Meanwhile, 1,000 dead in Iraq in July. Bombing will cause more suffering in Syria, not less.

[grahamhgreen]

Let Iraq serve as an example. Hate begets hate, only love conqors hate.

We heard the same story about Iraq, how we would make things better, how we would be greeted with flowers. We planted violence, and our harvest is more blood.

Now, what are the humanitarian war-hawks suggesting we do about the dead Iraqis? Why the complete lack of concern for them? In my view, it's because the war with Syria is not about humanitarian concerns, it's about empire.

BAGHDAD -- More than 1,000 people were killed in Iraq in July, the highest monthly death toll in five years, the U.N. said Thursday, a grim figure that shows rapidly deteriorating security as sectarian tensions soar nearly two years after U.S. troops withdrew from the country.

Violence has been on the rise all year, but the number of attacks against civilians and security forces has spiked during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, which began early last month. The increased bloodshed has intensified fears that Iraq is on a path back to the widespread chaos that nearly tore the country apart in the aftermath of the U.S.-led invasion that ousted Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Months of rallies by Iraq's minority Sunnis against the Shiite-led government over what they contend is second-class treatment and the unfair use of tough anti-terrorism measures against their sect set the stage for the violence.

The killings significantly picked up after Iraqi security forces launched a heavy-handed crackdown on a Sunni protest camp in the northern town of Hawija on April 23. A ferocious backlash followed the raid, with deadly bomb attacks and sporadic gunbattles between insurgents and soldiers – this time members of the Iraqi security forces rather than U.S. troops.

The U.N. Mission in Iraq said 1,057 Iraqis were killed and 2,326 wounded in July, the highest toll since June 2008 when 975 people were killed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/01/iraq-july-death-toll_n_3688443.html

[Comrade Grumpy]

1. Oh, Iraq, that's just our last glorious intervention. Pay no mind to it now.

Especially as we get ready for the next one.

[whatchamacallit]

2. "You just don't get it"

"My president decides which atrocities are atrocious!"

[JoePhilly]

3. Which "war with Syria" are you talking about?

The one that's not happening?

Or one in your head?

[grahamhgreen]

5. The one that he's still threatening. He had a big speech about it the other night. Would you like a

link

.... Just keeping the pressure on, I don't want another Iraq.

[JoePhilly]

6. Let me know when the war starts ... ok.

Its fun watching the folks who predicted that Obama was going to start a 2nd Iraq war in Syria cling to that prediction.

[grahamhgreen]

7. Most were not predicting, but preventing, is how I see it.

Last edited Thu Sep 12, 2013, 03:28 PM - Edit history (1)

[JoePhilly]

15. It was predicted to start on the Thursday before Labor Day.

Then that Friday.

Then over that long weekend.

The predicted start date keeps moving.

And from what I can see in this thread, some think its already happened.

[grahamhgreen]

17. Well, now we are arming Al Quada to kill Syrians. When Al Quada fights us, we call it a war, so

maybe it has already happened?

[Comrade Grumpy]

9. Uh, the US is now officially funding, training, and arming insurgents there.

And has probably been doing so for much longer than publicly acknowledged.

We are at war with Syria. Although I guess it isn't really our war because we're going to let other people do the killing and dying for us.

We weren't "at war" with Sandinista Nicaragua, either, but we sure killed a lot of people there, too.

I guess as long as there's no "boots on the ground," we can continue to deceive ourselves.

[JoePhilly]

16. So the war that everyone around here predicted would start

with Obama calling in air strikes, followed by a 2nd Iraq style escalation ... that's NOT the war with Syria the OP refers to ...

The war with Syria that they refer to is another war with Syria that was actually already underway.

So, to sum up ... we were already in a war with Syria, and President Obama was going to start a 2nd overlapping war with Syria by calling in air strikes, and then that 2nd overlapping war was going to expand into a 2nd Iraq war ... which would then become a war with Iran and Russia.

We have so many wars going on with Syria, and predicted in Syria, that its getting tough to keep them all straight.

[grahamhgreen]

19. So, wht do you want to do about the dead Iraqi's?

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. I love this willful ignorance

Time to send you as well to the children's wing.

[JoePhilly]

14. So were starting a 2nd Iraq war in Syria?

Hasn't that been the prediction around here ... or is that down the memory hole now?

[kenny blankenship]

4. A very safe bet. While it's tempting to say US intervention in Syria

(I mean direct intervention, of course, since we already intervening by proxy) will spark renewed sectarian civil war in Iraq, it's arguable that this reaction has already begun.

Let's see what else we can fuck up!

[VanillaRhapsody]

10. Your expectation is everything we do is a fuck up?

Wow...Lets just give up and become Isolationists!

[grahamhgreen]

12. When it involves violence and killing, yes, it's a major fuck up, LOL

"For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill." - Art of War

& "There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare."

[VanillaRhapsody]

18. Yes...threatening to was a "major fuck up" this time wasn't it?

[geek tragedy]

8. Big difference is that there was no civil war in Iraq before we invaded.

Syria today = Iraq after the US invaded.

[pjt7]

11. & I'm waiting for a major "D" politician to

call out Saudi Arabia for being the Worlds largest sponser of Terrorism.

Has Grayson said this directly?