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

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 07:07 AM Jun 2014

And Creeeeeeep: White House beginning to consider conflicts in Syria and Iraq as single challenge [View all]

The Obama administration has begun to consider the conflicts in Syria and Iraq as a single challenge, with an al-Qaeda-inspired insurgency threatening both countries’ governments and the region’s broader stability, according to senior administration officials.

At a National Security Council meeting this week, President Obama and his senior advisers reviewed the consequences of possible airstrikes in Iraq, a bolder push to train Syria’s moderate rebel factions, and various political initiatives to break down the sectarian divisions that have stirred Iraq’s Sunni Muslims against the Shiite-led government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Senior administration officials familiar with the discussions say what is clear to the president and his advisers is that any long-term plan to slow the progress of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, as the insurgency is known, will have far-reaching consequences on both sides of the increasingly inconsequential desert border between the two countries.

“The key to both Syria and Iraq is going to be a combination of what happens inside the country, working with moderate Syrian opposition, working with an Iraqi government that is inclusive, and us laying down a more effective counterterrorism platform that gets all the countries in the region pulling in the same direction,” Obama said at a news conference Thursday. “Rather than try to play whack-a-mole wherever these terrorist organizations may pop up, what we have to do is to be able to build effective partnerships.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-beginning-to-consider-conflicts-in-syria-and-iraq-as-single-challenge/2014/06/19/b14bd8b4-f7ac-11e3-a606-946fd632f9f1_story.html

48 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
And they are right to Shivering Jemmy Jun 2014 #1
All the more reason for the US military to stay the hell out. morningfog Jun 2014 #13
I have no opinion on that Shivering Jemmy Jun 2014 #41
+1000000000 woo me with science Jun 2014 #45
I am beginning to wonder Puzzledtraveller Jun 2014 #2
you are wrong Shivering Jemmy Jun 2014 #42
Good evidence for that: The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) woo me with science Jun 2014 #46
"Stay in Syria, and we'll give you all kinds of money and arms, but bullwinkle428 Jun 2014 #3
Cambodia and Laos redux. hobbit709 Jun 2014 #4
this is the Viet Nam/ Cambodia syndrome. Javaman Jun 2014 #5
That's it. My here is no reason for us to get involved morningfog Jun 2014 #6
Unless it was part of a greater plan Puzzledtraveller Jun 2014 #7
That's an interesting observation. Javaman Jun 2014 #8
Isolate Iran? Puzzledtraveller Jun 2014 #9
how would that be achieved? Javaman Jun 2014 #10
Maybe neutralizing Iran's allies. Puzzledtraveller Jun 2014 #11
Good point. Javaman Jun 2014 #12
Change the borders so that the mix would be less volatile. Uncle Joe Jun 2014 #43
I agree. the Treaty of Versailles destroyed that area of the world. Javaman Jun 2014 #47
defense of nebulous Iraqi political goals used as pretext for attacking neighbor Syria? bigtree Jun 2014 #14
Yes, clearly we should continue the UK's mistake from the end of WWI jeff47 Jun 2014 #15
The ultimate point is that this is not our conflict to solve. morningfog Jun 2014 #16
We can't solve it, but we can try to steer it some. jeff47 Jun 2014 #17
The "up to 300" military advisers are not there to provide security to the embassy. morningfog Jun 2014 #19
Good thing I mentioned training and advice!! jeff47 Jun 2014 #20
Target strikes are "training and advice?" morningfog Jun 2014 #22
You mean the ones we ruled out? jeff47 Jun 2014 #27
"...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
Sure they do. Someone has to fly the planes/drones. That's combat. (nt) jeff47 Jun 2014 #32
If you notice the statements from the White House, they distinguish "combat troops" on the ground PoliticAverse Jun 2014 #36
Yes, when they say "troops on the ground". jeff47 Jun 2014 #39
Well, obviously, we will be using American forces. That is my point. morningfog Jun 2014 #31
You can't declare future events to have already happened. jeff47 Jun 2014 #33
I have not said we have or will have "troops on the ground in combat." morningfog Jun 2014 #34
It's the logical result from where you're heading. jeff47 Jun 2014 #35
I haven't seen Obama or anyone say that airstrikes aren't happening. morningfog Jun 2014 #37
Yes you have, I linked the WSJ article where they did. jeff47 Jun 2014 #38
"...FOR NOW" form your linked article. morningfog Jun 2014 #40
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
Our policy regarding Syria and Iraq is incoherent. Comrade Grumpy Jun 2014 #21
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
and 'terror' bigtree Jun 2014 #25
Even now the Syrians and Iraqis are combining their mighty fleets to invade Malibu. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2014 #26
Hey, why not? That way, they can blame it all on Russia... MattSh Jun 2014 #44
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»And Creeeeeeep: White Hou...