ISIS might have just stepped in it...

It should be noted that the Kurds are not only not Arabs or Turks, they speak an Indo-European language, or, properly, group of languages. However, they are not Shi'a, as the Iranians are, who also are of Indo-European stock. They are really only interested in the territory which was traditionally considered as Kurdish, before Saddam started his assimilation program of moving Arabs, mostly Sunni, into towns previously almost exclusively Kurdish. I expect them to be interested in the far north of Iraq, since what they really want is an independent Kurdistan, which would include all of northern Iraq, southern Turkey and northeastern Iran. They are known as fierce fighters. Once they recapture the traditionally Kurdish part of northern Iraq, I expect them to lose interest in moving further south, which will leave a band of Sunni territory north of Baghdad. Way back, after our invasion, I said I believed that Iraq needed to be partitioned into three bands and that I thought it eventually would be. It just took longer than I thought...
 
Militants in Iraq Hit by Strikes, Kurds Say US Airstikes in Iraq

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/w....html?emc=edit_na_20140807&nlid=57903598&_r=0

DOHUK, Iraq — American military forces bombed at least two targets in northern Iraq on Thursday night to rout Islamist insurgents who have trapped tens of thousands of religious minorities in Kurdish areas, Kurdish officials said.

Some confusion exists
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/08/07/u_s_beings_humanitarian_airdrops_in_iraq.html

The scope of American involvement—or potential involvement—in Iraq was a muddled picture on Thursday. The New York Times reported that, according to Kurdish officials, the U.S. bombed at least two targets in northern Iraq on Thursday, a claim the Pentagon said was false. The White House, however, said it was considering airstrikes, as well as humanitarian airdrops in the Kurdish north of the country increasingly under siege by ISIS militants. ABC News is now reporting the humanitarian aid drops have already begun. Here’s more:
 
Last edited:
ISIS is stronger and more well-funded than most anyone thought, it seems. I read the other day where they looted some $500 million in northern Iraq in the last week. That's some serious funding.
Man, you could pay for six or seven vacations to Martha's Vineyard with all that money.
 
I'm so resistant to using military force to intervene in other parts of the world, but part of my fascination with WWII is the almost complete good vs evil aspect of it (it's not purely good vs evil, but you get the point, I hope) - this movement by ISIS reminds me of the Nazis - almost purely evil in the methods used to gain what they want.

For once I can honestly say I'm in total support of the use of my tax dollars to bomb these animals back to the hell they crawled out of.
 
Last edited:
I'm so resistant to using military force to intervene in other parts of the world, but part of my fascination with WWII is the almost complete good vs evil aspect of it (it's not purely good vs evil, but you get the point, I hope) - this movement by ISIS reminds me of the Nazis - almost purely evil in the methods used to gain what they want.

For once I can honestly say I'm in total support of the use of my tax dollars to bomb these animals back to the hell they crawled out of.
I too support doing what we can from the air to stop ISIS.
I do wish the President had gotten an authorization for the use of force from Congress though. It's ironic he didn't even try. I'd bet the Republicans would have supported the President in this, probably more than the Democrats would have. Maybe there's my answer.
 
I'd bet the Republicans would have supported the President in this, probably more than the Democrats would have.
Perhaps I'm jaded, but I don't buy that for a minute. As bad as Obama is, the republican party has been his equal since he was elected. Their continued actions are precisely why so many people (like me) have left the party.

They would have voted against it simply because he was for it.
 
Perhaps I'm jaded, but I don't buy that for a minute. As bad as Obama is, the republican party has been his equal since he was elected. Their continued actions are precisely why so many people (like me) have left the party.

They would have voted against it simply because he was for it.
Maybe. He didn't even ask, though, something Democrats have demanded of Republican Presidents. If the Republicans voted against authorizing the use of force, I would think that would be an issue the Democrats would like to take into the mid-terms.
 
The things those "people" are doing to children....they should be hunted down and killed to the last "man" among them. Quite seriously, do NOT google for more on it, but they are slowly and tortuously beheading very small children. I pray there is a hell just for these scum.
 
The things those "people" are doing to children....they should be hunted down and killed to the last "man" among them. Quite seriously, do NOT google for more on it, but they are slowly and tortuously beheading very small children. I pray there is a hell just for these scum.
They're freakin' less than animals.
 
Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads