Home | About | Donate

Kerry Makes It Clear: Obama Wants Authority to Deploy Ground Troops in Iraq and Syria


#1

Kerry Makes It Clear: Obama Wants Authority to Deploy Ground Troops in Iraq and Syria

Sarah Lazare, staff writer

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry confirmed on Tuesday that the Obama administration is, in fact, seeking approval for the deployment of ground troops to participate in combat operations against Islamic State forces in Iraq and Syria.


#2

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be: war without end.


#3

Bush and his gang (Cheney, Perle, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, etc.) must be ROTF LTAO as they all will profit from ongoing war operations worldwide...chasing a shape-shifting group of terrorists they helped create over the span of 35 years. When Bush referred to the Crusades during his march to the invasion of Iraq, he was not far from wrong...religious wars last centuries while the perpetrators of such are resolute that their beliefs are supreme and all others are satanic and thus to be quashed/eliminated...the underlying impetus is control of the natural resources and transportation routes thereof...control that the US would wrest from those they deem to be "enemy states" vis-à-vis "terrorists" all. Almost forgot to mention the war profiteers like Boeing, GE, Halliburton, TI, BP, etc. also jumping for joy at the thought of increasing and maintaining that flow of federal funds into their coffers.

And how many redeployments will each boots-on-the-ground military member be forced to endure? Can't possibly leave them to languish on bases in the US while "war" operations wound down.

Had "HOPEd" for more "CHANGE" from Obama over his two terms but he has had to battle an obdurate, entrenched Congress the entire time. Surrounding himself with so many wonks from the Bush admin before him has not helped, either.

Ugh.


#4

--- it's the same collectivized narcissistic personality disorder we've being seeing for decades. Enough already!


#5

Kerry has gone from protesting the Viet Nam War to being a shill for war mongers in what will prove to be a catastrophe--nothing has been learned from the Viet Nam War. Nothing. Rather than restraining such destructive tendencies this nation has been fanning their flames. Question is: Why the death wish?


#6

Would it be better for the country if armament were purchased from China or Russia in order to keep American companies from profiting ? What Obama should be doing is getting the countries in his so called coalition to commit troops to the effort. (60 countries X 5,000 men+ 300,000 set of boots on the ground) Should take care of ISIS handily, especially with air cover. Instead, he has Kerry negotiating with a terrorist regime on halting uranium enrichment. (he thinks they will be truthful-lol)
Meanwhile, the president splits his time with playing golf and legalizing new democrat voters. No wonder ISIS is winning. Good Luck America !!!


#7

What boots will go? Do you think citizens effectively enslaved by the economy will be willing to die for this country? I guess it will take a draft.


#8

The boots already in uniform will go if ordered to do so. That is how the military works. I would hope that the USA is not the only country willing to destroy ISIS. It is time for others to step up and help. The US is the only one to effectively lead the effort but we should not bear all the costs both in lives and treasure. Good Luck America !!!


#9

On a related note. Obama said the other day. For him to get rid of Isis in Syria, Assad would have to be taken out. Now we know what Obama plans were all along, more regime change, death and chaos.


#10

But why? What are the reasons for going to war with more some new countries? The American people just went into debt for trillions of dollars in the war on terror. We, I guess, got OBL or some Afghan got dumped overboard. We did Don Rumfeld's shock and awe. The finest fighting force in the world occupied the country for years. Our president put on a cod piece and stood in front of a sign that read "Mission Accomplished" and said "well done soldiers, hehehe."

So Kerry what is up? We just left after winning? We hung a guy and messed up a lot of people millions in fact. Isn't that winning on your terms? What more is there to do? The last time you illegally went to war it was with a country with a tiny army almost no air force. This time you had to ship them weapons so you could call them bad names like an army. The last time you asshats that run things did this 4,800 American brothers, sisters, moms and dads died causing sorrow and pain for their families and tens of thousand were badly injured. Mr Kerry you lovely turd blossom please enlighten us on how many will die this time?

So this is a declaration of war on a new country, Syria. Dear John please give us a many pointed outline on the reasons the American people, not bankers or oil men, would need and want to go to war with Syria. I am sure one point will not be that you tried to overthrow the leadership and failed badly and the men you hired to do it are now running around with US weapons causing problems in the neighborhood. So your pissed get over it. You lost. It is a repeating problem. You can not use 9/11 or anthrax attacks on congress because everyone already knows who done it. You already tried WMDs and Syria was glad to give up their decades old chemical weapons. I guess they would rather not have or use chemical weapons. Good idea. To bad they give them to us because we have and will use them.

We will all be over here talking about overthrowing you guys so when you get that list of good reasons for war you'll know where we are. Or just ask the NSA.


#11

Not the ones with a conscience...

If the US was serious about ending terrorism, it should probably stop creating terrorists...

Veterans For Peace


#12

Doesn't have to be that way however.


#14

You are calling Iran a terrorist regime? If you make a list of terrorist activitites between Iran and the USA, then clearly the USA will come out as THE terrorist nation. Ony Israel comes close. Just so as you know what terrorism is, and are able to tell the difference between propaganda and reality, here is the FBI definition:

"Terrorism: the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment ther eof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."

It has nothing to do with the wearing of turbans. It is not even about what sort of weapons or lack thereof, such as planes or drones that an organisation has access to in order to carry out the terrorism. Its about what one DOES rather than about how one is smeared. Im not saying that anyone is an angel, its just that Iran has never done terrorism, where as the USA is up to its neck in terrorist activites.


#15

Let me make this perfectly clear, the participation of the United States in more than than tactical and intelligence capacity is unacceptable. If the experiences of Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq don't convince you that gunboat diplomacy has never been a viable means of creating a productive. international relationship


#16

Do you know any of the history of US foreign policy regarding Iran?


#18

This "I want to make it absolutely clear" seems to be such a popular intro jingoism of these incompetent public figures. The very use in an open statement means actually: "I will make it totally murky and foggy to you cause I'm going to sell you some more of the same things that will make the 1% rich and the rest of you poorer, less secure, and more enslaved.
Kerry is a hypocrite and it can't be said enough of how hypocrite the whole sold our establishment is.


#20

Excellent!


#21

"we believe it's important that there aren't overly burdensome constraints that are placed on the commander in chief."

Sorry- it is essential that burdensome constraints limit his actions.


#22

The Nobel Peace Price Prez. But, as usual, for know-nothing Democrats -- as bad as the know-nothing Republicans they love to decry -- Obama can do no wrong.

I used to say, back when Bush was president, that, for the Republican faithful, he would have to personally go up in a plane, bomb American cities, deny it, and still his supporters wouldn't shake their faith in him. They would find a way to make excuses. The same is true for party Democrats now.

The overwhelming sentiment of voters in this country is: "It's all okay, as long as my guy is doing it."

And then we have the spectacle of former anti-war activist John Kerry leading the charge! The hypocrisy of this country is off the charts.


#23

Sorry, but there are already "boots on the ground" in the form of US-subsidized mercenaries in numerous places over there.

Regardless, let's be counterintuitive for a moment and suggest that actual, US military "boots on the ground" be deployed. Wretched though that may be in the short run, it may be the only thing that garners enough attention and public opposition to cause some real backlash to the military/industrial complex’s predilection for unending war. For war has become an industry, folks.

Scott Horton in his new book, “Lords of Secrecy,” discusses how NOT having boots on the ground and NOT having a mandatory draft has caused the American public to be able to remain in denial of our overseas shenanigans. (Compare the 1960’s and how motivated we were to end the draft AND the Vietnam War). Unfortunately, we’ve reared several generations of “citizens” in this country who are distanced, and frankly, ignorant, of our overseas policies. To many of them, sitting at a Nevada military site and aiming drones at war zones overseas has almost a tinge of glamor to it.

Something’s got to change, and it may take some in-your-face personal involvement for our citizens to call attention to our real obligations to humanity.