State Dep't says ISIS fighters need jobs, not killing

[siam]

According to this article, there are many reasons people join war
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...d-a-point.html

"Heading a group called The Sons of Liberty International, which claims to provide, globally, military support for “oppressed populations to liberate themselves,” he recently tweeted that he is trying to raise a “Christian army” to fight the Islamic State."
....
"Jeremy, Leo and Mel portray themselves—and really do seem to see themselves—as volunteers motivated by a need to support a historically victimized people leading a fight against a ruthless entity that uses Islamic scripture to justify biblical slaughter. But there are more than a few foreign gunmen, these three tell me, who treat this war like a business.

“There are people who have come over here to form clandestine military groupings,” says Leo, who found one of the first hurdles he faced was avoiding recruitment by mercenaries. Mel says he met far more foreigners trying to make a buck out of the war than those that came to fight ISIS out of conviction."

Many U.S. youth joined the military during the Iraq/Afghanistan war....

[siam]

sorry wrong link

the correct one is...http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...s-killers.html

[Bill the Cat]

What "strategy" existed was immediately scrapped, as the Bush administration did not believe the military conflict would extend very far past the fall of Hussein. They were completely unprepared for the insurgency and had to scramble to make up a new strategy to secure at least some regions (essentially the Green Zone) pretty much on the spot. The media had nothing to do with thwarting the Bush administration's post-Hussein strategy (and I'd like to know how such a thing was really even possible!).

Source: U.S. rushed post-Saddam planning. The Washington Times. 2003.09.03

The Congressional Budget Office projected yesterday that the demands of troop rotations globally will leave the Pentagon without any fresh Army units for Iraq in 2004 unless tours are extended beyond one year.

The Joint Chiefs report reveals deficiencies in the planning process. It says planners were not given enough time to put together the best blueprint for what is called Phase IV — the ongoing reconstruction of Iraq.


The report does not name any individual. Most war planning was conducted by Gen. Tommy Franks at U.S. Central Command; the Joint Chiefs of Staff, under the direction of Gen. Richard B. Myers, the chairman; and the Pentagon policy-writing shop led by Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith.


“Late formation of DoD [Phase IV] organizations limited time available for the development of detailed plans and pre-deployment coordination,” the report says. “Command relationships (and communication requirements) and responsibilities were not clearly defined for DoD organizations until shortly before [Operation Iraqi Freedom] commenced.”


In fact, the Pentagon was forced to scrap its original plan for rebuilding as violence increased against U.S. forces and basic services were slow to resume. L. Paul Bremer, a former ambassador, was tapped in mid-May to take over as Iraq’s American administrator.

© Copyright Original Source

There WAS an initial strategy. As I said. The public would have been none the wiser about it needing to be changed (as all strategies in war are typically changed as events become more clear). But the MEDIA took great pleasure in exposing the need to reconsider the strategy because it miscalculated underestimated variables.

Even liberal moron Michael Moore blames the media:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...backed-it.html

Although he blames them for a bit of a different reason than I do...

If one considers "pot shots" justification for a war that ends up killing thousands of US troops and hundreds of thousands of civilians, I'll just say I'm glad he's not in charge of big, red buttons.

Violating a cease of hostilities agreement was ABSOLUTELY reason to remove that jackass from power. Clinton was too much of a wimp to do anything of consequence about the violations.

And while Congress was definitely complicit in poor judgment, lack of accountability and hysterical over-reaction (much like we are currently witnessing regarding ISIS), the Bush administration alone is responsible for using intelligence that it knew was junk-grade and suppressing intelligence that contradicted the justifications for the war:

Source: Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war. CNN.com. 2008.01.23

President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups.


"In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003," reads an overview of the examination, conducted by the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism.


According to the study, Bush and seven top officials -- including Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice -- made 935 false statements about Iraq during those two years.


The study was based on a searchable database compiled of primary sources, such as official government transcripts and speeches, and secondary sources -- mainly quotes from major media organizations.


The study says Bush made 232 false statements about Iraq and former leader Saddam Hussein's possessing weapons of mass destruction, and 28 false statements about Iraq's links to al Qaeda.

© Copyright Original Source

The George Soros funded CPI???? I know you can do better than that Sam...

A Mother Jones timeline is here.

cherry-picking_large.jpg

Mother Jones should go into the kitchen and make a cobbler with all of those cherries she picked.

Iraqi elections are still, to a lesser extent, contingent upon US support; al-Maliki in particular, the man who became a driving force in putting Shites over Sunnis throughout Iraq's infrastructure, was explicitly a US pick:

Source: Nouri al-Maliki. Wikipedia. Accessed 2015.02.22

On 22 April 2006, following close U.S. involvement in the selection of a new prime minister, al-Maliki's name arose from the four that had been interviewed by the CIA on their connections to Iran (the others including Hussein al-Shahristani and Ali al-Adeeb).

© Copyright Original Source

Again, a democratically elected leadership is still a win, not a failure.

Ignoring the question of who initially leaked the evidence of what was happening at Abu Gharib, it's abominable to place the blame for war crimes on the exposure rather than the crimes!

No one is saying that, Sam. What is being said is that the MEDIA did the military no favors by broadcasting abuses by a few overzealous Marines, and made it seem to the entire world like EVERY US enemy prisoner of war was being treated like the few in Abu Gharib were. It continued to stain the integrity of the Armed Forces for years to come.

And Iraqis were aware of the atrocities there and elsewhere long before Western media became aware or interested. In any event, it was the policy of torture that was the clear mistake, not the fact that the media reported on the torture!

—Sam

But the worst part for the US as a nation was the media coverage and their conflating ALL POW treatment with Abu Gharib. The breach of conduct was an internal issue that was best handled by the military and the JAG office. But the liberal media saw another venue to try to wash their own hands clean and thrust the blame for the entire war on Bush/Cheney and give them another public black eye. It did NOTHING positive for morale, public opinion, or support for the troops.

[seer]

o one is saying that, Sam. What is being said is that the MEDIA did the military no favors by broadcasting abuses by a few overzealous Marines, and made it seem to the entire world like EVERY US enemy prisoner of war was being treated like the few in Abu Gharib were. It continued to stain the integrity of the Armed Forces for years to come.

Hey Homer, that was the US Army and the CIA, not the Marines!

[Cow Poke]

Hey Homer, that was the US Army and the CIA, not the Marines!

Yeah, the Marines would have never allowed the leak.

[seer]

Yeah, the Marines would have never allowed the leak.

Or they would have not taken prisoners in the first place. Can you say Guadalcanal?

[Bill the Cat]

Hey Homer, that was the US Army and the CIA, not the Marines!

My mistake.

[Cow Poke]

My mistake.

It's OK, Gomer - he called you Homer!