General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPresident Obama: NO military action in Iraq in the absence of political plan
Last edited Fri Jun 13, 2014, 02:08 PM - Edit history (2)
_____________________________
NYT:
Mr. Obama, in a televised statement before he departed for a trip to North Dakota and California, emphasized that the problem was not just a short-term threat to the Iraqi government but also a long-term failure by Baghdad leaders to achieve political reconciliation across sectarian lines. He warned Iraqi leaders that if they want American help, they have to come up with a plan to accommodate minority factions in a meaningful way.
The United States is not simply going to involve itself in a military action in the absence of a political plan by the Iraqis that gives us some assurance that theyre going to work together, he said. Were not going to allow ourselves to be dragged back into a situation where when were there were keeping a lid on things
guardian:
Obama finished his speech by calling Iraqi leaders to come together to fight Isis and build a stable country, saying "We're not going to be able to do it for them."
"We're not going to be able to do it for them
Various military actions by the United States, by any outside nation are not going to solve those problems in the long-term
or provide stability that we need."
"Look, the US has poured a lot of money into these Iraqi security forces
the fact that they're not willing to stand and fight and man their posts
indicates that there's a problem with morale, there's a problem in terms of commitment, and ultimately that's rooted in the political problems that have plagued the country for a very long time."
Bloomberg:
This is not solely, or even primarily, a military challenge, Obama said at the White House. Were not going to allow ourselves to be dragged back into a situation of trying to keep a lid on unrest and have Iraqi leaders undermine chances for an accommodation with foes."
The U.S. wont be able to prop up a government that cant unify the country, which has seen its army unwilling to confront the Sunni extremists who are waging a battle against the Shiite leadership in Baghdad, Obama said.
________________________
This statement means that the WH needs to explain how any military action, overt or in the form of military assistance to Iraqis, will further or help those political aims that he outlined in his remarks today.
The United States is not simply going to involve itself in a military action in the absence of a political plan by the Iraqis that gives us some assurance that theyre going to work together.
That may be a thin reed for opponents of military strikes, but it's one that we should hold onto tightly and not let go.
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)Al-Maliki had an opportunity to govern inclusively where Sunnis were part of the government. But he has pushed them out. So the Sunnis have no interest in co-operating with him now and that gives room for insurgencies.
Al-Maliki might survive by bringing in help from Iran but I am glad to see BO make clear our military help is only there to support a political accommodation. If there is no progress on the political front we will not help militarily.
BootinUp
(46,924 posts)reminds me of Wesley Clarks opinion way back in 2004.
riqster
(13,986 posts)If Maliki wants his nuts pulled out of the fire he himself lit, he'll have to do some firefighting of his own first.
Stupid fuck: I mean, what did the Iraqi PM THINK was gonna happen when he repressed a lot of already hostile and heavily armed people?
Zambero
(8,954 posts)Now go ahead and cry, Johns Boehner and McCain. No more blank checks for ill-conceived wars.
get the red out
(13,458 posts)I heard his news conference when I was home for lunch and I was relieved.
Blanks
(4,835 posts)They need to give land to the religion that is out of power and let them rule themselves.
bigtree
(85,915 posts). . . 22% Sunni I think. 95% Muslim.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Acosta added that Secretary of State John Kerry revealed that the Pentagon has been conducting surveillance operations over Iraq in order to provide the president with a military options should he decide to pursue them.
We have already taken some immediate steps, including providing enhanced aerial surveillance support to assist the Iraqis in this fight, Kerry told reporters in London on Friday. We have also ramped up shipments of military aid to Iraq since the beginning of the year.
and , in what must be a most ironic move:
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/06/13/cnn-u-s-preparing-for-airstrikes-in-iraq-decision-coming-as-soon-as-this-weekend/
bigtree
(85,915 posts). . . using cherry-picked quotes without context.
Today there's a report on how they defined school shootings down from 74 to 15.
mylye2222
(2,992 posts)Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)We will get what we want out of this, we designed the collapse.
bigtree
(85,915 posts)Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)bigtree
(85,915 posts)phleshdef
(11,936 posts)The problem is, Iraq's own security forces should, in theory, be able to handle these folks. But they aren't unified and standing up for the Iraqi government. The President said we wouldn't take any military action without this situation changing.
But if they meet his criteria and that situation does change, then they really don't NEED help anymore.
bigtree
(85,915 posts). . . it's a good basis to challenge him on any military action, as well.