View Full Version : Obama to sent up to 300 'advisors' to Iraq

06-19-2014, 12:03 PM
Jut got breaking news on my AP App. Looks like President Forwar wanted his own Iraq invasion after all.

06-19-2014, 12:07 PM
im not certain id want to be one of those "advisers" based on the video's of what the ISIS thugs do to those that are captured. this could get really ugly if shit goes wrong....or maybe thats just what they're planning?

James Madison
06-19-2014, 12:10 PM
Mogadishu, round 2.

06-19-2014, 12:11 PM
Obama just took this off the table--or pretended to--at least for this week...

06-19-2014, 12:12 PM
All I heard from his press conference was "I have no idea what I'm doing, so I'll uh just send some advisers" maybe if you hadn't bankrolled them in Syria you wouldn't have this problem now. Did you not learn anything from Bin Laden in the 80's? One thing that Obama does impress me with is his ability to talk for a long time but manage to say nothing at all. I'm sure Kerry will give the Iraqi gov't a stern talking to. What a mess.

Anti Federalist
06-19-2014, 12:27 PM
Advisors into a hot civil war...what could go wrong?

06-19-2014, 02:40 PM
"Advisers" with laser designators.


06-19-2014, 02:47 PM
Did you not learn anything from Bin Laden in the 80's?

Let's see. A skyscraper full of, shall we say, inconvenient federal trial evidence destroyed, a petrodollar war for the Fed and a pipeline war for the oil companies, the PATRIOT Act, the DHS, and numerous other totalitarian wet dreams come true--yeah, I'd say the Royal House of Saud has taught Washington quite a lot...

06-19-2014, 02:48 PM

Moments ago, president Obama announced what was informally known for days but only today was officially disclose to the public: namely that he’s sending up to 300 American troops to Iraq in the wake of escalating chaos in that nation. Actually: correction, make that "military advisors." Please don't call them troops because otherwise the US public may realize that Obama has just become only the third president in as many decades to launch his own private Iraq war.
He is right: this time the fighting will be done by "military advisors" soon to be far more numerous than merely "thousands", operating under the watchful, remote controlled eyes of America's drone army.

As Politico succinctly summarizes, "It’s a politically uncomfortable move for a president who won election in large part due to his opposition to the Iraq War and who has touted the withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from Iraq in 2011 as one of the key achievements of his presidency."

Naturally, coming from the president who has made the focus of his second term to rule via Executive Orders, this latest escalation would be just that - another unilateral action. Only this time Nancy Pelosi agreed to abdicate Congressional checks and balances on private presidential wars:

Obama added he would consult with Congress as he goes, but did not indicate he would return for another authorization vote.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that she and the other congressional leaders who met with Obama at the White House Wednesday told him that he does not need any additional authority to act if the action is being taken in the interests of national security, and that no one in the meeting raised an objection. According to Pelosi, Obama said his lawyers were studying that question, but that she hoped another vote wouldn’t be required.

That was just the beginning. Where things got bizarre, is when Obama said that "we are not looking to control their assets and their energy." The stupidity of this comment hardly deserve a comment: so why is Obama going in: as the pro bono mercenary army of an Iraqi president whom as we reported earlier Obama now wants replaced? Or maybe it is just to fight the ISIS rebels that the US has been secretly arming and training across the border in Syria.

But where things got outright surreal is when Obama announced that he’s sending John Kerry to Iraq consultations around a political solution. Kerry's mission? To help resolve 1400 years of infighting, sectarian hatred, violence and animosity and generally assure that, as Obama put it, the next leader will unite the sects and that Iraqi leaders must, wait for it, "rise above their differences."

Just because US Congress, where the left and the right hardly shoot at each other on sight, apparently has been so successful at rising above an ideological divide that has never been wider, it is now Iraq's turn to unite, overcome countless centuries of sectarian hatred, and come in a righteous circle singing Kumbaya. And if they refuse, US "military advisors" on the ground will help them.

06-19-2014, 03:25 PM
Advisors into a hot civil war...what could go wrong?
Reminds me of the advisers who were sent to Vietnam back in the '60s.

06-20-2014, 04:27 AM
So, a dozen years later, have we gotten out of Iraq yet?

06-20-2014, 04:35 AM

We as a nation have successfully achieved full surreality.

it is particularly interesting to argue that if he didn't need a new resolution, then he never actually stopped the Iraq War in the first place. The fact that he says he doesn't need a new resolution, reveals that IN HIS OWN MIND the war on Iraq never ended. We just outsourced it for a while.

06-20-2014, 07:00 AM

Natural Citizen
06-20-2014, 08:26 AM
Reminds me of the advisers who were sent to Vietnam back in the '60s.

I was wondering if any of the new breed would pick up on this but I didn't hold my breath. It's exactly what happened in Vietnam.

Rep for Dr.3D....

06-20-2014, 09:10 AM
Advisors into a hot civil war...what could go wrong?

why do people call it a civil war? we have fighters strolling in from Syria to cause trouble in Iraq and its a civil war? Take em out and the sunni population have no chance against the Iraqi government. I hate to say it but this is all the administrations fault. They arm and train Islamic terrorists and then said terrorists attacks a govt they are unhappy with in Syria and now Iraq.

This is not a civil but it may end up that way but atm, this is an invasion of Iraq by western backed mercenaries

06-20-2014, 09:16 AM
I was wondering if any of the new breed would pick up on this but I didn't hold my breath. It's exactly what happened in Vietnam.

Rep for Dr.3D....
Vietnam advisers were actually my first thought, but I thought it was obvious enough I didn't mention it. Maybe I'm just old and what I think is obvious is not so obvious. :p

06-20-2014, 09:24 AM
I'm not an expert, but I would say that Iraq has probably had enough of our "advice" already.

Occam's Banana
06-20-2014, 09:30 AM
My first thought was the various "advisors" and "supporting personnel" sent to "assist" the puppet governments of assorted "banana republics" and the like since at least the latter part of the 19th century. (See the remarks of one Butler, Smedley, USMC, regarding suchlike "advisements.") Vietnam wusn't nuthin' new ...

06-20-2014, 11:40 AM
At least Leonidas had the guts to accompany his 300.

Weston White
06-20-2014, 06:24 PM
So is this what we are calling our military personnel now? It is just so hard to keep up with all of these promised "changes".