Thursday, July 09, 2015

ON THIS ONE, WE BLAME THE VETERANS!

BULLY BOY PRESS &     CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE


WE BLAME THE VETERANS.


REGARDLESS OF YOUR POLITICS, WHAT BOOB PAYS THE MAN BEHIND "STRATEGERY"  AND "MISUNDERESTMATED" TO SPEAK PUBLICLY?


AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU BUY A HYUNDAI, YOU REALLY HAVE NO ONE BUT YOURSELF TO BLAME.


Senator Joe Donnelly: I just got back from Iraq with Senator [Tim] Kaine who led our trip and one of the meetings we had was with a number of the Sunni tribal leaders and some of them were from the Haditha area and in talking to them they have said, "We have stood with you. We have faith with you.  But we have people who are now eating grass in our town.  We have no food.  We have no supplies.  And we have been told that the only airlifts that can come in would be on military transport.  Is there anything you can do to help feed our people?"  And so, I wanted to put that before you to see if there's something we can do to be of aid to these individuals.



Donnelly was speaking Tuesday at the Senate Armed Services Committee.  The Committee Chair is Senator John McCain and the Ranking Member is Senator Jack Reed.  Appearing before the Committee were Gen Martin Dempsey (Chair of the Joint Chiefs) and Secretary of Defense Ash Carter.

Donnelly states that he was told, in Haditha, food resources were so low that civilians were eating grass.

Though only in his second year in the US Senate, Donnelly has not racked up  a reputation for lying or misleading.

So it's fairly safe to assume this is what he was told.

Where's the outcry?

We drive our Bitch Moan and Whine vehicles all over the globe over this or that artifact destroyed in Iraq but you have civilians forced to eat grass and no one cares enough to make this a lead story?





Secretary Ash Carter: Well, uh, I'll say something about that and ask the Chairman if he wants to add.  First of all, I want to thank you, Senator Donnelly, also Senator Kaine for traveling there.  We appreciate it.  And on behalf of the 3,550 members of our armed forces that are in Iraq conducting this fight, thank you for taking the time to go visit them this Fourth of July weekend.  The humanitarian situation is yet another tragic consequence of what is going on with ISIL.  It remains one of the coalition's, uhm, uh, uh, efforts as I indicated in my opening statement.  To relieve the humanitarian, that's very difficult to do when there is not order and control on the ground.  And so, uh, this is why we need to get a security situation that's stable, ground forces that are capable of hol- seizing territory, holding territory and governing.  That's the only way to get the humanitarian situation turned around -- either in Iraq or in Syria.  It's very sad.  It's tragic.  And, uh, in the case of Iraq -- as has been noted --  uh, something brought about by the re-emergence of sectarianism in a really tragic way.  Chairman, you want to add anything?

Gen Martin Dempsey:  One of the reasons we went to [al-] Taqaddum Air Base [in Anbar Province] -- also locally called Habbaniyah -- is to advise and assist in the Anbar operations center which is where these kind of issues should actually migrate through.  And it's -- You should be interested to know the Iraqis have the capabilities to address that.  They have C-130J [Lockheed Martin transport aircraft], you know state of the art, uhm-uhm -- 

Senator Joe Donnelly:  I know they do, but they're not.

Gen Martin Dempsey:  Yeah, well we'll pass it to the guy who's embedded with -- 


Senator Joe Donnelly:  And you know, when you're hungry?  You're stomach doesn't tell you you want Iraqi food or US food, you just want help.  And one of the bonds created with these tribal leaders is they said, "We've always felt that we could count on you."  


Dempsey was a bit of a smart ass and there's no way to pretty that up.

If you caught the tone of, "Yeah, well we'll pass it to the guy," you grasped what a smart ass what he was being.

How nice for him that hearing of the starvation of others is so removed from anything he's ever experienced that he can make light of it, that he can mock it.

How very nice for him.

For those who don't remember how Barack kicked off the latest stage of the never-ending Iraq War, the Yazidis were trapped on Mount Sinjar and without food.

An air drop of humanitarian items was something we advocated for here.

Some people thought that the anti-war thing to do was to ridicule the trapped Yazidis.

All that did was drive people away.

It's not funny when people are in need, when they're starving.

Unless you're Dempsey or some other smart ass.

But with the Yazidis on Mt. Sinjar, Barack didn't just do air drops, he used it to further the Iraq War.

There's no reason that the US can't do an air drop.

Dempsey is correct that the Baghdad-based government could help.

While Haditha is frequently under attack (and, in fact, faced vehicle bombings earlier this week), it is not under the control of the Islamic State currently.

Dempsey could have cut the smarm and instead explored the lack of compassion on the part of the Iraqi government -- the Shi'ite led Iraqi government -- out of Baghdad with regards to the suffering of Sunnis (Haditha is a Sunni town).

Clearly, Iraq's (Shi'ite) Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi feels no pressure to send food.

(The State Dept had to strong arm him in to visiting a refugee camp last week.)

With them not willing to do so, the US military -- which all over Iraqi air space -- should immediately be dropping food over Haditha.

Is it hard to do?

Because the way I remember it, the Pentagon and the White House repeatedly insist that, when dropping bombs on Iraq, these are precision exercises.

So a bomb can be dropped precisely but there's some confusion over whether food and rations can be dropped precisely?

Again, the Baghdad-based government knows what's happening and has refused to step in.

US President Barack Obama repeatedly insists 'we're not taking sides.'

If you're looking the other way while a town of Sunnis are starving to the point that they're eating grass, if you're not rushing aid to them, you are taking sides, you are taking sides against Sunni civilians.




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"





Posted by at

Wednesday, July 08, 2015

THIS JUST IN! SHE WILL DECIDE!

BULLY BOY PRESS &     CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE



"WHO ARE THEY TO ACCUSE ME?" HER ROYAL HIGHNESS INSISTED TODAY.  "I WROTE ALL THE E-MAILS AND THEN I DELETED ALL THE E-MAILS.  ALL BY MYSELF!  AND IF YOU'VE HEARD OF MY FAXING TROUBLES, YOU KNOW HOW HARD THAT WAS FOR ME."






Yesterday, US President Barack Obama spun on Iraq.


Today, State Dept spokesperson John Kirby tried to re-spin when problems were noted with Barack's 'facts.'


QUESTION: Iraq?


MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: Thank you. Just on the President’s statement yesterday at the Pentagon, he mentioned a number of battlefield victories in both Iraq and Syria. He actually pointed namely to seven areas. And what I noticed was that six out of those seven areas were in the northern regions of Iraq and Syria, where basically the Kurds are in control. Can you say the Kurds are your only effective partner on the ground?


MR KIRBY: What I can say is – and I’m not going to get into military analysis – is that when you have capable, effective partners on the ground against ISIL – indigenous partners on the ground – you can be much more effective against that group. We’ve seen that in parts of Iraq where – whether it’s Peshmerga up in the north or Iraqi Security Forces down in the south, when they are effective, they can have an immense impact on ISIL. And we have seen that in areas in northern Syria with counter-ISIL fighters there. And again, the President detailed some of that and I talked to some of that yesterday as well. They have been effective in certain places and at certain times.


QUESTION: And, like, the only example really he gave that was outside the Kurdistan regions was Tikrit, which was achieved with the help of Iranian-backed Shia forces. So can’t you --


MR KIRBY: No, that’s not true. He talked about --


QUESTION: What else?


MR KIRBY: -- Mosul Dam, he talked about --


QUESTION: Mosul Dam was with the Kurdish forces. It was --


MR KIRBY: He talked about – there’s been other – the Baiji refinery. I mean, there’s been other areas in Iraq. I know where you’re trying to go with this, and what I’m trying to tell you is that you need good partners on the ground. In Iraq, we’re building and we’re working towards helping advise and assist the Iraqi Security Forces so that they can become more capable. And in some ways and in some places and at some times in this fight, they have been very capable.

In the north in Iraq, of course, there’s been some assistance provided to the Peshmerga, as they have taken the fight to ISIL in northern Iraq. And yes, we have provided some coalition air support to counter-ISIL fighters in the north in Syria. And we’re still trying to get a program stood up to train and equip a moderate Syrian opposition. Now it’s going slow. We talked about this yesterday. I think we all recognize there’s a lot of work to be done. But the whole focus of that effort is to help create additional competent, effective, capable security forces inside Syria that can go after ISIL – could protect their neighborhoods, their communities, and go after ISIL.



Barack's speech led Mike to name him "Idiot of the week" and to note Barack claimed Baiji on the same  day Rudaw reported "Clashes resume in Baiji after 'great victory'."  Trina offered "Barack wants more war" which emphasized Thomas Gaist (WSWS) report:


Rather than attempt a legal justification for the war, which has been launched and prosecuted behind the backs of the American people and in defiance of popular opposition, Obama defended his administration’s war policies by boasting of the large kill count achieved by the US-led coalition.
“It’s important to recognize the progress that’s been made. We’ve eliminated thousands of fighters,” Obama said, underscoring the fact that it has become routine for the American president to speak of “killing” or “taking out” people around the world.
Obama reiterated the US goal of regime change in Syria, declaring that the US would do more to aid the anti-Assad opposition, and adding that “the only way” to end the civil war in that country was to “transition to an inclusive government” without Assad.
Noting that he had recently discussed the war against ISIS with Russian President Putin, Obama hinted that Putin was amenable to Washington’s plans to topple Assad.
He said that the US would step up its counterterrorism operations in countries “from Afghanistan to Nigeria.” This was a signal that Washington will continue its drone strikes, bombings, commando operations and other illegal actions in Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and other countries.
Obama devoted nearly half of his remarks to what he called the fight against terror threats within the United States. He said, ominously, that his administration was “partnering with Muslim communities” in the US and added that “we expect those communities to step up.” This was a thinly veiled justification for continuing government surveillance of the American people and other repressive measures, carried out under the pretext of “protecting the homeland.”
His remarks followed days of media scaremongering leading up to the Independence Day holiday on July 4. For several days, the networks led their news broadcasts with alarming reports of heightened terror threats, without producing a shred of evidence to substantiate their warnings, while acknowledging that the government had not detected any “credible, specific threats.”
Obama’s emphasis on the “war on terror” at home made clear that the relentless campaign of the government to sow fear and anxiety among the public in order to justify internal repression and external military aggression would continue unabated.



Rebecca noted how poorly Barack looked in "barack looks like s**t" while Kat pondered Barack's claims of "Success?" with Kat concluding:


Today really was Barack's "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" moment.
Did anyone notice?



Barack's speech was offensive and insulting on so many levels.


This included his conclusion:



In closing, let me note that this Fourth of July we celebrated 239 years of American independence.  Across more than two centuries, we’ve faced much bigger, much more formidable challenges than this -- Civil War, a Great Depression, fascism, communism, terrible natural disasters, 9/11.  And every time, every generation, our nation has risen to the moment.  We don’t simply endure; we emerge stronger than before.  And that will be the case here.  
Our mission to destroy ISIL and to keep our country safe will be difficult.  It will take time.  There will be setbacks as well as progress.  But as President and Commander-in-Chief, I want to say to all our men and women in uniform who are serving in this operation -- our pilots, the crews on the ground, our personnel not only on the ground but at sea, our intelligence teams and our diplomatic teams -- I want to thank you.  We are proud of you, and you have my total confidence that you’re going to succeed.  
To the American people, I want to say we will continue to be vigilant.  We will persevere.  And just as we have for more than two centuries, we will ultimately prevail.  



He wants to thank the military but not the American people at large?

He wouldn't have a job if it weren't for the American people at large.

He's just another War Hawk who never wore a uniform or carried a gun but wants to pretend like that's the only way to measure patriotism.

We could offer the fear examples but I really don't care to promote his scare tactics.

When Bully Boy Bush pulled this sort of thing, he would be mocked and called out.

We no longer live in such a world.


That became clear over the weekend when the dreadful Jill Stein announced she was seeking the Green Party's presidential nomination -- presumably so she could damage the party even more than she did in her 2012 run.



As we noted at Third, "Editorial: The endless joke that is Jill Stein."


Stein used her announcement speech to take a strong stand against . . .


talking about Iraq.


In her silence on the topic, she linked arms with Hillary Clinton, the only other candidate who can't and won't talk about Iraq.





RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Jaws"



Posted by at

THIS JUST IN! CRANKY HASN'T HAD HER SHOTS!

BULLY BOY PRESS &     CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE


CRANKY CLINTON IS GETTING BAD PRESS FOR HER 4TH OF JULY ANTICS WHICH ARE SEEN AS PREVENTING THE PRESS FROM OBSERVING HER BY PUTTING UP A ROPE TO KEEP THEM OUT OF HER CAMPAIGN EVENTS.

NOT SO, SAYS CRANKY.

"THE ROPE WAS THERE TO PROTECT THEM," SHE EXPLAINED EXCLUSIVELY TO THESE REPORTERS.  "WE HADN'T REALIZED THAT MY RABBI SHOT HAD EXPIRED UNTIL RIGHT BEFORE THE EVENT AND THERE WASN'T TIME TO FIND A LARGE ANIMAL VET AND GET ANOTHER SHOT SO WE JUST ROPED OFF THE PRESS IN CASE I STARTED FOAMING AT THE MOUTH."





FROM THE TCI WIRE;

Today, US President Barack Obama spoke publicly about the Islamic State.  The address took place at the Pentagon or, as ABC News put it, the address took place "in a rare visit to the Pentagon."

In other words, he may have visited all 50 states, but the Pentagon's never really been on his travel itinerary.

Dana Milbank (Washington Post) also noted the "rare visit" nature:

Obama had used the phrase before, but this was shock-and-awe-worthy — the commander in chief, in a rare visit to Defense Department headquarters, standing onstage with grim-faced and medal-festooned generals and likening war strategy to . . . an arcade game.


Milbank noted Barack "had used the phrase before."

That's true.

But the person who applied it to Iraq first and most persistently was Senator John McCain who began using it over and over in 2006.



For only one example of this, we'll flash back to the August 3, 2006 United States Senate Armed Services Committee hearing when the following exchange took place:



Senator John McCain: So, General Abizaid, we're moving 7,500 troops into Baghdad, is that correct?

General John Abizaid: The number is closer to 3,500.

[. . .]

McCain: And where are these troops coming from?

Abizaid: Uh, the troops, the Styker Brigade, is coming down from Mosul.

McCain: From Mosul? Is the situation under control in Ramadi?

Abizaid: Uh, the situation in Ramadi, is better than it was two months ago.

McCain: Is the situation under control in Ramadi?

Abizaid: I think the situation in Ramadi is workable.

McCain: And the troops from Ramadi came from Falluja, isn't that correct?

Abizaid: I can't say senator, I know that --

McCain: Well that's my information. What I worry about is we're playing a game of whack-a-mole here. We move troops from -- It flares up, we move troops there. Everybody knows we've got big problems in Ramadi and I said, "Where you gonna get the troops?" 'Well we're going to have to move them from Falluja.' Now we're going to have to move troops into Baghdad from someplace else. It's very disturbing.



It was hard not to recall that exchange as Barack spoke today.

Such as the quote from Barack's speech Milbank offers, "ISIL lost at the Mosul Dam. ISIL lost at Mount Sinjar. ISIL has lost repeatedly across Kirkuk province. ISIL lost at Tikrit. . . . ISIL lost at Kobani."


Mosul?

Really?

The dam may have been 'saved' via intense bombing from US war planes but who controls Mosul?


As Reuters noted Saturday, "The city has been under Islamic State control since the Islamist militants took over in June last year" and "[t]he Shi'ite-led government has promised a military offensive to retake Mosul but progress has been slow."

A year and one month to 'retake' Mosul?

Yeah, I'd say that's pretty slow.

Despite that reality, Barack was insisting at the Pentagon that "today, it's also important for us to recognize the progress that's been made."


And, of course, the Islamic State seized control of Ramadi in April and remains in control of it.

But Barack spun this as a 'victory' as well, insisting in his long winded remarks today that "the fall of Ramadi has galvanized the Iraqi government."

The claim is laughable in terms of scoring it as a 'win.'

It's also factually a lie.

Since August, the US has insisted that a national guard in Iraq was a possible solution.  They've prodded the government on that.

Parliament's refused to vote on it.





RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"OBAMA'S IMPERIALIST FOREIGN WARS HURTING AMERICA'S..."
"Yanis Varoufakis resigns as Greece votes "NO!": Ge..."
"Call for immediate action to address a reported $2..."
"Barack's singing the same old song again"
"Michigan Greens Endorse MILegalize Marijuana Initi..."
"Are you lonely or pissed?"
"Accidents and other bombings"
"Hejira"
"The Denver Post lets Chris Hill lie again"
"Extant"
"Oh, Nicolas JS Davies, do you shut up"
"Idiot of the week"
"Barack wants more war"
"Review to come"
"The question"
"Hillary's lies catch up to her"
"barack looks like s**t"
"Success?"
"Fake Jill Stein can't talk Iraq"



  • Cedric's Big Mix
    Axelroad explains his silence
    4 days ago
  • The Daily Jot
    THIS JUST IN! HE DIDN'T THINK ANYONE WOULD TRY TO CONTACT HER!
    4 days ago



    • Posted by at
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)