The Thursday night announcement that the Obama Administration had approved airstrikes in Iraq was followed up by attacks Friday morning, hitting multiple ISIS targets. Multiple rounds of airstrikes have officials already talking up the expansion of the war.
First couched as simply about protecting US troops inside Irbil from the “deteriorating situation,” the administration is now saying they’ll use air strikes not only to protect the Kurdish capital of Irbil, but Baghdad as well, drawing yet another red line to ensure growing US involvement in the war against ISIS.
The direct US insinuation of itself into the latest Iraq War has also got officials talking up sending even more military equipment to the Iraqi military, and also providing direct military support for Iraqi forces.
The administration is still trying to present the plans for growing intervention as “limited” military operations, both in scope and in timeframe, though tellingly they have dodged all questions about how long the operation will last, what the endgame is, and even what the scope will ultimately be.
Instead, officials continue to work at selling the war to the public as a reaction to new situations on the ground in Iraq, despite months of buildup in anticipation of exactly the air war the US “suddenly” finds itself in. Genocide and humanitarian intervention have become the new watchwords, and officials say the action was meant to prevent “another Benghazi.”
Yet the Benghazi situation was a function of leaving a consulate open in a profoundly unsafe city. While the administration has presented both Baghdad and Irbil as potentially just as unsafe, nowhere was serious consideration apparent of closing the consulate or the embassy, and instead the administration chose to escalate the war.
Ultimately, President Obama drew a red line around Irbil in his announced air war, and drew another on Baghdad today to escalate it. The policy seems to be presenting whatever level of war currently ongoing as the bare minimum, while constantly shifting it toward a greater US involvement in hostilities.
It's okay everyone, this is "humanitarian intervention to prevent genocide." Rules of engagement are malleable of course.
We haven't seen much humanitarian intervention in Israel to prevent the obvious genocide in Gaza.Don;t think we will either.Israel's puppets in Congress will see to that.
Just as in Serbia/Kosovo and Libya. And upcoming in Syria, Iran, and Ukraine?
The USG by creating the Ukraine war doing a favor for the EU Neo fascism and that's not about Neo fascism in Ukraine, is about NATO the EU side of militarism regime and here is how the Syria/Iraq/ISIS/Ukraine wars are connected.
ISIS is the creation of USG which according to the Joe Biden plan, dividing Iraq into Sunni, sheei't and Kurdish region Iraq would not be recognized as Iraq but three separate states, each would have their own governments and etc. ISIS rule is to create and expend the Saudis religious territory into Iraq and Syria and create what they already done, a caliphate regime, such regime exist in Saudi Arabia and other UAE countries. In that regard Obama's bombing in no way is about destroying ISIS but rather giving them a ultimatum to stay where their caliphate map is designed to be.
Later, however, if the bombing operation not successful it would be the NATO responsibility to act, which means Iraq invasion for the third time, and the reason, stoping terrorism in Iraq while they are creating another fascism regime in Ukraine. All that talks by Obama that America is helping the people of Iraq, is yet another manipulative, deceptive political talks, if that was the case USG should and could have stooped ISIS long time ago by not cooperating with Saudis, by not going after Joe Biden plan wanting to divide Iraq nationals. The USG have no respect nor prospect what the unity of nations can bring about, above all peace, which the word have no meaning to USG and EU present regimes.
"The policy seems to be presenting whatever level of war currently ongoing as the bare minimum, while constantly shifting it toward a greater US involvement in hostilities."
Otherwise known as the GOOOOOOOOOOOD MOOOORRRRRRNNNING VIETNAM policy
Wonder why the Obama administration decided to use the word "Genocide" now, is everyone just now waking up from their slumber, what do you call the over one million Iraqi (then) killed since the US invaded Iraq?
Since the US economy relies on a war to stave off economic collapse, maybe the re-ignited war in Iraq will be enough to take the heat off of Putin.
Obama I (The Lionheart), fearless leader of the Christian West, should no doubt soon be facing off with Saladin al-Baghdadi of ISIS in personal combat. Might be an interesting match. I hope it's on pay-per-view so that we can afford some of the stage costs.