeat and destroy the Islamic State.

Armstrong said CENTCOM’s misleadingly optimistic assessments about the success of the US strategy were expressions of an intelligence culture that ignored and harshly punished dissidents and honest, independent assessments.

"It is all ‘tell the boss what he wants to hear’ now," he observed.

Therefore, the US intelligence establishment was driven by a universally-shared preoccupation with winning favor at every level from superiors, Armstrong pointed out.

1019430704.jpg

© Flickr/ fortytwenty
US Routinely Manipulates Intelligence to Justify Engaging in Conflicts - Anti-War Activist
US intelligence analysts "want to keep the boss (at each level) happy that what we are doing is working," he explained.

Additionally, the intelligence establishment wanted to hide from the US public and its own political class the extent to which rebel groups fighting the Syrian government were dependent on massive US support and protection, Armstrong added.

Intelligence was therefore manipulated "to cover up the actual support being given to so-called moderates who actually cooperate with Daesh," he stated.

Frequent communication between CENTCOM senior leaders and US Director of National Intelligence James Clapper could lead to distorted data on counter-Daesh operations being presented to President Barack Obama, the House Joint Task Force report warned
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
A few talking points to kick off proceedings but take this down any route you wish....

Can Trump possibly win the US Presidential Election?
ANSWERl : POSSIBLY but only if the somnolent, eyes wide shut americans admit they've been HAD by DEAR leader Obama and his ''MUM" killary Killton...HARD to see it happening though...the ENTIRE war party - neocons, wall street, banks, us treasury, federal bank, pentagon, soros, america-israel groups, are HUNGRY for war and blood. who is TRUMP to be allowed to CHANGE that?

Do Americans care that much about Foreign Policy?
ANSWER -- in general --- ONLY when blowback hits them in their pockets and faces as consequences of american policies they NORMALLY keep themselves SAFELY IGNORANT ABOUT -- AND YET have opinion about the world - it's what i call the american habit of "ignorant and proud of it"!!
but when something blows back on them -- they SUDDENLY KNOW EVERYTHING about a country they couldn't even place on the map!

What will be Barack Obama's legacy?
as he GREAT FAILURE AND BIGGEST LIAR Of all the long string of lying american presidents...and the HOLLOW STICK FIGURE that he really is...
the complete PURE example of what GEORGE ORWELL defined about political speech of leaders who are nothing but CHARLATANS like he is:
"the ability to give substance to pure wind".

that's barack obama.

If you don't like Trump and/or Hillary then who would have been your preferred candidate?
ANSWER -- it would have been nice if american ''democracy" (which ain't anything at all like it pretends) actually gave a chance to the likes of CYNTHIA MCKINNEY - but the lords of the universe made SURE she's no more as a senator...WOULD have been nice if JILL STEIN has a chance to it...
i don't like his 'economic philosophy" but I'D TAKE RON PAUL ANYTIME over the ''choices" today ...

but if down to it - -- TRUMP of course..at least the guy actually wants to do BUSINESS rather than just BLOODLETTING LIKE KILLARY AND OBAMA AND THEIR ILK are so hungry for...as their ''legacy" - about which theya re actually PROUD! unbelievably enough...i mean HOW do these creatures actually get BORN?

What are the biggest domestic concerns for the populace of the United States?

ANSWER -- JOBS, THAT PAY PROPERLY - or should be -- the TERROR MATTER IS ONE BIG FAT SCAM by the USA GOVERNMENT CORPORATE HONCHOS who -- tada -- ALWAYS make money when there's a war -- its ht eBEST thing in the business of money.

"THE MONEYED CLASSES WILL NEVER SUPPORT WARS UNLESS THERE IS A PROFIT TO BE MADE"-- LUDWIG von Mises...
"

What are the biggest external overseas concerns for the populace of the United States?
ANSWER: none -- EXCEPT americans ought to mind their own business and not meddle in the affairs of other countries -- and stop whining when the consequences come back to haunt them.
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
You seem rather hysterical. I'm not sure how you even want anyone to enter into a debate with you. But post away, if it makes you happy.

no -- i just have FUN doing it -- because it also is entertaining for me - not that it is what i look for -- but entertaining to see the extent of american ignorance HAND IN HAND with arrogant SMUGNESS about things they know nothing about that happens around the world.
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
A few talking points to kick off proceedings but take this down any route you wish....

Can Trump possibly win the US Presidential Election?

Do Americans care that much about Foreign Policy?

What will be Barack Obama's legacy?

If you don't like Trump and/or Hillary then who would have been your preferred candidate?

What are the biggest domestic concerns for the populace of the United States?

What are the biggest external overseas concerns for the populace of the United States?


this article by JUSTIN RAIMONDO (he is californian , i believe and long-ago one-time GOP representative in the state assembly or something)


highlights.jpg

The Benefits and Hazards of Trumpism
Justin Raimondo on his foreign policy speech

DC's Sunni Myth
'Cyrus Mahboubian' on the wars in Syria and Iraq

More US Weapons for the Saudis
For their atrocious war on Yemen, says Daniel Larison



Biden: 'Condolences' for Bombing of Serbia
US-led campaign in 1999 killed around 500 civilians

Russia Bombs Militants From Iran Air Base
First time Russia used another country for Syria strikes

Saudis Hit Yemen House, Kill 17 Civilians
Warplanes attacked relatives trying to rescue victims



Backing Russia Into a Corner
Alastair Crooke on America's insane policy

Obama's Assassination Program
Marcy Wheeler dissects the newly-released 'guidance'

The Monster Harry Truman
Jared Labell on the 'Butcher of Asia'


behindheadline540cr.gif

The Benefits and Hazards of Trumpism

– all gathered together in one speech

by Justin Raimondo, August 17, 2016
Print This | Share This
Donald Trump’s most recent foreign policy speech, in which he explained how he would deal with the Islamic State (ISIL) and the Middle East in general, contained multitudes – everything good and everything questionable about his brand of “America First” nationalism. Here is Trumpism on full display, the common-sensical and the nonsensical intertwined. While I realize a presidential election campaign is not the time for nuance, it behooves us to pull apart these disparate strands if we want to understand this moment in our history.

He starts out by defining the problem: the series of attacks that have horrified the world and flummoxed our law enforcement agencies. And what’s notable here is that he just doesn’t talk about what’s going on overseas, as you might expect in a speech ostensibly about foreign policy: he talks about San Bernardino and Orlando alongside Paris and Brussels. In short, he brings it all home.

This underscores his entire orientation: it’s what “America First” is all about. Why should Americans care about ISIL? Well, folks, says Trump, it’s because they’re attacking us right here on the home front. Contrast this with the usual neocon-Hillaryite politically correct gobbledygook: we have to spread Democracy and Goodness throughout the Middle East! They don’t have gay rights in Afghanistan! We must defend the “international order”!

There’s the problem: ISIL. So what caused it? Trump’s answer:

“The rise of ISIS is the direct result of policy decisions made by President Obama and Secretary Clinton.”

What? I seem to remember some guy named George W. Bush – didn’t he invade Iraq or something? – who vowed to pursue the goal of “ending tyranny in our world.” Why, as I recall, he even invoked Doestoevsky’s novel about revolutionary nihilism, The Possessed, and pledged to ignite “a fire in the mind” throughout the Middle East – and the world! And the fire is still burning….

In fairness, Trump gets to the Iraq war later on in the speech, but this omission is telling, although it probably says more about who’s advising him than it does about the candidate himself.

In any case, Trump goes on to denounce the disastrous military interventions that empowered ISIL in Syria and Libya: so far so good. He also notes US support for the Muslim Brotherhood’s revolution in Egypt, another aspect of the post-“Arab Spring” turn in US policy that ended badly. Then we get the Fox News version of history: the Iran deal put Tehran “in a dominant position of regional power and, in fact, aspiring to be a dominant world power.”

This makes zero sense, especially after his long peroration about the horrors of ISIL: does he not know that Iran is fighting ISIL in Syria? Does he not realize that Iranian-backed militias in Iraq are fighting alongside Iraqi government forces to defeat the pro-ISIL pro-al Qaeda Sunni insurgency?

Does he know anything?

We get yet more Fox News revisionist history with his description of President Obama’s Cairo speech as an “apology tour,” followed by this:

“The failure to establish a new Status of Forces Agreement in Iraq, and the election-driven timetable for withdrawal, surrendered our gains in that country and led directly to the rise of ISIS.”

He blames Obama, but this is false: it was the Bush administration that negotiated the Status of Forces Agreement and established the withdrawal timetable. President Bush signed a memorandum of understanding that stipulated all US troops must leave Iraq by December 31, 2011. The withdrawal wasn’t “election-driven” – it was Bush-driven.

Surely the Bush administration wanted to keep US troops in Iraq: to do otherwise would be to admit, in deeds if not in words, that the invasion had been a disastrous mistake. The sticking point was the question of immunity of US soldiers from Iraqi law: given the horrific history of Abu Ghraib, and other numerous instances of US troops committing war crimes in Iraq, the Iraqis insisted that any US soldiers accused of engaging in such acts would have to be subject to trial in Iraqi courts. The US, which has a policy of not allowing its soldiers to be tried in foreign courts, refused to go along with this. And that was the end of that.

While it’s true that the Obama administration tried to resurrect the agreement, the US prohibition on foreign legal jurisdiction over our troops was considered nonnegotiable.

What comes next is the under-appreciated sight of a Republican candidate for President trying to prove that he was against the Iraq war from the beginning. Trump cites an interview with Neil Cavuto in which he said the economy is a bigger problem and we shouldn’t “be going in yet.” (Yet?) He cites a fuller and more definitive statement made to Esquire magazine in 2004:

“What was the purpose of this whole thing? Hundreds and hundreds of young people killed. And what about the people coming back with no arms and legs? Not to mention the other side. All those Iraqi kids who’ve been blown to pieces. And it turns out that all of the reasons for the war were blatantly wrong. All this for nothing.”

So, if it was all “for nothing,” then it was a good thing we pulled out, and indeed we should’ve pulled out sooner. Right? Of course not!

“So I have been clear for a long time that we should not have gone in. But I have been just as clear in saying what a catastrophic mistake Hillary Clinton and President Obama made with the reckless way in which they pulled out.

“After we had made those hard-fought sacrifices and gains, we should never have made such a sudden withdrawal – on a timetable advertised to our enemies. Al Qaeda in Iraq had been decimated, and Obama and Clinton gave it new life and allowed it to spread across the world.”

The myth of Victory Denied is a longstanding right-wing trope that refuses to die: they say the same thing about the Vietnam war. If these people had their way, US troops would still be fighting in the Mekong delta. “We weren’t allowed to win!” is the one point where neoconservatism and Trumpian nationalism intersect. Except it has nothing to do with reality. The Iraqis kicked us out – and in Vietnam we were militarily defeated. Neither war was winnable.

Indeed, every war we’ve fought on the Asian landmass has ended in, at best, a stalemate, as in Korea, and at worst a complete rout, as in Vietnam. Iraq is no different: and neither, for that matter, is Syria, or Libya, or any of the other interventions Trump denounces. The choice we faced in all of these wars was: either permanent occupation, or else withdrawal. There’s no in-between. Our troops are still in Korea, more than half a century after the fighting ended, a fact that Trump complains about. Does he want Iraq to turn into another Korea?

He slyly acknowledges this contradiction when he goes into his unbelievably stupid “we-should’ve-kept-the-oil” riff:

“This proposal, by its very nature, would have left soldiers in place to guard our assets. In the old days, when we won a war, to the victor belonged the spoils. Instead, all we got from Iraq – and our adventures in the Middle East – was death, destruction and tremendous financial loss.”

What this means, in effect, is that we’ll be in the Middle East forever, guarding “our assets.” And, by the way, the “old days” Trump refers to are really ancient times: when the Romans sacked cities and lugged the loot back to Rome. America’s wars didn’t involve us collecting anything but the war debts of our shiftless allies: after World War I, we effectively canceled the war debts owed by Great Britain and France. After World War II, the Marshall Plan subsidized the nations of devastated Europe, and the Brits didn’t pay off their debt to us until 2006 (after multi-year suspensions of payments). These wars, and indeed all the wars waged by us in modern times, resulted in nothing but “death, destruction, and tremendous financial loss.”

Trump then turns around and declares “The era of nation-building will be ended.” Great! But we’ll still be fighting in Iraq, and god knows where else.

So how will Trump deal with the Islamic State? Well, beyond calling “an international conference,” we don’t know. He doesn’t want to “telegraph” his Grand Plan to “our enemies.” And he also doesn’t want to tell the American people what he plans to do – but we can glean the implications from what he does say. And I have to say it’s not encouraging.

Trump’s immigration proposals – “ideological vetting” of potential immigrants, a “temporary” ban on immigrants from countries rife with terrorism, a “Commission on Radical Islam” to study the problem – are vague placebos in place of a real policy. France has a large Muslim population. So does Britain. So does Germany. Are these countries, all of which have been the scenes of homegrown terrorist activities, among those he wants to impose his “temporary” ban on? He never tells us which countries he’s talking about. As for the “vetting” process: will any would-be terrorist answer truthfully when asked if he or she believes in Sharia law, as opposed to the US Constitution? Grow up!

If Trump were serious about using immigration policy as a weapon in the “war on terrorism,” he would advocate an immigration moratorium. He used the word “extreme” a half a dozen times when he talked about who should be allowed to enter the country, but apparently this is too extreme even for him – and yet it’s the only realistic approach to take. I’m not saying I would endorse such a proposal, but at least it has the virtue of being both practical and honest.

To sum up: on the plus side we have Trump denouncing the Iraq war and the interventions in Libya, Syria, and Egypt that gave ISIL a pathway to prominence. That a Republican candidate for President is saying these words is more significant than anyone is willing to admit: it represents a sea change for the GOP, and it means there’s no going back to the neoconservative nostrums of the past. There’s also his willingness to cooperate with Russia, which would mark a decisive break with the new cold warriors who inhabit the Beltway and infest both parties. And you’ll note that, when listing our Muslim allies in the Middle East, Trump didn’t mention the Saudis or the Gulf emirates. They surely noticed this glaring omission, although no one else did.

On the negative side, we see that Trump is a captive of the ridiculous idea that once we’re in we have to stay in and fight until we achieve “victory.” What he doesn’t realize is that when you’ve dug yourself into a hole the way out is to stop digging – and his failure to understand this simple principle is surely replicated by the way he’s conducted his campaign so far.

What Trump’s critics don’t understand is that his victory in the primaries represents a break with Bush Republicanism, which is why the neoconservatives have been his most vocal and embittered opponents. He really does oppose the first principle of interventionism, which is that “American leadership” is the singular answer to the world’s problems. What he doesn’t get, however, is that we can’t allow ourselves to get sucked back into the Middle East maelstrom under the pretext of cleaning up the mess made by the globalists.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,521
Reactions
14,660
Points
113
It might be fun for you to bury everyone under a manure-load of info that no one has the time or desire to validate. But worse, you don't organize your thoughts in any way that makes them debatable. So you're just talking to yourself, and being self-serving with all of this posting. To me, it's ungenerous to the notion of debate and abusive to the members. You should try harder to formulate a conversation, if you really care about conversation. Otherwise, you're just masturbating over this stuff to your own satisfaction.
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
killarly killton is very qualified

to MAKE MORE LIBYA'S her very special project.. u know...and she wants to march on iran and back into syria and onto to MOSCOW!!!

and she wants to TEACH china how to behave!!! that's what obama's ''ASIA PIVOT" is all about -- HILLARY'S long ago LUST ...

the FUNNIEST thing: HER LAST STATE SECRETARY under OBAMA global trip

LANDED her in BEIJING -- to give the chinese a TEACHING! n how to behave --

sitting on the stage among a panel of other global leaders and chinese officials eac giving their speeches and discussions.

CLINTON strides to her podium and after the requisIt ''AMERICA IS GREAT"
''america stands for democracy and peace and prosperity" to polite applause...

PROCEEDS to LECTURE her hosts "we think that the matters of reform in democracy in china have to be addressed -- and crucial that china address human rights in china" ...

AFTER which her speech -- one of th chinese officials THREW PROTOCOL to the wind -- stood up - walked a few paces towards her -- as she sat at her sofa-chair...

and WAGGED HIS FINGER AT HER ...

TELLING her in fluent english:

"who are you to lecture us how we order our society? first you have to address the criminalities of your country in invasions , you destroyed yugoslavia and serbia, destroying iraq, starving children with your sanctions, your jails are full of black americans just because they are black.. police brutality is rampant in your society -- do not lecture us about human rights".

ooooooooo..i saw that on a chinese TV CCTV COVERAGE while it was happening live, years ago, lol

is it ANY WONDER BLOODY HILLARY wants her presidency so much? its HER TURN and by golly she's gonna get HER ''REVENGE"!!
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
It might be fun for you to bury everyone under a manure-load of info that no one has the time or desire to validate. But worse, you don't organize your thoughts in any way that makes them debatable. So you're just talking to yourself, and being self-serving with all of this posting. To me, it's ungenerous to the notion of debate and abusive to the members. You should try harder to formulate a conversation, if you really care about conversation. Otherwise, you're just masturbating over this stuff to your own satisfaction.


NO -- for you to make puerile reference to masturbation because i post material that CLEARLY discomfitures YOU from your delusions about your OBAMA and ''AMERICA GOOD" -- IS really quite elementary , dear moxie.

with or without you -- so long as BRITBOX -- who invited me to post here because i follow such things -- and that doesn't mean HE agrees with me --

i will do so -- because it pleases me.

i don't care what you think about ME.

but i throw out the INFORMATION that the likes o fyou obviously can not stomach about YORU own country and its utter corruption and hypocrisy and double standrds.

but i know also that it is like that old saying

'one can lead a horse to water --= one can not force the horse to drink it>

i bring the WATER -- you are the horse.

OF COURSE i also can tell that regardless of these FACTS -- you and many like you CHOOSE to WALLOW in your own ignorance -- it is comforting to you -- and THEN you throw your dimissive remarks..

it's FUN - as a side benefit to me for my effort -- to see it on full display by people like you. americans...

YOU ARE THE LAUGHING STOCK of the world....and however you CLING to yoru BUBBLE -- INSIDE IT -- you and ''america" are being humiliated everywhere despite what yhour politicians BRAG about thatyou LOVE to listen to "america is the grfeetest eve - we are GOOD GUYS" --

AND that's - i predict -- NOTHING compared to the day that SURELY comes -- when the USA'S DOLLAR PRINTING MACHINE is unable to sustain the PRETENSE of ''power and wealth" with your ever growing DEBT to much of the world and THEY start coming for PAYMENT!

THEN -- youwill PROBABLY only then know what i am really talking about...lol.

you jus tdon't know it .
 
Last edited:

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,521
Reactions
14,660
Points
113
I'm not trying to censor you. I'm asking you not to post so copiously and aggressively without rhyme or reason. It's unfriendly to conversation. I'm sure you can understand that simple point. As to bringing horses to water, I'd offer you the related one from Dorothy Parker on horticulture. You can look it up.
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
I'm not trying to censor you. I'm asking you not to post so copiously and aggressively without rhyme or reason. It's unfriendly to conversation. I'm sure you can understand that simple point. As to bringing horses to water, I'd offer you the related one from Dorothy Parker on horticulture. You can look it up.

i am not concerned about 'style" moxie

if you don't like he WAY i talk -- that is NOT my problem -- i am not here to make ANYONE feel comfortable.

--- having said that;

here is an example -- IN GREAT DETAIL of just how OBAMA YOUR LIAR

cares NOTHING for your own soldiers that he and killary and bush send to ''missions to accomplish" while LYING to you american people that ''our troops are not leading the fight -- just support, no troops on the ground".

balh blah blah!!

and IF such things do NOT give you ANY thought at all of the POSSIBILITY however remote that this IDOL you have -- obama -- is a pure liar and callous person who cares NOTHING for the american people --

but is a WATER BOY for his masters of profit and war

YOU ARE TRULY LOST -- and SHOULD be ashamed of yourselves.
and i dare say - DO NOT DESERVE to call yourselves ''patriotic americans' .
-------------------------------------
i -- who am NOT even american -- actually FEEL VERY, VERY HURT when i see every single american soldier reported to have died, or lost limbs or a family losing a dad or mom and in debt, etc,e t,c...

just as much as the iraqis have lost their country

BECAUSE OF THE LIKES OF YOUR OBAMA AND THE LIKES OF YOU -- 'SO-CALLED ''CITIZENS' OF THE USA who circle your wagons around EVIL EVIL CALLOUS people suich as OBAMA AND those he represents!

so -- do not lecture me about GOOD FORUM DISCUSSION .
===============================

if you can not take reading such thigs that you americans OUGHT to be knowing about to see just how FOOLISH you are as your ''leaders" laugh at how EASILY fooled you are...then -- do not even address me...let alone -- complain about my 'tone of voice"

and if you prefer -- we can just talk about 6-4 , 7-6 OF RAFAEL NADAL AND NOLE! LOL.

BUT if i post and ''flame and sam" this forum -- i do nothing out of order at all - because I HAVE the information that is correct -- YOU DON"T!

AND THAT'S one purpose -- if not all =- of what a THREAT ABOUT US POLITICS IS ABOUT?

DID you prefer that it be NICE? ROFLMAO -- this is not kindergarten, dear.

===============================






news
Get Our News App


longform-original-21116-1471297715-3.jpg
Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News
Inside the Real US Ground War On ISIS
As the US and its allies prepare to launch a major offensive for Mosul, US service members are on the ground in growing numbers — and increasingly in harm’s way. Mike Giglio reports from the bases and front lines where they work around northern Iraq.


Mike Giglio

BuzzFeed News Middle East Correspondent
dateline-5490-1447620843-1.png

Reporting From Erbil, Iraq
posted on Aug. 16, 2016, at 9:51 p.m.

Tweet
Tumblr

ERBIL, Iraq — The Black Hawk helicopter pushed into ISIS territory through the pre-dawn sky. Joshua Wheeler, a veteran master sergeant with US special operations, was taking his men deep behind enemy lines. As the chopper descended on the ISIS stronghold of Hawija in northern Iraq, back in Washington, US president Barack Obama, who had been notified of the mission, waited for word of its fate.

Wheeler and his team were at the forefront of the hidden war US special operations troops are waging against ISIS. With him in the chopper were fellow members of the US Army’s elite Delta Force and some of the local commandos they had trained. Decked in desert camouflage and equipped with high-tech automatic weapons and night vision, the US and local soldiers looked almost identical.

Their mission, carried out on Oct. 22, was more dangerous than most. It called for the men to infiltrate a guarded compound that ISIS had converted into a prison and rescue dozens of men who, according to intelligence reports, were scheduled to be executed that day.

ISIS militants began firing on the helicopter as it lowered toward the compound. Wheeler shot back from the bay, recalled one of the local soldiers who was beside him, a captain with a specialized Kurdish force called the Counter-Terrorism Unit (CTU), which is run by the security council of Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdish region.

Then — as Wheeler often did, his Kurdish partners said — he led the way.

Wheeler hit the ground first, said the 29-year-old captain, the ranking CTU officer on the chopper. Gunshots and calls of “Allahu Akbar” rang out as the militants tried to repel the commandos, firing with everything they had. The captain said he and Wheeler advanced together, “fighting side by side.”

On risky missions like Hawija, the US commandos often have a simple command, said a CTU lieutenant: “Let us go first.”
By the time the operation was over three hours later, around 20 ISIS militants had been killed and 69 prisoners had been saved. And Wheeler was dead, struck down by an ISIS bullet, making him the first US service member to lose his life in the ISIS fight.

When his death became public, US officials painted the combat role of the US commandos on the mission as an anomaly. The Pentagon’s press secretary called it “a unique circumstance.” Defense Secretary Ashton Carter said Wheeler’s engagement with the enemy “wasn’t part of the plan.” These comments pushed Wheeler’s death into line with the narrative Obama had presented to the public when the new fight began. “I ran for this office in part to end our war in Iraq and welcome our troops home, and that’s what we’ve done,” he said in August 2014 as US airstrikes against ISIS began. “And so even as we support Iraqis as they take the fight to these terrorists, American combat troops will not be returning to fight in Iraq, because there’s no American military solution to the larger crisis in Iraq.”

But the Kurdish soldiers who worked with Wheeler tell a different story. They say that Wheeler intended from the start to be up front in the operation — and that elite US troops like him often lead the charge against ISIS on the ground.

On risky missions like Hawija, the US commandos often have a simple command, said a CTU lieutenant: “Let us go first.”

“In those operations, they put their lives ahead of ours,” the lieutenant said. “They are in the lead.”

grid-cell-26804-1471372724-2.jpg

Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News

grid-cell-26804-1471372725-7.jpg

Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News



A member of Kurdish Counter-Terrorism Unit who was in the operation room during the fight for Hawija shows a picture of Master Sgt. Joshua Wheeler on his smartphone screen. Wheeler was killed during that operation.

Interviews in the Kurdish region’s capital of Erbil with three CTU members — the captain, the lieutenant and the unit’s commander — marked the first time sources with direct involvement in the Hawija mission have publicly discussed it in depth. Each requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of their work, believing that ISIS would attempt to assassinate them if it learned their names. The interviews, carried out over two weeks in July, also provided new insight into how these elite US special operations troops are taking the fight to ISIS: often on the front lines, and sometimes beyond them. Joint US and CTU teams have worked together on the ground in more than 50 operations against the militants, the three men said, performing kill-or-capture missions, conducting surveillance, calling in airstrikes, carrying out sniper attacks, and pounding ISIS positions with mortars and artillery.

These elite US forces reflect a pattern in the greater US war on ISIS in Iraq, which has seen US soldiers quietly stepping up their role on the ground, where they work in growing numbers and increasingly in harm’s way. There are currently about 3,830 US service members in the country, according to the Pentagon, an increase of 17 percent in the last year. That figure doesn’t include civilians, contractors, and soldiers on temporary duty, and analysts tracking the conflict often put the total between 5,000 and 6,000. In addition to specialized forces of various stripes, soldiers from the conventional US Armed Forces are posted around the country. Conversations with local soldiers and US officers — along with visits to front lines and military bases around northern Iraq, including the operations room in Erbil that oversees US airstrikes and Camp Swift, the expanding US base some 50 miles south of the ISIS capital of Mosul — showed US service members to be much deeper in the fight than White House officials in Washington commonly portray. These troops, in addition to arming and training local forces and coordinating battle plans, are a regular presence on the front lines, conducting surveillance, firing mortars and artillery, and calling in airstrikes as US warplanes rip through the skies.

“There are no real front lines,” Volesky said. “Everyone is at risk.”
In the process, they are putting their lives on the line. Sixteen US soldiers have been wounded in the war on ISIS, according to publicly available data from the Department of Defense, and two more have been killed since Wheeler’s death in late October. On March 19, Louis Cardin, a 27-year-old Marine staff sergeant, was killed by ISIS rocket fire at his base near Camp Swift, where his battalion had been providing artillery support for the Iraqi military. And on May 3, Navy SEAL Charles H. Keating IV died while fighting alongside Kurdish troops in a town called Tel Asqaf after ISIS militants breached the nearby front line.

Obama came to office promising to get the US out of old wars, not into new ones — and to stop the loss of US lives in Iraq. White House officials have often downplayed the role of US soldiers in and close to combat against ISIS, keeping the narrative of US involvement focused on the drones and fighters jets that operate out of range of ISIS’s assault rifles, mortars, and suicide car bombs. But while this new US war, in contrast with the last one, leaves the bulk of combat operations to local forces, for US soldiers, it carries its own set of sacrifices and risks.

sub-buzz-30919-1471382505-8.jpg

BuzzFeed News; OpenStreetMap, DigitalGlobe

Far removed from the politics in Washington, these troops are well aware of the danger they face. Gen. Gary Volesky, the commander of US ground forces in Iraq, is on his fifth tour in the country. He completed his first four during the Iraq War, leading soldiers first against Saddam Hussein and then against ISIS’s predecessor, al-Qaeda in Iraq. “The fight here is a little bit different than it has been in the previous times we’ve been here. But let’s make no mistake. We’re in a combat environment,” he said. “So when people talk about the soldiers aren’t at risk — we know we’re at risk.”

Volesky ticked off some of the threats that had faced US soldiers in recent days: 20 ISIS rockets that hit at the international airport a short drive from his base in Baghdad; and a suicide car bomb “just about three kilometers from where I currently am.” Artillery shells can come crashing down even on US bases set back from the day-to-day fighting. As ISIS loses territory, Volesky noted, it has also leaned more heavily on its roots in unconventional war, focusing less on holding land and more on insurgency, meaning asymmetrical tactics like car bombs and attacks on US troops behind the front lines become more of a threat. “There are no real front lines,” Volesky said. “Everyone is at risk.”

Volesky had just returned to Baghdad from a visit to northern Iraq that took him to the base where Cardin, the Marine sergeant, had been killed. “I went out to the place that has our artillerymen out there that are in the fight every single day, living in the desert, and said, ‘Hey, what can I do for you? What do you need?’” he said. “And they just said, ‘We need more targets.’”

sub-buzz-1073-1471383329-1.jpg

Kurdish snipers watching a village controlled by ISIS near Mt. Zartak. Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News

The headquarters of the elite Kurdish unit that worked with Wheeler in Hawija is set deep inside an intelligence compound in the mountains on the outskirts of Erbil, along a road that winds past guard towers and barricades. “Warning: Military Personnel Only,” reads a sign nearby. One wall in the single-story building is lined with commendations from foreign government services: the French Foreign Legion, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, the CIA.

Somewhere around Erbil — whether in the intelligence compound or at another place, the CTU officers won’t say — is a base where CTU and US commandos live and train. Officially, the base doesn’t exist, but it has a name: Camp Wheeler.

To his local partners, Wheeler embodied the US commitment to the new war.

Like many US service members in Iraq today, he had deployed there before. The former Army Ranger was transferred to the military’s elite special operations command in 2004 and had been deployed at least 17 times, mostly in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army said after his death. Like its counterpart in the Navy, known as Seal Team 6, which killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, most of what Delta Force does is classified. Its soldiers, termed “operators,” played a key role in the Iraq War, leading the hunt for Saddam Hussein and helping to decimate the leadership of al-Qaeda in Iraq with constant raids. Delta Force left Iraq when Obama pulled out US troops in 2011, and they were among the first to return when the war on ISIS began.

US special operations forces started working with the CTU shortly after its formation in 2012, but their cooperation surged after ISIS poured across the Syrian border and into Iraq in June 2014, capturing Mosul from the Iraqi army. The shock offensive woke the world to the fact that ISIS — which Obama had once called al-Qaeda’s “JV team” — was a global threat. US airstrikes began two months later amid another flurry of international panic: ISIS was now pushing into Kurdish territory, threatening genocide against the Yazidi religious minority concentrated around Mt. Sinjar and closing on Erbil, where the regional government has long been a key US ally.

sub-buzz-27401-1471360598-3.jpg

Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News

The operators work with the CTU in three-month rotations, training the commandos, helping them plan operations, and often accompanying them. Wheeler was the team leader on his rotation, the CTU soldiers said, and was near the end of his tour when he went into Hawija. The father of four had recently taken a short trip home for the birth of his newest son. The CTU soldiers remembered Wheeler as demanding during training and warm and open in downtime. He kept a bottle of whiskey on top of his refrigerator, said the CTU lieutenant, and had learned a little Kurdish: Are you ready? Move! Fire!

The lieutenant said that Hawija was not the only operation that saw Wheeler put his life on the line. “Of all the teams I’ve worked with, his was the strongest, and I can tell you that in those three months we did the biggest number of important operations,” the lieutenant said. “He took part in many operations, and I took part in many with him. Our objective was detaining and removing ISIS members from the field.”

When Wheeler touched down in Hawija, the lieutenant was in an operations room watching on a drone feed. He saw Wheeler’s team move toward one of the two houses ISIS militants occupied on the compound as commandos from another chopper moved toward the second. The lieutenant’s account is consistent with drone footage of the raid viewed by a BuzzFeed News reporter in the days following Wheeler’s death. In it, infrared cameras showed commandos, described by Kurdish sources as a mix of Delta operators and CTU troops, departing two helicopters and rapidly approaching the compound’s two houses as they came under enemy fire.

While the captain took some men to secure the house’s ground floor, Wheeler and the others advanced toward the second story, which had its own entrance via a set of exterior stairs. From his perch at a window there, an ISIS militant was firing down on the commandos relentlessly.

Wheeler led the charge, shooting to kill the militant at the window. But a second jihadi got off the shot that killed him, hitting him in the neck. Another US operator then dispatched the assailant, and one of Wheeler’s comrades began, in vain, to perform first aid.

“Josh was a very selfless guy,” said the senior officer who commands the CTU.

In an interview at the CTU’s headquarters, the senior officer, who helped to plan the raid, confirmed details recounted by the captain and lieutenant and provided his own. “The guy on the second floor could have killed everyone,” he said.

Spokespeople for the US military declined to comment on the specifics of the raid.

After Wheeler’s death, the commandos held a service before his remains were sent home, draping an ISIS flag they had taken from Hawija on the casket.

His name is now engraved on a rock at the secret base that was dedicated in his honor.

“It was as if I lost a brother,” the captain said on a recent afternoon in Erbil, rolling up a sleeve to reveal a scar from a shrapnel wound he suffered in Hawija. He said his US partners continue taking risks that their fellow US citizens never see. “He got killed on the ground fighting ISIS. And Josh, if he wasn’t killed, he wouldn’t have wanted anyone to know.”

sub-buzz-31552-1471383439-12.jpg

The Kurdish with the American flag inside the joint operation room in Erbil where the coalition forces and the Kurdistan Regional government work together on monitoring drone footages on screens and calling airstrikes. Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News

In an operations room far from the front, clicking keyboards provide the quiet soundtrack for another key front of the US war. It is here, in a cordoned-off building at Erbil’s international airport, that US and Kurdish specialists coordinate US airstrikes across northern Iraq. One day last month, US soldiers in crew cuts and camouflage sat at keyboards facing a wall of high-definition TVs. Seven showed live streams from surveillance drones. An eighth had a muted broadcast of a Dodgers-Brewers game. The airport also hosts a US military base that is growing as the country expands its involvement in the war. It houses roughly 2,500 personnel from the US and its coalition of allies, according to a spokesperson for the coalition based there. Special forces are mixed with conventional troops and US military contractors, sleeping in rows of tents. On a recent afternoon, some soldiers worked out in a covered gym while one, shirtless and sweating, jogged outside in the 110-degree heat. Military helicopters lined a tarmac nearby, and residents in the city beyond see the choppers buzzing back and forth daily.

August 8 marked the two-year anniversary of US airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq. The Obama administration’s request for authorization for a new war has not been granted by Congress, and today’s military engagement has relied on a 2001 authorization for the use of military force granted in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The US-led coalition fighting ISIS has carried out 9,562 airstrikes in Iraq and another 4,838 in Syria, according to the Pentagon. (US allies such the UK and France also deploy planes, as well as their own special forces, and in the ops room, a photograph of Queen Elizabeth was taped to one wall.) The strikes are coordinated through this ops room and another in Baghdad. They give the US a presence in battles around the country as myriad forces battle ISIS on the ground. US drones and jets batter ISIS positions in places like Fallujah, where the militants suffered their biggest defeat last month as the Iraqi military pushed into the city followed closely by Iran-backed militia. They also assassinate ISIS leaders in targeted strikes.

The airstrikes are frequently launched in support of the Kurdish forces, called peshmerga, that hold more than 500 miles of front lines with ISIS in northern Iraq. Through an open door in the Erbil ops room, a Kurdish team mans its own bay of computers as they field requests for air support. The Kurdish official who oversees the team — a reserved, middle-aged man who can’t be named for security reasons — recalled a mad scramble to organize the joint US-Kurdish effort in its chaotic early days. “ISIS was coming. They were taking ground,” he said. “Sometimes we didn’t sleep for 72 hours.”

Now the partnership runs smoothly, he said, with teams working around the clock, fueled at times by the Red Bull kept stocked in a refrigerator. As he detailed the process, during a rare visit by a journalist, a subordinate received a call for help from a peshmerga commander who was facing ISIS fire from a heavy machine gun. Silent minutes passed as the men on the keyboards analyzed the request. One wrote out the details and coordinates in English on a form and walked it into the next room, where he handed it to a US officer in a corner. “Froka laraya,” the US officer said in Kurdish: a plane is on the way.

Though the role US troops are playing on the front lines in Iraq is little known at home, Kurdish soldiers see them as a regular presence — calling in airstrikes, flying surveillance drones, firing mortar rounds and hacking ISIS communications, often within range of ISIS fire.

The ops room relies on a steady stream of intelligence from US surveillance and soldiers on the ground. It often comes from US troops who are embedded around the front lines. While Delta Force carries out its sensitive work with the CTU — and with the CTU’s older counterpart, the Counter-Terrorism Group — a constellation of US troops from different specialized units play key roles in the ISIS fight.

US special forces are helping to train the peshmerga as well as the Iraqi military and Sunni Arab militias. They also perform lesser-known and more dangerous tasks under what is broadly termed an “advise and assist” mission.

sub-buzz-32071-1471383559-8.jpg

A Kurdish team prepares a sniper nest on Mt. Zartak in northern Iraq. Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News

At a sandbagged post outside the city of Makhmour, about a kilometer from ISIS territory, a peshmerga commander pointed to a spot in the sand where US soldiers had fired mortars at the enemy, seeking to neutralize ISIS’s own mortars, which had been pummeling the area daily. The US mortar team was led by a man the Kurdish soldiers guarding the post remembered for his beard. It can be hard for peshmerga to tell regular US soldiers from special forces — but facial hair is one sign, as special operations troops, in contrast with conventional soldiers who must be clean-shaven, are often afforded what are known as “relaxed grooming standards.” (At another peshmerga position that takes regular mortar fire, dug into the top of Mt. Zartak with ISIS in the valley below, a soldier confused a US journalist for one of the Western troops who frequently fly drones there. “Excuse me sir, is that one of yours?” he asked, as a fighter jet passed overhead.)

In the town of Tel Asqaf, where the front is a long dirt barricade 10 miles from the edge of Mosul and a mile from the nearest ISIS positions, the peshmerga general in charge, Tariq Sulaiman, said he considered the US operators who work in the area to be “not just partners, but brothers.”

It was in Tel Asqaf that Keating, the Navy SEAL, lost his life. His team was based nearby and had been training the peshmerga and working with them to identify targets, call in airstrikes and operate surveillance drones, Sulaiman said. The SEALs were in the area when ISIS breached peshmerga lines early on May 3, breaking through with armor-plated car bombs and some 400 fighters in a mad push to seize control of a strategic highway. Sulaiman said he believed that the SEALs had instruction to avoid direct contact with the enemy, but they drove right to the head of the ISIS advance, halting the militants as they took cover behind their truck in the middle of the road and opened fire. “They stopped ISIS,” he said.

Peshmerga soldiers rallied behind the US operators, who numbered about 10, for what several of those who participated remembered as an intense firefight. “My head was ringing for days,” one said. ISIS militants took up positions in a home along the roadside, which is pocked now with bullet holes. Peshmerga soldiers remembered shrapnel from car bombs raining down, and a US operator holding steady in his fire on a mounted machine gun as bullets hit around him. Keating was killed in the battle, they said, and the rest of the SEALs eventually evacuated on a helicopter.

The spot where Keating was hit was quiet on a recent afternoon as peshmerga pickup trucks and SUVs raced past. Cigarettes and bullet casings littered the sunbaked dirt along the shoulder, and a scorpion dashed across the road. In addition to Keating, Sulaiman said, the battle saw 16 peshmerga killed. “Our blood was mixed,” he said. “You couldn’t tell whose was whose on the ground.”

sub-buzz-31643-1471383698-12.jpg

Bullets found at the spot where Navy Officer Charles Keating was shot and killed during a gunbattle with ISIS near Tel Asqaf last May. Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News

On a recent afternoon in Washington, DC, a flatscreen TV in the office of Seth Moulton — a Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee who served four tours as a Marine in the Iraq War — greeted visitors with some statistics they had compiled. “Fewer than 1 percent of Americans are willing and able to serve,” it read. “Sixteen percent of Americans currently have a parent who served, compared to 40 percent in 1990. Eighteen percent of members of Congress are veterans today, compared to 64 percent in 1984.”

The result, it adds, is “a longstanding trend: a growing disconnect between American society and the armed forces that claim to represent it.”

Moulton felt the disconnect when he served in the Iraq War, he said, sitting down for coffee in his office — and he thinks the problem has grown worse for the new US war, in part because the Obama administration has been unwilling to level with the public. “And I understand why: this is the president who promised to get us out,” he said. “The president who promised to take us out of Iraq, basically as a condition of his election, has now sent almost 6,000 troops back.”

We have to give a clear mission and end game to our troops. The alternative is that we keep sending US troops back to fight and die for battles that we’ve already won.”
Moulton visited US troops in Iraq this spring and felt a sense of déjà vu. US commanders spoke of their battle plans against ISIS in the same way they discussed the US military surge in 2007, which saw special operations forces and ground troops partner with Sunni militia fighters to roll back al-Qaeda in Iraq. He believes the US still lacks a comprehensive political plan in a country whose unsettled internal conflicts helped pave the way for ISIS’s rise. “I don’t think we have a long-term political plan to ensure the peace after we’re done defeating ISIS. I don’t think we have a political end game at all,” he said. “So my great fear is that all these troops that we’re sending back to Iraq today, to re-fight battles that we already won, which is once again going to take a lot of lives and resources to defeat a terrorist group, are going to find themselves back there again in five years.”

Moulton noted that the US built its largest embassy in the world in Iraq with the understanding that the country would continue to need major US political and diplomatic investment — and that the embassy now sits half-empty, something he saw as a sign that the Obama administration isn’t fully committed. “We didn’t build that embassy as a tourist attraction, we built it because we needed the capacity,” he said. “Fundamentally this is a problem from the leadership, from the administration. We have to give a clear mission and end game to our troops. The alternative is that we keep sending US troops back to fight and die for battles that we’ve already won.”

When Obama pulled US troops from the country, in late 2011, he declared an end to the Iraq War — fulfilling a core promise of his election campaign.

But when the US decided to return to the country to fight ISIS, recalled Derek Chollet, who was a senior civilian official at the Pentagon at the time, there was little time for sentimentality. “There was the sense that we needed to stop this thing from unraveling,” said Chollet, who is now a senior advisor at the German Marshall Fund, a public policy think tank based in Washington, DC. “What we were seeing was an unraveling of the country — and it was reminiscent of the summer of 1975 when we were watching the fall of South Vietnam after we had left there. So my recollection is not an emotional debate about putting troops on the ground, it was more that the [Iraqi] government wants us there, and we should do it.”

sub-buzz-8233-1471363313-3.jpg

Kurdish peshmerga gathered at the front line with ISIS in Tel Asqaf, Iraq. Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News

Chollet said the new US involvement in Iraq keeps in line with Obama’s campaign promise. “When the president would say to end the Iraq War, what was meant by that was not that we wouldn’t have a relationship with Iraq and would not do anything there militarily, but that it wasn’t going to be the overwhelming priority for the United States in the world,” he said. “I think that for the president what matters most is that what we’re doing there is sustainable over time: in terms of the resources we’re putting into it, in terms of support in Iraq for what we’re doing, and in terms of the American people’s support for what we’re doing.”

A spokesperson for the Obama administration rejected the idea that it has downplayed the role of US soldiers in combat, and he pointed to portions of an interview Obama gave the military newspaper Stars and Stripes in May. In them, Obama noted the current conflict’s difference in scale and mission from the previous US engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Our mission in Iraq, first and foremost, is to support Iraqi forces as they take the lead in fighting [ISIS] on the ground,” Obama said. “This includes our special operations forces in Iraq, and now Syria, who are training, equipping and advising local forces and partnering on counterterrorism missions against [ISIS] leaders and targets. It also includes our air campaign, which, along with coalition partners, has pounded [ISIS] targets and helped local forces in Iraq and Syria push ISIL back from key areas. This is a dangerous mission, and our forces will sometimes face combat situations, as did Master Sergeant Wheeler, Staff Sergeant Cardin and Chief Special Warfare Operator Keating.”

“The facts on the ground simply don’t align with the desired storyline.”
Yet even some within the government feel that the administration has often portrayed the war as one that doesn’t require deep involvement from US troops on the ground — even as their involvement has increased. “Why must everything be forced to fit into the ‘ending the war’ narrative, even when it doesn’t fit?” said one US official involved in anti-ISIS policy, speaking on condition of anonymity to express his critique. “The facts on the ground simply don’t align with the desired storyline.”

Dan Sullivan, a Republican on the Senate’s Armed Services Committee, said that presenting a clear picture of what US troops are doing in Iraq is crucial to the mission’s sustainability. “The lesson that we’ve learned now in this country is that you have to level with the American people about what you’re doing, what the government’s doing, what our military forces are doing,” he said. “Because that’s just the right thing to do, and that’s the best way to get American support, but also because there’s an issue with keeping faith with the troops.”

Sullivan, a lieutenant colonel in the Marine Corps. Reserve who served in Afghanistan and Iraq, said the White House has worked “to spin the fact that our troops are in combat” in the new conflict. “These guys are out there sacrificing and risking their lives,” he said. “And there are spouses and kids back at home who know it.”

sub-buzz-2600-1471449817-3.jpg

Camp Swift, Makhmour, Iraq, July 5, 2016.
. Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News

On the ground in Iraq, U.S. soldiers are moving with the front lines — preparing for the upcoming offensive to retake Mosul, which will be the largest against ISIS to date. Outside Makhmour, not far from the base where Cardin, the Marine sergeant, was killed by ISIS rocket fire, an artillery convoy of seven U.S. armored vehicles kicked up dust as it rolled through a field behind peshmerga lines. As Iraqi forces have advanced against ISIS in the area, pushing north toward Mosul, U.S. soldiers have too, rolling artillery forward from their bases so they can keep ISIS under fire.

The Mosul offensive will see Iraqi and Kurdish forces working to surround the city, bearing down on it from multiple fronts. “And on every front there’s going to be US special forces calling in air support, reacting to crises, engaging in direct fire,” said Michael Knights, an analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who has spent time at Iraqi, Kurdish, and US bases across the country. “And eventually this is going to extend into Mosul itself.”

US involvement on the ground promises to increase as the offensive comes to a head. “The front line is shrinking down as we are getting closer to Mosul, and it’s the jaws of this great animal closing on ISIS, and we are going to see a higher and higher concentration of US forces and their [Western] allies on the front lines,” Knights said. “What has so far been a low-visibility effort is going to be a much more intensive one.”

Part of an Army infantry brigade combat team is stationed at the US base in Makhmour, which sits in a joint compound with the peshmerga and the Iraqi military. Carloads of civilians who have fled the nearby fighting pass on the road outside the compound’s guarded gate. Inside, the entrance to the base is marked by a handwritten sign on a fortified metal door: Camp Swift.

Inside Camp Swift, which has largely been off limits to journalists since it opened last year, were signs of expansion. The sandbagged guard posts that once marked the camp’s exterior had been encircled by new ones on walls set further out. ISIS rockets have hit the base, but two US soldiers manning one post said it had been quiet of late. “We’re mostly watching civilians, and there are a lot of dogs,” one said.

The base houses more than 150 US troops, said Col. Brett Sylvia, the senior officer there. “It’s slowly growing,” he said.

Sylvia, 43, is the commander of Task Force Strike, the US Army’s advise-and-assist program in Iraq. His mission is to help local forces — mainly the Iraqi army and peshmerga — to drive ISIS back and ultimately defeat it. Based at nine locations in Iraq and three in Kuwait, Sylvia said, his soldiers advise local forces before and during operations and assist them on the ground with surveillance and artillery. The adjoining Iraqi base holds an ops room, much like the one in Erbil, where US officers were manning computers in one corner while Iraqi officers occupied another.

Trying to coordinate the war on ISIS is a complicated task — and one over which the US doesn’t have total control. The Iraqi military and peshmerga are often at odds, while the US tries to keep its distance from the Iran-backed Shiite militia, many of whom fought US troops during the Iraq War. The Iraqi military, meanwhile, is still trying to regain its footing after its collapse in Mosul, which saw three divisions retreat in the face of a much smaller ISIS force, leaving behind US-provided weapons and armored vehicles.

But ISIS has lost around 45 percent of its territory in Iraq and Syria over the last two years, according to the Pentagon. And from the front lines around Makhmour, Iraqi forces are slowly making their way toward Mosul, where the eventual offensive to retake the city will be the climax of the US efforts. “The main event is getting to Mosul,” Sylvia said, pointing to a military map at the base that was centered on villages to the city’s south. “Very soon what I want to do is take this map and shift it down.”

Sylvia said his soldiers were well aware of the risks they take. “This is a combat environment, and we are here,” he said. “The US here in 2016 is a lot different than the US here in 2007. But it doesn’t mitigate how dangerous it is.”

Sylvia, a father of five, served four tours in the Iraq War and has spent approximately two years in total deployed in the country. Walking through his growing base, he noted that his oldest son, now 18, was about to follow in his footsteps and join the Army. “Everything I do out here is so that my sons don’t have to come out here,” he said.

With additional reporting by Mitchell Prothero in Istanbul and Ali Watkins in Washington, DC.

sub-buzz-22946-1471298804-1.jpg

Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News

CORRECTION

An earlier version of this story said that the Obama administration did not request authorization from Congress for a new war. The administration did request it, but was not granted by Congress. We’ve updated the story. Aug. 17, 2016, at 3:40 a.m.

UPDATE

An image showing the entrance to Camp Swift was removed at the request of the US Army. Aug. 17, 2016, at 12:04 p.m.





Mike Giglio is a correspondent for BuzzFeed News based in Istanbul. He has reported on the wars in Syria and Ukraine and unrest around the Middle East. His secure PGP fingerprint is 55F9 0F43 6840 1CED 246D B8AC 7558 4558 23A2 AFC1
Contact Mike Giglio at mike.giglio@buzzfeed.com.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,521
Reactions
14,660
Points
113
Again, an aggressive amount of content with no attempt to formulate a coherent dialogue. It's not about style, it's about a reasonable and generous approach towards an open conversation. Your non-stop posting of content thwarts all of that. I'll stand by and see if anyone bothers to read everything you posted and engages with it. If not, you might consider putting it out in bites that can be digested and discussed.

Also, I don't know how you expect me to read all of this and you didn't even bother to look up my Dorothy Parker quote. More apt than I thought. You insist on a lot from others but have no generosity back.
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
Again, an aggressive amount of content with no attempt to formulate a coherent dialogue. It's not about style, it's about a reasonable and generous approach towards an open conversation. Your non-stop posting of content thwarts all of that. I'll stand by and see if anyone bothers to read everything you posted and engages with it. If not, you might consider putting it out in bites that can be digested and discussed.



ah -- the world -famous american penchant for ''give it to me in sound bites"

and ''i'll check to see how others see it" -- ya -- youthink i CARE?

LOL.if you or anyone can address the information as they are -- GOOD - if not DO not hide behind arguments about ''too much" - you are either CAPABLE OR NOT.

this -- -- AGAIN -- MOXIE -- IS NOT for little children. it's not for INFANTILIZED americans.

who love ''soundbites" and call that "'debate" -- as in HILLARY:

"THE REASON WE ARE the GREATEST -- IS BECAUSE WE ARE goooooood".

REPEAT that again -- children -- ''we are gooood"...
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,521
Reactions
14,660
Points
113
Can you even read? I'm not talking about "sound-bites." I'm asking you to make something other than a self-indulgent diatribe so that it can be discussed. I don't think that's hard to understand. I don't make anything like the outrageous claims you keep attributing to some made-up version of the US. And if you are trying to lampoon someone who says 'the reason we are the greatest is because we're good,' I'd give you Donald Trump. Whatever you think about Hillary, she's not given to childish and facile jingoistic statements like that. That's purely The Donald.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,521
Reactions
14,660
Points
113
i am not concerned about 'style" moxie

longform-original-21116-1471297715-3.jpg
Warzer Jaff for BuzzFeed News
Inside the Real US Ground War On ISIS
As the US and its allies prepare to launch a major offensive for Mosul, US service members are on the ground in growing numbers — and increasingly in harm’s way. Mike Giglio reports from the bases and front lines where they work around northern Iraq.


Mike Giglio

BuzzFeed News Middle East Correspondent

Can you synthesize this article and explain your reason for posting it? That would be helpful.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
mrzz World Affairs 2449
T World Affairs 13
britbox World Affairs 82
britbox World Affairs 1004
britbox World Affairs 46