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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: And Creeeeeeep: White House beginning to consider conflicts in Syria and Iraq as single challenge [View all]jeff47
(26,549 posts)35. It's the logical result from where you're heading.
Why stop at airstrikes? If we're already assuming everyone is lying about where we'll stop, why stop at airstrikes? Your entire post is about creeping towards war, and that's where war is.
I disagree that special operations advisers should be there as well.
Is that an Iraq-only thing, or should we not have trainers/advisers anywhere else in the world?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
48 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
And Creeeeeeep: White House beginning to consider conflicts in Syria and Iraq as single challenge [View all]
morningfog
Jun 2014
OP
Good evidence for that: The Project for a New American Century (PNAC)
woo me with science
Jun 2014
#46
defense of nebulous Iraqi political goals used as pretext for attacking neighbor Syria?
bigtree
Jun 2014
#14
The "up to 300" military advisers are not there to provide security to the embassy.
morningfog
Jun 2014
#19
"...for now" on Tuesday, the 17th. Yesterday, Obama said U.S. Prepared to Take 'Targeted' Action
morningfog
Jun 2014
#28
How, exactly, will we be conducting airstrikes without using any American forces?
jeff47
Jun 2014
#29
Because they don't consider air strikes the same as "troops returning to combat". n/t
PoliticAverse
Jun 2014
#30
If you notice the statements from the White House, they distinguish "combat troops" on the ground
PoliticAverse
Jun 2014
#36
And now we have US forces conducting aristrikes in Iraq, as was clear over a month ago.
morningfog
Aug 2014
#48
Also, assistance grew from 100 "trainers" to now 300 trainers/special forces. YUP! We're
ChisolmTrailDem
Jun 2014
#18
I don't know how the White House can articulate the policy with a straight face,
amandabeech
Jun 2014
#23
It has all the earmarks of "nation building" and "defending our vital national interests".
Tierra_y_Libertad
Jun 2014
#24
Even now the Syrians and Iraqis are combining their mighty fleets to invade Malibu.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Jun 2014
#26