This is a smart way to fight a war. Drop a few bombs, provide intelligence to
the good guys, and provide them with arms if need be so they can fight the
terrorists effectively.I'm starting to remember why I voted for
Obama in the first place.
Please consider the following to protect the minorities in Iraq. First,
our military ought to airdrop powerful "smart weapons" as part of
humanitarian aide so the minorities in Iraq can protect themselves. We have a
few materials engineers in the upper brass of our military. We also have our
many materials engineering professors at our universities. Can they invent an
attachment that will melt certain components of these weapons in case it ends up
in the hands of the enemy? Then it will make these "smart weapons"
useless when activated. They would weld these attachments to only powerful
weapons. They would include GPS as part of this attachment. By applying this to
only powerful weapons, the military would have enough space on the
electromagnetic communication spectrum to make this possible. The military would
use satellite communications to activate these attachments by remote means. Thus
you could provide big American firepower to the minorities in Iraq with the
insurance that these powerful weapons will not end up in the hands of the enemy
to use against the minorities. These attachments could also be applied to tanks
and Humvees engines. Then you balance this war without the risks.
You mean to tell us that Old Lead from Behind is actually doing something.
Well, all I can say is that I hope arming the Kurds doesn't turn out like
the Russians arming the Ukrainian separatists with surface-to-air missiles.
That turned out real well...
U.S. arming Kurds in Iraq? You could probably find a headline 30 years ago that
says "U.S. arming Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan".What could
possibly go wrong?
Re: ". . . I hope arming the Kurds doesn't turn out like the Russians
arming the Ukrainian separatists with surface-to-air missiles."No need to worry about that.The Russians never actually armed
Ukrainian separatists. The Russian Army is the "Ukrainian separatists,"
so there was no need to arm them.They were already armed.
So I guess Obama is a war monger after all. Hope and Change!!
ISIS are using weapons from our country, and now the Kurds?What ever
happened to gun control?
Worf -Ronald Reagan armed Al Qadah to the teeth. And GW Bush did the
same for ISIS.But those two are both Sunni groups.Obama
is arming the Kurds.What you need to keep in mind, is that those
fundamentalist Sunni groups are dedicated to the destruction of America.And the Kurds have always been our friends.See the
difference?Apparently, only Democratic Presidents have the good
sense to arm our friends instead of our enemies.
@GaryO,Get out of the past. Fix the problems of today!Obama just agreed to eleven billion dollars of military weapons to Qatar, who
is supplying arms to Hamas, and ISIS. ISIS is also fighting with weapons we
left sitting there in Iraq.ISIS are using weapons from our country,
and now the Kurds.And yes! American ranchers along the southern
border have been killed by Mexican cartels using American weapons. Our
commander did little to protect our citizens.This had nothing to do
with Reagan, or Bush.What ever happened to gun control?
Hey Worf –“What ever happened to gun control?”Whatever happened to critical thinking? Apparently it’s been
banned in Right Wing circles.“This had nothing to do with
Reagan, or Bush.”WRONGThe condition of the Middle
East has everything to do with Reagan and Bush.GW Bush is a Reagan
acolyte. GW tried to out-Reagan Reagan. He followed and even accelerated
Reagan’s ridiculous policies to the great detriment of America.Reagan gave tons of weapons to Al Qadah . . . rocket launchers, LPG’s,
rpg’s, artillery, thousands of small arms. And GW did the same in Iraq
but more so, after he declared war and occupied the nation for NO good reason.
Obama, BTW, is very much on record for having opposed that war.And
yes, ISIS now possesses many of those weapons given to Iraq, after we
“won” that unprovoked war. “Mission Accomplished!”
Remember?Try to think critically. The present is the PRODUCT of the
past . . . And all of that incredibly nonsensical and destructive Republican
leadership of the past is still very much haunting the world today.
Re: ". . . all of that incredibly nonsensical and destructive Republican
leadership of the past is still very much haunting the world today."So, when Obama pulls up stakes, abandons the Kurds, leaves behind untold
heaps of weapons, but no training or other support on using them, as he
cynically declares victory, then cuts and runs out of Iraq, that's somehow
"nonsensical and destructive Republican leadership?"And,
when his vacuous, uninvolved leadership brings about the military and
humanitarian disaster that every honest military expert predicted at the time of
his retreat, that's also, somehow, "nonsensical and destructive
Republican leadership?"Hmmmmm.Truth is -- Obama owns
this disaster. He wanted it. He created it. His refusal to deal directly and
seriously with it, suggesting we avert our gaze and foolishly buy into his
assertions that the world is a more peaceful place for his anti-American
politics is just pathetic.Real people know it's way too late to
blame Obama's serial foreign-policy disasters on George Bush,
notwithstanding the bleating of callow Obama apologists.Obama owns
this tragedy. His cowering in the face of monstrous evil will be his legacy.
@ GaryO:Once again, your comments are long on rhetoric and short on
facts. Your first one was actually doing pretty good until your wrote that last
sentence. That totally negated the effect you were trying for. If
you do more research, you'll discover that many Congressional Republicans
had been calling for Obama to arm the Kurds before he finally did it. If
anything, he did it under pressure from other politicians, similar to how he
responds to most crisis.Did you forget that current democrat
attorney general Eric Holder armed some of the worst drug gangs in Mexico via
Fast and Furious? So much for your statement that democrats always get it right
and Republicans always get it wrong. Neither party has a lock on either. They
both do some thing right and some things wrong. Even a near-blind person could
see that.Please try to be more objective in your assessments. It
would make the ongoing dialog much less biased and much more meaningful.
@GaryO,You didn't address Mexican cartels, Pakistan, Indonesia,
Qatar, etc. Billions of dollars worth of weapons sent to them How
did Bush, and Reagan cause those? Let's get the cognitive juices going!
Hey Objectified -“ . . . your comments are long on rhetoric
and short on facts.”WRONGMy rhetoric is full of
facts.“ . . . many Congressional Republicans had been calling
for Obama to arm the Kurds . . . “ Really? I haven’t
heard a thing from Jason Chaffetz or Mike Lee about that. . . . Plenty of talk
about impeachment though.Obviously, our Democratic President and
our Tea-Party-infested Congress have different agendas. Obama is interested in
helping this nation, while Tea-Partiers continue obstructing and destroying.“Fast and Furious?” Fast and Furious was a gun-walking
sting. No one involved in border security or law enforcement believes
themselves to be out of harm’s way. They have dangerous jobs. Sometimes
they are injured and killed. It does happen. But this law enforcement sting gone
wrong does not approach the enormity of GW’s attempt at “nation
building.”“Please try to be more objective in your
assessments.”I am pretty objective. I rely on facts. And the
facts tell me that Republican policies over the last few decades have done an
incredible amount of harm to this nation and the world, much more so than
You all can argue over whether Barry or Dick Cheney are to blame over the
current TARFU in the Near East.Both sides are wrong. It goes back to
the borders drawn up after WW1. Had the Turks (Ottoman Empire) not sided w/
Germany; there might still be some semblance of order in the region?p.s. ISIS is a Wahabbist group. You know the nuts jobs who backed bin Laden
& want to overthrow the status quo in Riyadh.
re: procuradorfiscalStatus of Forces agreement - established that
U.S. combat forces would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all
U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011.On December 14,
2008, U.S. President George W. Bush signed the security pact with Iraq.On
16 November, Iraq's Cabinet approved the agreements; on 27 November, the
Iraqi Parliament ratified them; on December 4, Iraq's presidential council
approved the security pacts.You are entitled to have your own opinion, but
not your own facts.
@GaryO, It's not about Democrats, Republicans, or what
happened in the past.It's about what's right or wrong,
today.We have trouble today, and the commander feels he can lead
from a golf course at Martha's Vineyard.
The Wahabi are the militant mullahs from Saudi Arabia and have been stirring up
Muslims for years. Someone ought to have a talk with the Saudi's about
them. It will not be good for us if the Islamic State takes over Kurdistan and
Iraq and Syriaa, and on and on. I am glad if we can send weapons and supplies
to the Kurds and they don't need ground to air missiles.