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
 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
Sun Sep 21, 2014, 03:21 PM Sep 2014

This isn't mission creep, it's mission lurch.

It's not even about trust. It's about watching the slow motion disaster.

I want to believe that Obama believes everything he says when he talks about this war. Whether this war campaign was planned from the start to be unrolled this way or it has actually "evolved" as it's played out is immaterial. Those of us raised early objections were right. This mission has creeped like hell and we're only a month and a half in.

Think about how the missions have changed. First, a few hundred troops were sent to Iraq to protect the embassy and consulate. Then, a few hundred more to advise the Iraqi Army. Then, we were sold an emergency action to stop a potential genocide. A true humanitarian mission. How could anyone not support that? We helped to liberate the mountain that was under siege. At that point, we were stopping genocide and protecting "American interests."

Then, we expanded. We started helping reclaim land, territory. We started bombing more areas, driving IS back. Now, two brutal murders later and our objective is to destroy IS. We have sent over 1,600 troops to Iraq and approved a down payment of $500 million to train a rebel army, with one of its objectives being taking on Assad. And, we will start bombing Syria, probably next week. And, this war will take "several years."

The language of our troop use has changed too. We used to say "no boots on the ground." That became "no combat troops on the ground." Then, "no US ground war." Yesterday, Obama said in his weekly address, "I won’t commit our troops to fighting another ground war in Iraq, or in Syria." That is worlds apart from "no boots on the ground," or "no combat troops."

It is clear that US troops will be soon embedded with Iraqi forces on the front line of battle. They will be combat ready and ordering strikes. The administration is clinging to the absurdity that because these troops aren't planning to fire guns offensively that this distinction matters.

And we'll have at least three more years of this "creeping."

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
This isn't mission creep, it's mission lurch. (Original Post) morningfog Sep 2014 OP
"it's up to the Iraqis as a sovereign nation to solve their problems" jakeXT Sep 2014 #1
~~~" And we'll have at least three more years of this "creeping." NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #2
Here's my serious concern about this. morningfog Sep 2014 #4
Meh. I think you're too optimistic Doctor_J Sep 2014 #3
You may be right. morningfog Sep 2014 #6
If the Iraqis don't step up there will be a problem flamingdem Sep 2014 #5
 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
2. ~~~" And we'll have at least three more years of this "creeping."
Sun Sep 21, 2014, 03:38 PM
Sep 2014

And then what?

Are you "Ready for Hillary"?

 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
4. Here's my serious concern about this.
Sun Sep 21, 2014, 03:43 PM
Sep 2014

Hillary has been lockstep with Obama so far. Her hawishness is well understood. What is the outcome if we end up with Hawkish Hillary vs. an anti-war Republican candidate in 2016.

It isn't beyond the impossible. She could be running on a surge or "let's win it" campaign while the repub could be on a "Obama was wrong let's get out." In essence, 2016 will be decision making time in Syria. A lot will happen between now and then.

Not a good prospect.

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
3. Meh. I think you're too optimistic
Sun Sep 21, 2014, 03:41 PM
Sep 2014
I want to believe that Obama believes everything he says when he talks about this war.


I don't think he believes much of what he says about anything any more. He doesn't even pretend to fight the right at this point.

Such a wasted opportunity. Or at least it seemed like an opportunity in November 2008.
 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
6. You may be right.
Sun Sep 21, 2014, 10:33 PM
Sep 2014

I think he really doesn't want to keep sending more troops, even though he keeps sending more troops. Or maybe he really wants to actually send in the ground war but feels he can't.

I certainly see a disconnect in his objective and the policy this far. They don't match.

flamingdem

(39,316 posts)
5. If the Iraqis don't step up there will be a problem
Sun Sep 21, 2014, 05:55 PM
Sep 2014

when Isis attacks Baghdad big time.

I wonder who'll step in.. not like we can bomb there with a guerila like force attacking.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»This isn't mission creep,...