Washington Kills 230 Civilians in Mosul Overnight - Where's the Outrage?

[H. E. Panqui]

silverboor limbaughs: "Oh God get out of your loser mindset."



...yeah, slaughtering people in patently immoral, illegal, undeclared, largely-secretive, etc., wars has always been a winning strategy for your world-champion terrorists/republicrats...

[Todd]

You really need to PM dannno. He'll lay it all out for you. If Trump said "30 days" he means thirty days. Once he can get to it. This is still Obama's war. Trump hasn't had the time to address this yet. I'm sure he would like to, but so many factions are causing him to concentrate elsewhere right now. He talks with Rand at least twice a day. Just give him a chance.

I approve this rant. Very Big_ J like. Good job.

[jmdrake]

Extrapolate that to Iraq. We are much more involved, then Obama was letting on.

Extrapolation often leads to stupid conclusions and this is a prime example. You have not actually made a coherent argument. We had pulled out of Iraq. YOUR HERO TRUMP SAID WE PULLED OUT OF IRAQ TOO EARLY! Now was it wrong for Obama to get us involved in Syria? Most certainly. But that has nothing to do with my factually accurate statement that we had pulled out of Iraq. And the answer to the war in Syria? Simple. Trump needs to actually keep the campaign promise to "Let Russia handle it." Instead he's doubled down on the failed Obama strategy of "helping the moderate rebels."

The fighting was suspended because Russia decided to pay us back and spammed everyone with civilian deaths. We did it to them too. Did you think Syrian regime just suspended their operations around Allepo when news was filled with news of civilian deaths there?

Oh. So now your channeling your inner Hillary Clinton and deciding to "blame Russian interference." As if Al Jazeera wasn't covering the civilian deaths in Mosul.

They are human shields. They are protecting military objectives. We been bombing civilians before, especially when operation began.

This is not an endorsement of war. But if you fighting do it right.

Except the Iraqi army already had ISIS on the run without the need for America to "take out" the so called "human shields." And since this "war" is about saving Iraqi civilians from ISIS......

[jmdrake]

silverboor limbaughs: "Oh God get out of your loser mindset."



...yeah, slaughtering people in patently immoral, illegal, undeclared, largely-secretive, etc., wars has always been a winning strategy for your world-champion terrorists/republicrats...

He and other Trumpbots have completely bought the Trump Kool Aid. We've just had a Trumpbot longing for Trump to impose martial law in order to save us from the New World Order. You can't make this stuff up.

[silverhandorder]

silverboor limbaughs: "Oh God get out of your loser mindset."



...yeah, slaughtering people in patently immoral, illegal, undeclared, largely-secretive, etc., wars has always been a winning strategy for your world-champion terrorists/republicrats...

Make strawmans. Get owned. No need to talk toyou further.

Extrapolation often leads to stupid conclusions and this is a prime example. You have not actually made a coherent argument. We had pulled out of Iraq. YOUR HERO TRUMP SAID WE PULLED OUT OF IRAQ TOO EARLY! Now was it wrong for Obama to get us involved in Syria? Most certainly. But that has nothing to do with my factually accurate statement that we had pulled out of Iraq. And the answer to the war in Syria? Simple. Trump needs to actually keep the campaign promise to "Let Russia handle it." Instead he's doubled down on the failed Obama strategy of "helping the moderate rebels."



Oh. So now your channeling your inner Hillary Clinton and deciding to "blame Russian interference." As if Al Jazeera wasn't covering the civilian deaths in Mosul.



Except the Iraqi army already had ISIS on the run without the need for America to "take out" the so called "human shields." And since this "war" is about saving Iraqi civilians from ISIS......

I am not going to engage in parsle tongue with you.

What I said so far is enough to win the argument for those that read the exchange.

[jmdrake]

I am not going to engage in parsle tongue with you.

What I said so far is enough to win the argument for those that read the exchange.

The argument in your own mind? Let's recap the argument that you have really just admitted you lost.

Me: We had already pulled out of Iraq.
You: Don't read the propaganda. We were still in Syria.
Me: Mmmm....Syria isn't Iraq. Don't be an idiot.
You: I know that but I'm right because MAGA!

It's really simple. You bought the bill of goods that Trump was somehow against the MIC and aggressive foreign policy. I don't blame you. I once believed that too. I hoped that Trump was possibly an antiwar candidate. It turns out that he wasn't. That was a ploy to get votes, stand out from the crowd, and siphon off support from Rand Paul. And.....it worked. It totally worked. Trump has been on both sides of almost every issue. Ron Paul said it best when he said that Trump changes positions within minutes. He was "kinda sorta" for the Iraq war....then he supposedly was "always against it" and you should "ask Sean Hannity" for proof...which never came. But then he pushed the neocon lie that ISIS was because Obama "pulled out too early." So it should come as no shocker to anyone that General Mattis is saying now that we should stay in Iraq indefinitely. Meet the new boss...same as the old boss....

[Suzanimal]

"Just come home. We just marched in, we can just come home ..."

For people who don't who said that...

[jmdrake]

"Just come home. We just marched in, we can just come home ..."

For people who don't who said that...

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Seriously I was starting to think I was on the wrong forum. We have to bomb the human shields in order to save them? WTF?

[Suzanimal]

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Seriously I was starting to think I was on the wrong forum. We have to bomb the human shields in order to save them? WTF?

Yeah, I was beginning to doubt anyone even remembered that guy.

[ChristianAnarchist]

For people who don't who said that a different world we would live in if that man had been elected!!

What a different

[AuH20]

U.S. won't be leaving the Middle East anytime soon with China on the prowl in both Africa and Eurasia. I doubt Trump can do anything unless he goes completely rogue and tells Kissinger and Co. to go cry in the corner.

[jmdrake]

U.S. won't be leaving the Middle East anytime soon with China on the prowl in both Africa and Eurasia. I doubt Trump can do anything unless he goes completely rogue and tells Kissinger and Co. to go cry in the corner.

What would Ron Paul do?

[AuH20]

What would Ron Paul do?

Pull them out and then be poisoned a day or two after.

[TheCount]

U.S. won't be leaving the Middle East anytime soon with China on the prowl in both Africa and Eurasia. I doubt Trump can do anything unless he goes completely rogue and tells Kissinger and Co. to go cry in the corner.

Stop making pathetic excuses for him. He's not only maintaining the policies of his predecessors, he's doubling down on them.

This 'Trump is simultaneously fighting the deep state and unable to do anything that we believed that he would because of the deep state' trope is getting sad quickly. Any criticism of any kind is met with handwaving and a mumbling of 'deepstatedeepstatedeepstate.'

[undergroundrr]

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/ne...-civil-defence

If it turns out to be over 500, that's our own mini-9/11. A black mark on US history.

[AuH20]

Stop making pathetic excuses for him. He's not only maintaining the policies of his predecessors, he's doubling down on them.

This 'Trump is simultaneously fighting the deep state and unable to do anything that we believed that he would because of the deep state' trope is getting sad quickly. Any criticism of any kind is met with handwaving and a mumbling of 'deepstatedeepstatedeepstate.'

I'm not making excuses for him. He's made some pacts with questionable personnel which falls on his shoulders. I'm explaining the nature of this entrenched bureaucracy that seemingly runs on autopilot. Even Kennedy could not stop the Bay of Pigs operation.

[jmdrake]

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/ne...-civil-defence
An Iraqi military official told The New Arab that whoever carried out the attack may have used internationally banned weapons.

"Six of these bombs destroyed the targeted street and three adjacent alleys. The charred state of the dead bodies and fused iron and deep craters left by the bombs could not have been from normal weaponry," the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, claimed.

If it turns out to be over 500, that's our own mini-9/11. A black mark on US history.

Wait a second. So after overthrowing and being complicit in the murder of Saddam Hussein over alleged possession of banned weapons in Iraq...we use banned weapons in Iraq? Dafuq?

[jmdrake]

Pull them out and then be poisoned a day or two after.

And so instead of pulling out, Trump out Obama's Obama and out Bush's Bush. Ummmmmmmm.....okay.

[Suzanimal]

U.S. won't be leaving the Middle East anytime soon with China on the prowl in both Africa and Eurasia. I doubt Trump can do anything unless he goes completely rogue and tells Kissinger and Co. to go cry in the corner.

Wasn't his less aggressive foreign policy one of his selling points during the election? Now, you're saying he has no control over it? Maybe I'm not getting what you're saying.

[AuH20]

Wasn't his less aggressive foreign policy one of his selling points during the election? Now, you're saying he has no control over it? Maybe I'm not getting what you're saying.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/20...9sL/story.html

Though it’s a bedrock American principle that citizens can steer their own government by electing new officials, Glennon suggests that in practice, much of our government no longer works that way. In a new book, “National Security and Double Government,” he catalogs the ways that the defense and national security apparatus is effectively self-governing, with virtually no accountability, transparency, or checks and balances of any kind. He uses the term “double government”: There’s the one we elect, and then there’s the one behind it, steering huge swaths of policy almost unchecked. Elected officials end up serving as mere cover for the real decisions made by the bureaucracy.

The presidency itself is not a top-down institution, as many people in the public believe, headed by a president who gives orders and causes the bureaucracy to click its heels and salute. National security policy actually bubbles up from within the bureaucracy. Many of the more controversial policies, from the mining of Nicaragua’s harbors to the NSA surveillance program, originated within the bureaucracy. John Kerry was not exaggerating when he said that some of those programs are “on autopilot.”

[jmdrake]

Wasn't his less aggressive foreign policy one of his selling points during the election? Now, you're saying he has no control over it? Maybe I'm not getting what you're saying.

Yes. But at the same time Trump ran on a less aggressive foreign policy he also ran on a more aggressive foreign policy.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/20...9sL/story.html

Really that excuse is thin. Trump is doing what he said he would do which is "bomb the shyt out of ISIS" and "kill their families." I'm sure in the rubble and body count of dead civilians there were people who were at least distantly related to someone in ISIS regardless of whether those people actually agreed with ISIS or not. The real danger in a Donald Trump is that since he is all over the map on every issue anything that he does is keeping a promise to somebody.

[ChristianAnarchist]

Yes. But at the same time Trump ran on a less aggressive foreign policy he also ran on a more aggressive foreign policy.



Really that excuse is thin. Trump is doing what he said he would do which is "bomb the shyt out of ISIS" and "kill their families." I'm sure in the rubble and body count of dead civilians there were people who were at least distantly related to someone in ISIS regardless of whether those people actually agreed with ISIS or not. The real danger in a Donald Trump is that since he is all over the map on every issue anything that he does is keeping a promise to somebody.

Surely you are not suggesting that it's ok to kill people who are related to ISIS wackos??

[pcosmar]

Pull them out and then be poisoned a day or two after.

Perhaps.

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

[silverhandorder]

Loser mindset: US needs to care about Iraqis.

MAGA mindset: Trump is kicking ass left and right domestically. Will kick ass foreign policy wise when it is time to work on it.

[Suzanimal]

Loser mindset: US needs to care about Iraqis.

MAGA mindset: Trump is kicking ass left and right domestically. Will kick ass foreign policy wise when it is time to work on it.

I hope this was sarcasm.

[Suzanimal]

https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/20...9sL/story.html

Elected officials end up serving as mere cover for the real decisions made by the bureaucracy.

Then quit serving as cover for them. That's certainly within his power.

[Suzanimal]

Yes. But at the same time Trump ran on a less aggressive foreign policy he also ran on a more aggressive foreign policy.

36DDD chess?

[TheCount]

I'm not making excuses for him. He's made some pacts with questionable personnel which falls on his shoulders. I'm explaining the nature of this entrenched bureaucracy that seemingly runs on autopilot. Even Kennedy could not stop the Bay of Pigs operation.

Still a garbage excuse. Still don't believe it. It is within the President's power to affect these things and yet he does not. Quite the opposite, he enables it. You can't blame the deep state for that.

[enhanced_deficit]

It is within the President's power to affect these things and yet he does not. Quite the opposite, he enables it. You can't blame the deep state for that.

BTW did you criticize or understood/support DGP's killing of children, civilians?

Curious if you see loss of innocent life through partisan lens or called dgp out too during the violent chapter following his Nobel Peace prize win.

[enhanced_deficit]

At some point it will be one terrorist attack too many. And then we will start really fighting.

Did you know in Mosul Iraq, terrorist group Hezbullah and US tax payers funded forces are defacto allies?

Iran's Hezbollah Franchise in Iraq: Lessons from Lebanon's Shiite ...
www.washingtoninstitute.org/.../irans-hezbollah-franchise-in-iraq-lessons-from-leban...
As Shiite militias in Iraq attempt to become potent political actors, they may follow Hezbollah's Lebanese model: using military leverage over the government to ...


Hezbollah fighters train Iraqi Shiite militants near Mosul
www.longwarjournal.org/.../hezbollah-fighters-train-iraqi-shiite-militants-near-mosul....
Nov 5, 2016 - Video surfaced of Hezbollah fighters training Iraqi Shiite militants near Mosul this week. They are not wearing their militia's insignia, but their ...

Terrorism is attack on civilians with a political/militant or such objective and terrorist attacks have been going on routinely for many years now.
Iraq war was a revenge slash greed driven operation based on lies, Iraqi people have paid enough price already for the war mongering adventures of US based neocons.

We shouldn't fight. But this is what will happen. A. We go bankrupt. or B. We will bomb the $#@! out of anything that moves

So you see no prospects for any other outcomes like options (C), if Trump behaves as you are projecting, and 4-8 years from now we find another Barack Hussein Obama or an openly muslim arab man sitting in the White House?
Bush's wars produced Obama, how can anyone be so sure that Trump's wars with high collateral damage and all the physical/psychological/emotional/financial costs that come with it won't push American public to swing to the opposite extreme again?

Beyond some verbal bluffs and incidental blunders like recent ones in Yemen/Iraq, I don't see Trump moving militarily in fighting escalation diection. Mostly because it's not practical and very little appetite in most of America for such a costly course.