Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TexasTowelie

(112,160 posts)
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 12:13 PM Jun 2014

Iraq-- A Religious Civil War That Started In 680

Democratic House leadership has basically joined Republican House leadership in back Obama's plans for "limited" military involvement in Iraq's religious civil war-- which started on October 10, 680, not 1680, 680 at the Battle of Karbala, when the Sunnis and the Shia began exterminating each other. Obama can't possible think he's going to heal that breach-- even if silly-dillies like Lindsey Graham, Kelly Ayotte and John McCain do. How sad it is to see Democratic House leaders-- many of whom would be flying into fits of rage if Obama's plans were the plans of a Republican-- backing military intervention just for naked partisan reasons. Most sickening of all, of course, is to watch Pelosi-- who rose to the top of leadership by breaking with warmonger Dick Gephardt when he backed Bush's illegal war against Iraq-- going along with the usual suspects and zombies like Hoyer and Clyburn. Yesterday, after a meeting at the White House, Pelosi parroted the Administration line: “I do not believe the President needs any further legislative authority to pursue the particular options for increased security assistance discussed today. I am pleased by the president’s efforts to secure strong Congressional support, and I look forward to additional consultation.” Clyburn backed her up: “I’m a great believer in drones, and I think that this situation cries out for it." That's exactly what Maliki was asking for yesterday-- and for the last month.

Progressives are on another page altogether. Barbara Lee is one of the Members who speaks for the Democrats who oppose war. A few days ago she let her supporters know she plans to offer legislation to repeal the Iraq era authorization to go to war that it still in effect. "The latest spate of violence in Iraq has the President and many members of Congress again contemplating military action. We've been through this before and the American people have spoken-- to stop endless war, at some point we must stand down. To this end, I’m offering amendments to the defense spending bill this week to repeal the authorization for military action in Iraq and the 2001 blank check for war. We’re going to get our vote!

The support from top Democrats provides Obama with cover and flexibility as he weighs his approach to the escalating violence in Iraq, but it also sets the leaders apart from many rank-and-file members who are vehemently against the use of military force less than three years after the last U.S. troops pulled out of Iraq.

Rep. James McGovern (D-Mass.) warned Wednesday that even a limited military engagement could lead to a much greater commitment down the road.

“I worry about us getting sucked into another endless war,” he said.

- See more at: http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2014/06/iraq-religious-civil-war-that-started.html

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Iraq-- A Religious Civil War That Started In 680 (Original Post) TexasTowelie Jun 2014 OP
We need to avoid further entanglement. yallerdawg Jun 2014 #1
babylonsister posted this from Mother Jones intaglio Jun 2014 #2

yallerdawg

(16,104 posts)
1. We need to avoid further entanglement.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 12:25 PM
Jun 2014

In this case, "The enemy of my enemy leads to fewer enemies." How insane is this in the 21st Century?

President Obama needs to just let things run its course, organize world humanitarian aid and indignation/condemnation, and "consult" with Congress, i.e.. get them to vote on authorization for military force and be on record -- just like Syria.

Then follow the will of the people -- not Neocon industrial machine puppets like McCain and Graham.

intaglio

(8,170 posts)
2. babylonsister posted this from Mother Jones
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 12:37 PM
Jun 2014
Obama: Ask First, Shoot Later linking to an LA Times Obama's Mideast airstrike refrain: 'And then what?'
Last fall, as President Obama weighed airstrikes against Syria, deliberations followed a clear pattern: The president solicited scores of options, planners returned with possibilities, and, according to people involved, Obama would reply with the same question: And then what?

Over the last several days, with Obama mulling involvement in another Middle East conflict, this time in Iraq, that dynamic has held.

The result is a policy that so far has put on hold calls from the Iraqi government for U.S. airstrikes against Sunni Islamic militants who have seized territory north and west of Baghdad. Instead, aides say Obama is waiting for evidence that the Iraqi government, which is dominated by Shiites, is willing to reach political reconciliation with Sunni groups.


Link to babylonsister's thread
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Iraq-- A Religious Civil ...