US launches 4 airstrikes against Iraqi militants

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP-Excite

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. military says American jet fighters and drones have conducted four more airstrikes on Islamic militants in Iraq, taking out armored carriers and a truck that were firing on civilians.

U.S. Central Command says the strikes were spread out, with three before noon Eastern Daylight Time on Saturday and one about 3 p.m.

The military says indications suggest that the strikes were successful in destroying the armored vehicles.

This is the third round of airstrikes against Islamic State forces by the U.S. military since they were authorized by President Barack Obama.



Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20140809/us--united_states-iraq-airstrikes-e8b84627dd.html

[cheapdate]

1. It's hard for me to stake out the right moral position

when you hear that the United States &quot took) out...armored carriers and a truck that were firing on civilians."

[840high]

2. yep

[another_liberal]

6. Every one of them we kill will give the Islamic State ten new recruits . . .

At least that is how it seems to have worked up to this point. Right?

[cheapdate]

7. I can't swear that the math is precisely correct,

but the "blowback effect" is undeniable. It changes the practical considerations but it doesn't change the moral equation very much when the question is over stopping a present slaughter.

[another_liberal]

8. You want us to carry out a massacre . . .

To prevent a massacre? How is there an advantage in once again killing Iraqis we don't like to try and prevent Iraqis we do like from being killed? We've been down that road already, and it leads right back to where we are now.

"The cause of a problem can never be the solution."

It is well past time we admit we are not the answer, and get our military out of Iraq.

[cheapdate]

9. If killing ISIS fighters to stop them from massacring everyone in their path

is "carrying out a massacre" then my answer is the still the same. As problematic as it may be for a stronger agency to use force to stop a massacre, at some point there is a moral obligation to do so, even if that stronger agency is the United States.

But for the record, I don't consider striking ISIS while they are actively engaged in killing civilians a "massacre".

What do you suggest?

[christx30]

10. Agreed:

ISIS has decided that someone is going to die. That person could be an innocent civilian, or it could be a member of ISIS. It's up to us to decide which it's going to be.

[another_liberal]

21. You are thinking short term . . .

We are going to get nowhere trading tit-for-tat violence and slaughter with these people. At least it has never worked before, and we have tried the hell out it!

Our time in Iraq is past. We need to be long gone from there and to stay gone for a long time.

[cheapdate]

24. So what's your suggestion?

Withdraw all US diplomatic and security personnel from Iraq? And if IS overruns the Kurdish state and Baghdad and commits mass genocide and sets up a permanent state staunchly committed to their expressed goal submitting the whole of the Middle East and the world to their strict Islamic rule, so be it?

What's the long term thinking there? If it gets bad enough neighboring states will come together to stop them?

[another_liberal]

25. We are most certainly damned if we do, and damned if we don't . . .

No matter if we bomb for another ten years or just get out of it now, we are not going to decide this issue. Only the people of Iraq, and to lesser degree their neighbors, can bring an end to this mess. All we can really decide now is whether we want to waste more resources, engender more hatred toward ourselves and kill even more people or not, since doing so will ultimately help no one.


As a country, we need to rediscover humility and an awareness of our limitations. Our national condition of military hubris has reached dangerous heights.

[LanternWaste]

29. Is not that what happened during the successful Kosovo air campaign?

"You want us to carry out a massacre to prevent a massacre?"

Is not that what happened during the successful Kosovo air campaign?

[Leontius]

14. Then kill those ten

[samsingh]

15. exactly

[samsingh]

16. isis is kiling innocen civilians

isis should be stopped by using all our might

[Fred Sanders]

3. We need local time, not just American Eastern time.....just saying...yes, I know the google thing.

[cosmicone]

4. Just 4?

I say we should have sortie after sortie until the ISIS menace is completely mowed down to non-existence.

[another_liberal]

5. Yeah, to hell with what we need that money for here at home . . .

Killing more people is a far better use of our scarce funds. Killing more people, and killing more people still, that's what has made America great!

(sigh)

[samsingh]

17. we are killing mass murderers - it's called justice and leading with morality

[another_liberal]

20. Yeah, sure . . .

Just remember most people around the World see the situation differently. As a matter of fact, many of those people (including quite a few Iraqi Sunnis) will be more likely to support Islamic State murderers for the very reason that America has gotten back into the fight.

"Everything is relative to the position of the observer."

[samsingh]

23. so you would okay if IS massacred the 40,000 Kurds stranded on a mountain?

I wouldn't. I care about people, innocent people.

[another_liberal]

26. We should do all we can to help those people . . .

Everything, that is, short of intervening again in Iraq with our military. Our bombs and drone missiles never made things better there yet, and they are very unlikely to defeat IS forces either; rather, such actions on our part will just make the jihadists act with more brutality and disregard for human rights than they do presently.

But don't let me impede the interventionist parade. Enjoy your war, if that is really what you want?

[samsingh]

28. i want brutal imbeciles and criminals like isis stopped

[LanternWaste]

30. Precisely what, and precisely how?

"We should do all we can to help those people..."

Precisely what, and precisely how?

[SylviaD]

13. I agree. ISIS is terrifying to me. n/t

[Hulk]

11. Let's see.....5,000 - 3 = =<4,997

It's a start. If there are only 5000 of these rabid animals crawling across Iraq, then this is a start, and I would assume we have reduced their numbers down at least 3.

[samsingh]

18. isis is horrible and filled with mass murderers

[ancianita]

12. A lot of good it did. 500 dead Yazidis on that mountain. eom

[flamingdem]

19. Isis took over a strategic city today

Jawila or something like that. Imagine if they weren't under any pressure, they'd take Erbil and its riches. The Kurds are our allies, we simply can't ignore this.

[another_liberal]

27. We can further enrage the I.S. forces with our bombing . . .

And we can make sure they act with added brutality toward the Kurds. Yes, we have the power to do that.

I doubt if our intervening again militarily will accomplish much more.

[J_J_]

22. when we accidentally kill innocent civilians

Will we blame the victims or Isis?