Praise the French and Pass the Ammunition

France looking at supplying Iraqi Kurds with arms: FM – Yahoo News

Paris (AFP) – France, in consultation with its EU partners, is looking at supplying arms to Iraq’s Kurds to fight against Islamic State jihadists, Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said Sunday.

Well, somebody sure as hell needs to.

About Bill Quick

I am a small-l libertarian. My primary concern is to increase individual liberty as much as possible in the face of statist efforts to restrict it from both the right and the left. If I had to sum up my beliefs as concisely as possible, I would say, "Stay out of my wallet and my bedroom," "your liberty stops at my nose," and "don't tread on me." I will believe that things are taking a turn for the better in America when married gays are able to, and do, maintain large arsenals of automatic weapons, and tax collectors are, and do, not.


Praise the French and Pass the Ammunition — 9 Comments

  1. Latest word appears to be that Our Fearful Leader has simultaneously commenced shipping “self-defensive arms” to the Kurds and – in essence – cut Nouri al-Maliki’s water off.

    Obama said that the United States has “stepped up military advice and assistance” to Iraqi and Kurdish forces.

    State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said that the United States was rushing weapons to Kurdish forces, known as the peshmerga, from stockpiles.

    The weapons flow could further strain the self-governing Kurdish region’s relationship with the central government. The United States has previously insisted on respecting Iraq’s territorial integrity and routing arms through Baghdad.

    …as well as:

    Obama said that he as well as Vice President Joe Biden called prime minister-designate Haidar al-Abadi, an erstwhile ally of Maliki who was tasked by President Fuad Masum with forming a new government.

    Stressing his position that there is “no American military solution” to the Iraq crisis, Obama called Abadi’s nomination “a promising step.”

    Can you spell “escalation”?…Then again:

    Obama has ruled out sending back ground troops and has said that it is up to Iraq’s government, not the United States, to defeat ISIL.

    Lieutenant General William Mayville, speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, said there would be no mission creep.

    “There are no plans to expand the current air campaign beyond the current self-defense activities,” he said. (emphasis added)

    Yes – well…maybe no, maybe…who knows?…maybe we’ll see…

    Meanwhile – the peshmerga, now have at least a limited “air defense” arm, plus lots more shootin’ stuff to use…

    • Let’s not get ridiculous. Obama is not going back into Iraq with any significant ground force.

      First, he doesn’t need to. Air power will be more than enough to defeat ISIL – if that’s what he actually wants, which I doubt.

      Two: He won’t go back in because the American people, despite the neocon chorus currently howling away at Bushbot carols, still oppose going back in by a three to one margin at 75% opposed.

      Finally, we are now witnessing the real malign outcome of Bush’s botched War on Something Or Other (for god’s sake don’t call it Muslim terrorism): As I said, he poisoned the well for a generation on the notion of putting US ground troops back into the middle east for any reason.

      • …Obama is not going back into Iraq with any significant ground force. (emphasis added)

        Readily agreed – for the most part (and I sincerely hope we are both correct about that – enough with getting U.S. personnel chopped up “on behalf” of people who don’t want us around, and would be largely resentful – much less ungrateful – re: any efforts we were to make, there) – and I (also) sincerely hope it stays that way.

        Which is not to say that – to warp a Slick Willie number a bit – the meaning of “significant” (a)is the same for all, and (b) is not open to “interpretation” and even to “change”.

        “Less than significant”, for instance, could mean – or come to mean – some smaller, specialized (and carefully-covert) number of “boots on the ground”.

        And since when did any margin of U.S. public opinion – or past pronouncements, by whoever – prevent His Imperiousness from doing what he “decided” (read: Valerie and The Chicago Boyz settle on) what he really, really wants to do?

        There are a lot of “what ifs?” still possible between now and January 20, 2017 – let us sincerely hope for no more dead or mangled U.S. servicefolks in Iraq, or even anywhere else in the Middle East, for that matter.

          • Update: Dammit – I really, really hate being even partially-correctly-predictive of this kind of shit

            US Sends More Advisers to Iraq, Steps Up Air Strikes

            The Obama administration has sent about 130 additional military personnel to Iraq, U.S Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said on Tuesday, as Washington seeks to help Iraq contain the threat posed by hardline militants from the Islamic State.

            Hagel, speaking to troops in California, said the soldiers had arrived in the area around Iraqi Kurdistan’s capital, Arbil, earlier in the day on Tuesday…

            Admittedly, “another 130 military personnel” does not probably – given the size of the area involved (most/much of Kurdish-held Northern Iraq), and the relative numbers (a whole, big bunch of Kurdish, Muslims vs. a probably-even-bigger bunch of ISIS-allied Muslims) involved – amount to a “significant” number of new U.S. boots in Iraqi dust…but still…

            What comes next?

Leave a Reply