Thursday, April 28, 2016

Can Martha Burk shut up?

I get it, I do.

I'm a lesbian.  I assume Martha Burk is as well.

Hence her devotion to Augusta and women golfers.

But what issue has she had other than that?

The issue of electing Democrats?

Yes, Martha is back with columns yet again.

So we know it's an election cycle.

And she's again avoiding issues.

The GOP wouldn't be able to chip away at women's rights if the Democratic Party actually stood up for them.

Doesn't happen.

I'm sick of the dance.

I care about real issues.

If and when lousy Martha finds a way to speak out against war, I might care what she says.

Till then she can stop typing her farts up because no one needs to smell that.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Wednesday, April 27, 2016.  Chaos and violence continue, AL JAZEERA is shut down in Iraq, the Defense Dept -- wanting more money -- cites 'progress' in Iraq, the US State Dept suddenly loves protests, and much more.

In 'free' Iraq, where the US-installed Haider al-Abadi still rules as prime minister (for now), AL JAZEERA has been shut down.  The network explains:

The Iraqi Communications and Media Commission has shut down the Baghdad bureau of Al Jazeera Media Network and banned its journalists from reporting in the country.
In a letter to Al Jazeera on Wednesday, the CMC said it was withdrawing the license that allowed Al Jazeera to operate in Iraq due to "violations of the official codes of conduct and broadcasting rules and regulations."

DW notes:

 "We remain committed to broadcasting news on Iraq to Iraqi people, our viewers in the Arab world and across the world," the broadcaster said.
The controversial news network has been banned in Iraq for the third time now. The last time was in 2013, when it reported on a violent military crackdown on Sunni Muslim protestors.

This is 'free' Iraq.

Where thug Haider rules.

Where the US government props up thug Haider and pretends he's not another Nouri al-Maliki.

Despite the fact that he encouraged threats against journalist Ned Parker and that when the REUTERS correspondent had to leave Iraq for the safety of his team and himself, Haider dared to turn it into a joke while visiting the United States.

Haider's a hateful man with a cruel streak even bigger than his rotund belly.

He's hateful and he's not to be trusted.

But so many whores in the press pretend like he's done something or is somehow not Nouri -- as if that's enough?

Pol Pot wasn't Hitler.

But as the people of Cambodia can attest, that didn't mean Pol Pot was Ghandi.

Haider's a thug and a threat.

And the US government has disgraced itself even further in its desperate attempts to prop Haider up.

Why is the US still in Iraq?.

Matt Purple (NATIONAL INTEREST) observes:

The United States is back in Iraq. Actually, it never really left.
President Obama supposedly withdrew all American forces in 2011, except for a few hundred Marines, defense contractors, and military advisors. But it wasn’t long before he began ramping up our presence again, through temporary deployments and other means. This only accelerated after the Islamic State’s blitz through Iraq in 2014. Today, the government has blown through even its self-imposed cap of 3,870 troops, with an acknowledged five thousandAmerican military personnel now on the ground in Iraq. It’s another lazy half-measure—like the disjointed attempt to combat the Taliban—from a president who’s never once laid out a coherent strategy for fighting terrorism.

Why is it still in Iraq?

To 'combat' the Islamic State?

Doesn't seem like it.

Seems like the military still remains in Iraq to prop up  puppet government which still does not represent the Iraqi people.

Maybe when Iraqi politicians are forced to represent the Iraqi people, they'll stop stealing from Iraq?

Maybe when you're puppets installed by a foreign government, you don't give a second though to fleecing the people you supposedly represent?

US Secretary of Defense Ash Carter appeared before the US Senate Appropriations Committee today.


To plead for money, of course.

To also insist that talk in the House of insisting the next US presidnet make a request in the spring of 2017 for what is needed.

The Defense Dept -- and the current White House and president -- want a blank check and want it written now so that they can cash it whenever they choose to.

They don't want oversight.

They don't want to be responsive to the people's representatives.

That is the Congress.

And they're given control of the purse -- of spending -- for a reason.

A blank check would defeat that control.

Secretary Ash Carter:  There with our support Iraqi security forces retook Ramadi, have been reclaiming further ground in Anbar Province, most recently the city of Hit and along with Iraqi Kurdish forces have begun operations to capture and isolate Mosul with the intent of collapsing ISIL's control over that city.

We keep hearing all of these claims.

Most of which can't be verified.

Like Brett McGurk's endless pimping of the claim that foreign fighters going into Iraq are decreasing.

It's a nice claim but is it really verifiable?


Like so much this White House has offered on Iraq, it's not verifiable.

Carter wanted to talk about success and Anbar.

And he wanted to do so in the same week that Tim Arango (NEW YORK TIMES) offered a look at Anbar which included:

The situation in Anbar has grown increasingly muddled as the Obama administration has stepped up its military support to Iraq, announcing that it will deploy Apache helicopters and position more troops closer to the front lines. It has touted victories in Anbar as an important step toward liberating the country from the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, and as a prelude to a campaign, possibly this year, to retake Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city.
But Iran’s proxies are undercutting efforts to unite the civilian population, a necessity if Iraq is to eventually extinguish extremism. In the siege of Falluja, a Sunni city, the Shiite militias have prevented civilians from leaving Islamic State territory while resisting calls to allow humanitarian aid to reach the city. Sunni Arab civilians in the province are increasingly reporting kidnappings and murders by the militias, accounts that American and Iraqi officials say are credible.
In some cases, after civilians have disappeared, their families have received ransom demands. Abu Abdulrahman, a resident of Amiriyat al-Falluja, a city in Anbar under the control of the government, said three of his cousins vanished last year after being stopped at a militia checkpoint.
“We haven’t heard anything about them since then,” he said, although a man approached the family and demanded a ransom of $8,000, which was paid. “He disappeared with the money,” he said.
Conditions are so dire in Falluja for the tens of thousands of civilians trapped there that dozens of people have starved to death, civilians and activists say. Food prices have skyrocketed, with a bag of flour that would cost $15 in Baghdad going for $750, Human Rights Watch has reported.

Back to the hearing for a moment.

Secretary Ash Carter: As we've made this progress with momentum in this campaign clearly on our side, last week in Baghdad, I announced a number of key actions we're taking to continue accelerating our campaign against ISIL.  We'll be placing advisors with the ISF, that is the Iraqi Security Forces, down to the brigade and battalion level to help enhance decision making and responsiveness.  We'll be leveraging Apache attach helicopters to support the ISF's ongoing efforts to envelop and retake Mosul [. . .]

Mosul was seized in June of 2014.

How much longer is it going to be before the city is 'retaken'?

US President Barack Obama's plan or 'plan' has been enacted since August of 2014.

Mosul's still not liberated.

Today, the US Defense Dept announced/claimed:

Strikes in Iraq
Bomber, fighter, ground attack and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 23 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of Iraq’s government:

-- Near Baghdadi, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed two ISIL tunnel systems, an ISIL tunnel entrance, an ISIL heavy machine gun, an ISIL recoilless rifle and an ISIL fighting position.

-- Near Beiji, two strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed three ISIL fighting positions.

--- Near Fallujah, three strikes struck an ISIL tactical unit, destroyed two ISIL mortar systems and suppressed an ISIL tactical unit.

-- Near Hit, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL machine gun and an ISIL anti-air artillery piece.

-- Near Kirkuk, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL assembly area.

-- Near Kisik, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and an ISIL mortar system.

-- Near Mosul, five strikes struck three separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed two ISIL rocket rails, an ISIL vehicle and an ISIL fighting position and suppressed an ISIL heavy machine gun.

-- Near Qayyarah, four strikes struck three separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL mortar system.

-- Near Sinjar, a strike suppressed an ISIL mortar position.

-- Near Sultan Abdallah, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL assembly area and an ISIL supply cache.

-- Near Tal Afar, three strikes destroyed two ISIL tunnel systems and an ISIL front-end loader and denied ISIL access to terrain.

Task force officials define a strike as one or more kinetic events that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative, effect. Therefore, officials explained, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIL vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against buildings, vehicles and weapon systems in a compound, for example, having the cumulative effect of making those targets harder or impossible for ISIL to use. Accordingly, officials said, they do not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target. Ground-based artillery fired in counterfire or in fire support to maneuver roles is not classified as a strike.

Day after day, that nonsense takes place.

Over and over since August of 2014.

There is no progress.

Isn't it past time questions about Iraq were asked?

Let's switch to Tuesday's State Dept press briefing moderated by spokesperson Mark Toner.


MR TONER: Yeah. Sure, Michel. Iraq it is.

QUESTION: Do you have any (inaudible) the partial cabinet reshuffle today and the demonstrations by the followers of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr?

MR TONER: Well, I’ll start with the protests. And we obviously – we support the Iraqi people’s freedom of expression and assembly, just so long as these are peaceful protests. Peaceful protests are an integral part of a functioning democracy, and it is our understanding that, up till now, these protests have been, in fact, peaceful. Moving forward, the security for the international zone is the Government’s of Iraq’s responsibility, so they can probably answer best any further questions about security around these protests. But we obviously support the Iraqi people’s right to express themselves nonviolently.
In terms of the cabinet reshuffle, I’d obviously refer you to the Government of Iraq to comment on the specifics. But Secretary Kerry said when he was in Baghdad just a few weeks ago that it’s important to have political stability, to have a unified and functioning government as rapidly as possible, in order to move forward so that Iraq’s efforts to combat and defeat ISIL are not affected and not interrupted. So we urge all parties to work in tandem and work together to move the political process forward in ways that advance the interests and the aspirations of the Iraqi people and in accordance with the Iraqi constitution.

Oh, goody, political stability.

That's the argument that let Nouri al-Maliki get a second term (the Iraqi people did not elect him) and that let him stay on throughout his second term.

Even though he was overseeing the beating and raping of Iraqi girls and women in jails and prisons -- often illegally imprisoned.

Even though he targeted Iraq's LGBT community, unleashed the Shi'ite militias on them, sent his Interior Ministry into the schools to demonize them and call for their deaths, etc.

Even though he used both terms to actively encourage the persecution of Iraqi Christians to the point that his two terms saw a great reshuffling of Iraqi Christians from Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq to the Kurdish north instead -- because the Kurds could and would do what Nouri wouldn't: try to protect Iraqi Christians.

Even though he terrorized and killed civilians for the 'crime' of protesting.

Even though he had reporters kidnapped and tortured for the 'crime' of reporting on the protests.

Nouri al-Maliki's rap sheet is never ending.

But he was kept in place for 'political stability.'

He provided no stability to Iraq.

But the US government felt he was 'their man' and that if they propped him up long enough, at some point he was going to get that hydrocarbons law passed.

It's still not passed.

So today finds Barack and company putting their faith in Haider.

By the way, it's cute that the State Dept can now support protests.

During the year-plus of non-stop protests, the State Dept could never find a way to defend the protesters.

Not even following the Hawija massacre.

But today, they're all on board with protests.

Because they aren't protests.

They're support rallies for Haider.

Shi'ite cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr has released his zombies on the streets of Baghdad to rally for Haider and create the appearance of support.

Back to the State Dept's struggle with truth on Tuesday.

QUESTION: About – thanks, Mark. Regarding Muqtada al-Sadr --


QUESTION: -- is there any concern at this point in this building about his influence in Iraq? On multiple occasions in the last three months, he’s been able to swiftly get well over 100,000 people into the streets of Baghdad. He’s also overseeing one of the more influential and successful Shia militias in the country in the fight against the Islamic State. He seems to have reemerged as a major player there. I wonder if you can comment on that and whether that’s a good thing or are there concerns here.

MR TONER: Well, I think, just answering your last question first, I mean, it’s a perfectly fine thing, as long as he wants to be a part of the political process and not work against it. I would just – you’re certainly right that he is able to still wield tremendous influence within Iraq. That’s clear by these current protests. And again, as we often say about these kinds of environments is that, if you’re willing to quote/unquote “play by the rules” and be a voice for positive change within a society, then that is part of the democratic process and we support that. So certainly we, again, recognize his influence. We recognize that he’s still an influential figure in Iraq, but we just encourage that his influence remain, as I said, positive and peaceful.

QUESTION: Is there some indication that it’s not at this point?

MR TONER: No, I just – I mean, look – I mean, just in the past we’ve had concerns. And going forward --

QUESTION: We actually had a target on his head for a few years.

MR TONER: Well --

QUESTION: And he was – I don't know if he was ever indicted --

MR TONER: I’m not sure about that either. But all I’m saying is --

QUESTION: But his forces at one time were at war with U.S. forces occupying Iraq.

MR TONER: That’s correct.

QUESTION: I know that was a long time ago.

MR TONER: No, I understand that. That’s why – and partly – that’s part of my caveat. I mean, that’s why I say what I say, is that I think as Iraq evolves politically there is, in many countries that are evolving politically, an opportunity for some of these individuals to transition, if you will. But we view always this transition with caution.

His caveat?

That's cute.

"Radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr."

The US government came up with that billing for Moqtada.

And they didn't mean it as a compliment.

But these days, Moqtada dances for Haider so the US is all prepared to stick dollars in Moqtada's g-string as well.

There is no coherent policy for Iraq because there's no concern for Iraq or the Iraqi people.

It's still about getting hands on Iraq's natural resources.

All this time later.

Wednesday, April 27, 2016

1971 (documentary)

1971 is a documentary that Netflix has.

It's a pretty good documentary.

About a break in of a FBI office in Pennsylvania in 1971.

And how it was like WikiLeaks and other things before.

But the thing that let me down?

Nathan or something.

Some son of one of the couples who broke in to the FBI office, took files and distributed them to the media.

He and his sister Mary.



Our parents could have been arrested . . .

. . . and then we would have been raised by Uncle Bob.

And how would we have turned out.

What a bunch of whiny asses.

What is it with the White middle class?

You never hear the children of MLK or Malcolm X whining that their dad's actions might have meant they would be raised by strangers.

It's like grow up White brats, your parents did something amazing and important.

Celebrate them.

Stop making it about you.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Tuesday, April 26, 2016.  Chaos and violence continue, Haider presents his 'reform' ministers to Parliament, he semi succeeds, he also gets water bottles 'handed' to him, cracks in the lie that the US bombings of Iraq only target 'terrorists' continue to emerge, and much more.

As if Iraq doesn't have enough drama all by itself, THE WASHINGTON POST attempts to create some.  Loveday Morris and Mustafa Salim insist, "Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi desperately tried to steer his country out of political turmoil on Tuesday, partially reshuffling his cabinet amid stepped-up pressure as thousands of protesters threatened to storm parliament."

We'll get to the 'protesters,' first "Haider al-Abadi desperately tried to steer his country out of political turmoil"?

The 'turmoil' is created by Haider.

The US-installed prime minister is not following the Iraqi Constitution.

Why is that so damn hard for reporters at THE WASHINGTON POST to be honest about?

Oh, that's right, for US press outlets, the State Dept line becomes 'fact.'

At least it does for the immediate time.

But let there be no mistake five years from now, when Americans all know the truth, that the truth was known then but these reporters and press outlets didn't convey it and let them be forced to explain why that was.

Haider has created any 'turmoil' by insisting that he needs a new Cabinet.

He's done at the bidding of the US government.

Let's move over to 'protesters.'

Threaten to storm the Parliament, did they?

The Parliament's in the Green Zone.

That would be the heavily fortified Green Zone.

Where Iraq's politicians hide out from the people.

It was almost breached shortly after Nouri al-Maliki became prime minister in 2006.  That was very scary for those hiding out in the Green Zone (which included US officials).

This caused anxiety and a flurry of measures being added to further fortify the Green Zone.

To storm the Parliament, these 'protesters' would first have to storm the Green Zone -- something no group has managed to do in over a decade of the Green Zone's existence.

Let's say that they managed to breach the Green Zone.

And then let's forget for a moment that the orders in place would be warning shots and then firing at those civilians trying to get into the Green Zone.

Let's just say that they managed to breach the Green Zone.

They then just waltz into the Parliament?


The Parliament has its own set of security.

The notion that anyone was going to breach the Green Zone today and make it into the Parliament was never a genuine possibility.

Anyone saying otherwise is lying.

Again, Iraq has enough drama, there's no need to lie in order to create more.

The 'protesters' were followers of Shi'ite cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr who have repeatedly responded to his call to turn out to show support for Haider al-Abadi's proposals.

Iraq: Sadr supporters in mass protest for political reform

They rally, they don't protest.

We've said it all along.

Look at the photo above.

They were their to rally.

Moqtada's actions have been to provide cover for Haider, to try to silence Shi'ite critics.

BBC NEWS words it delicately:

On Tuesday, hundreds of thousands of Mr Sadr's supporters heeded his call to "frighten" MPs from the main political parties, which rely on control of ministries for patronage and funds, and "compel" them to agree to the prime minister's reforms.

While Moqtada's zombies were no real threats, there were a few actual ones.

Speaker escorted by his bodyguards to enter the Parliament earlier today.This is how a failed state looks like

The US has sent Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defense Ash Cater and Gen Joseph Dunford (Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) to Iraq in recent weeks to convey the White House position (Barack himself is apparently afraid to visit Iraq as president): We stand with our puppet.

Haider proposed the current Cabinet of Ministers to Parliament back in the fall of 2014 and Parliament voted them into office.

Now he just can't work with them, he insists.

And he wants a do-over.

That doesn't exist in the Iraqi Constitution.

Nor does the way Haider's attempting to go about replacing them.

But it's what the US government wants so it's what gets shoved ahead.

And since it's what's the US government wants, western reporters don't feel the need to ever point out that Haider's attempts go against the country's constitution.

The protesters that the Speaker of Parliament had to worry about?

Those protesters are inside the Parliament, they are Members of Parliament.

Recent sessions have resulted in screaming matches, threats of violence and more -- and that's just between the MPs.


  1. Video of water bottles being thrown at Iraqi PM as he enters Parliament Hall today. Hanan Fatlawi throws one too

  • Protests inside Iraqi Parliament now shouting "Betrayal! Betrayal!" Speaker replies: "Sit down so we can talk. Iraqis are waiting for us"

  • Dissenting MP shouts "I will not leave until I die." Speaker replies: "Die then."

  • There are demonstration inside Iraqi Parliament right now shouting "Baghdad will be free. Reforms are just & valid" Speaker mocking them

  • Iraqi Parliament right now looks like a clown show. MPs shouting at Speaker. Security forces and army personnel inside in huge numbers

    VIDEO: Water bottles thrown at Iraqi PM by MPs as he entered Parliament today -

    Oh, Haider.

    And all this time later, he still wasn't able to pull it off.

    He got six ministers approved today.


    RUDAW notes:

    Hasan Janabi as Minister for Water, Wafa Mahdawi as Minister for Labour, Alaa Ghani as Minister for Health, Abdulrazaq al-Eisa as Minister for Higher Education, Alaa Dishr as Minister for Electricity and Aqeel Mahdi as Minister for Culture.


    RUDAW explains, "The remaining ministerial posts to be voted on are: Education, Communications, Foreign, Finance, Justice, Youth, Industry, Planning, Housing, Transport and Oil."

     In more signs that nothing changes, the US Defense Dept announced more bombings of Iraq today:

    Strikes in Iraq
    Bomber, ground-attack, fighter, and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 18 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of Iraq’s government:

    -- Near Baghdadi, a strike destroyed an ISIL mortar position.

    -- Near Rutbah, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit.

    -- Near Beiji, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit.

    -- Near Fallujah, six strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units; destroyed 11 ISIL fighting positions, two ISIL-used bridges, an ISIL bunker and two ISIL heavy machine guns; and damaged a separate ISIL fighting position.

    -- Near Habbaniyah, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit.

    -- Near Hit, two strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed four ISIL fighting positions and an ISIL heavy machine gun.

    -- Near Kirkuk, two strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL command and control node, an ISIL assembly area and an ISIL fighting position.

    -- Near Kisik, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and an ISIL assembly area.

    -- Near Mosul, two strikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and an ISIL weapons storage facility and destroyed an ISIL supply cache.

    -- Near Sinjar, a strike destroyed an ISIL fighting position and an ISIL vehicle.

    Task force officials define a strike as one or more kinetic events that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative, effect. Therefore, officials explained, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIL vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against buildings, vehicles and weapon systems in a compound, for example, having the cumulative effect of making those targets harder or impossible for ISIL to use. Accordingly, officials said, they do not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target. Ground-based artillery fired in counterfire or in fire support to maneuver roles is not classified as a strike.

    The western media's been very good about either ignoring these bombings completely or else insisting that they only kill 'terrorists.'

    Nicholas J S Davies (CONSORTIUM NEWS) offers an important new report which opens:

    USA Today reported on April 19 that U.S. air forces bombing Syria and Iraq have been operating under new, looser rules of engagement since last fall. The war commander, Lt Gen Sean McFarland, now orders air strikes that are expected to kill up to 10 civilians without prior approval from U.S. Central Command, and U.S. officials made it clear to USA Today that U.S. air strikes are killing more civilians as a result of the new rules.
    Under these new rules of engagement, the U.S. has conducted a major escalation of its bombing campaign against Mosul, an Iraqi city of about 1.5 million people, which has been occupied by Islamic State since 2014. Reports of hundreds of civilians killed in U.S. air strikes reveal some of the human cost of the U.S. air war and the new rules of engagement.
    Previous statements by U.S. officials have absurdly claimed that over 40,000 U.S. air strikes in Iraq and Syria have killed as few as 26 civilians. Speaking to USA Today, a senior Pentagon official who is briefed daily on the air war dismissed such claims, noting that heavier civilian casualties were inevitable in an air war that has destroyed 6,000 buildings with over 40,000 bombs and missiles.

    Monday, April 25, 2016

    Sharon Stone's an elderly sex kitten (put her down already)

    Did you catch this crap?

    Her basic instincts tell her Bernie Sanders probably took LSD.
    Outspoken actress Sharon Stone recently told The Hollywood Reporter she worries the presidential candidate, 74, dabbled in psychedelic drugs during his younger years.

    Hey, Sharon, no one wants to see your coochie anymore.

    You're an old woman.

    You were old for a movie star in Basic Instinct.

    And that was your big hit.

    And that was your only hit.

    You can't even handle a TV show now.

    You're old and your moment passed.

    You're a one-hit wonder.

    Why don't you wonder about that?

    Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Deborah Messy" went up earlier tonight.


    Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

    Monday, April 25, 2016.  Chaos and violence continue, the Kurds and the Shi'ites are at odds, the United Nations is wondering where the plan for 'day after' is, and much more.

    Today, the US Defense Dept announced:

    Strikes in Iraq
    Attack, fighter, ground attack and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 11 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of Iraq’s government:

    -- Near Baghdadi, a strike struck an ISIL staging area.

    -- Near Huwayjah, a strike destroyed an ISIL tunnel system.

    -- Near Fallujah, five strikes struck three separate ISIL tactical units and an ISIL staging area and destroyed three ISIL fighting positions, two ISIL mortar positions, an ISIL bulldozer, an ISIL front-end loader, an ISIL recoilless rifle and three ISIL bed-down locations.

    -- Near Mosul, two strikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed three ISIL anti-air artillery pieces and an ISIL vehicle.

    -- Near Sinjar, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.

    -- Near Waleed, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit.

    Task force officials define a strike as one or more kinetic events that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative, effect. Therefore, officials explained, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIL vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against buildings, vehicles and weapon systems in a compound, for example, having the cumulative effect of making those targets harder or impossible for ISIL to use. Accordingly, officials said, they do not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target. Ground-based artillery fired in counterfire or in fire support to maneuver roles is not classified as a strike.

    Like that's worked.

    Daily bombings since August of 2014 and Iraq's no closer to the political solution US President Barack Obama insisted June 19, 2014 was the only answer.

    Worse, AFP reports, "Clashes between Kurdish and Shiite Turkmen fighters in an Iraqi town late Monday cut the main road from Baghdad to the north for the second day in a row and threatened to undermine a cease-fire agreement reached by military leaders a day earlier."

    Yes, day two.

    Sunday, Mohammed Tawfeeq and Tim Hume (CNN) reported, "Twenty-two fighters have been killed in ongoing clashes between Kurdish Peshmerga and Shiite militia members in northern Iraq, local security officials say, a development that complicates the fight against ISIS in the region."

    1. Tuz Khurmatu: Kurd Youth who defended themselves from Shia Militias, replace Iraqi flag after capturing a checkpoint

     DOW JONES explained it this way, "A firefight between Iraqi Kurdish fighters and a Shiite militia in northern Iraq has left at least 27 of the combatants dead and threatens to fray Iraq's fragile anti-Islamic State alliance."

    But non-western outlets explained it a little differently.  Dalshad Abdullah, Manaf al-Obeidi and Hamza Mustapha (ASHARQ AL-AWSAT) offered:

    Kurdish sources told Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper that Iranian soldiers and militants belonging to the Lebanon-based Hezbollah had been a part of the recent battles, fighting alongside the Mobilization Forces.
    During the first hours of battle, over 25 combatants belonging to the Turkmens’ side were reported dead.
    On its behalf, the Turkmen party accused groups of militants coming from beyond borders of instigating dispute among the people of Tuz Khormato. In an announcement, Turkmens called out the voice of reason found in everyone to rule, so that civilians would not have to pay the price of an armed conflict.

    If, two years ago, Barack had put 1/4 of the effort into diplomacy that he did into bombing Iraq, things might be different today.

    Instead, he failed to lead.

    And Secretary of State John Kerry's ridiculous assumption that he was Secretary of Defense did not make things better.

    Diplomacy was shoved aside and the State Dept worked on corralling nations into being part of the so-called 'coalition.'

    They should have put that time and energy into leading on political solutions.

    Tim Arango (NEW YORK TIMES) notes the so-called 'wins' on the battlefield mean very little:

    For seasoned observers of the American military involvement in Iraq -- going back more than 25 years to the start of the Persian Gulf war -- it is all part of a depressingly familiar pattern: battlefield gains that do not bring stability in their wake.
    “Unfortunately, as has been a trademark of American involvement with Iraq at least since 2003 (and arguably since 1991), military success is not being matched with the commensurate political-economic efforts that will ultimately determine whether battlefield successes are translated into lasting achievements,” Kenneth M. Pollack, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a longtime Iraq analyst, wrote recently in an online column.
    A growing number of critics are warning that American-backed military victories need to be backed up with political reconciliation between Sunni and Shiite Arabs, something Iran is working against, and with determined efforts to rebuild cities so that civilians can return.

    Even Fred Kaplan has caught on, writing this week at SLATE:

    But he [Barack]'s also cited another reason for restraint: There’s no point in throwing American troops into this conflict without a decent prospect for a political solution. Specifically, as long as Iraq’s Shiite-led government doesn’t share power with the Sunnis, ISIS (or jihadist organizations like ISIS) can’t be crushed. The Baghdad government’s oppressive policies and corrupt practices might not have caused the rise of ISIS, but they’ve helped sustain it and legitimized the grievances that ISIS has exploited, encouraging even many moderate Sunnis to tolerate—or at least not rebel against—the presence of ISIS as the lesser of two evils.

    Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has more inclusive inclinations than his predecessor, Nouri al-Maliki. And the American commanders in Iraq have done much to reinforce these tendencies, for instance paying the Kurdish peshmerga and the anti-ISIS Sunni tribal fighters through the Baghdad treasury—and thus building a sense of loyalty to and from the government—rather than giving them cash directly, as was done during the tribal co-optations of 2007 (as had to be done, since Maliki wasn’t willing to be the conduit). Another hopeful sign: The U.S. commander leading this tribal coordination is Lt. Gen. Sean MacFarland, who, as a colonel back in 2006, organized the Anbar Awakening, the first (and, for a while, pivotal) campaign in which Sunni militias cooperated with U.S. troops to beat back al-Qaida. When it comes to melding tribal politics and military entities in western Iraq, MacFarland has no equal.

    Barack's had no real plan.  Which is why the US government has pushed the US military into the arms of groups that previously killed US troops in Iraq.  And it's not just getting cozy with the League of Righteous, it's also setting these terrorists -- that's what they are -- up to be in charge of Iraq.

    Stratfor offers an analysis which opens:

    In some ways, the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq has masked the country's deep fragmentation. During their campaign against the jihadist group, Iraq's many ethnic and religious groups have often cooperated with one another. United by a desire to reclaim territory from the jihadist group, the Kurdish peshmerga, Shiite militias and Sunni tribal militias, along with the Iraqi government forces, have launched numerous joint operations. But competing goals among the groups, all of which desire more economic resources, territory and political influence, will bring them into conflict. Over the course of the operations themselves, longstanding tensions between the factions have already manifested. The struggle for influence and control among the groups will emerge even more fully as they overcome their common enemy.
    Although Iraq's ethnic and religious communities exert their influence in the country in different ways, they share one important means in common: their militias. In Iraq, a claim to territory often translates to a claim to power. To a great extent, this is a symptom of the weakness of the Iraqi security forces. Numbering under 150,000 in front-line forces, Iraq's military suffers from poor leadership and logistics, dismal salaries and weak morale. As a result, militias in Iraq have risen to prominence, throwing much-needed support behind the Iraqi security forces. At the same time, the militias come with their own agendas. 

    No real thought is given.  No long term plan exists.

    The United Nations is noting this lack of a long term plan:

    Iraq must immediately take concrete steps to plan for “the day after” the defeat of ISIL, grounded in equality, the rule of law and a vision that has earned the confidence of all the country’s diverse communities, UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights Kate Gilmore urged today, at the end of a week-long visit to Iraq.
    “Iraq, it seems, has a long memory but is short on vision,” Gilmore said. “It is like a vehicle travelling over rocky terrain, with a large rearview mirror but only a keyhole for a windscreen, despite a vicious contest for the wheel. The dominant narrative among many of Iraq’s leaders is of ‘my community’s grievance’, failing to acknowledge the widespread nature of Iraqis’ suffering and failing to chart a course for an inclusive future.”
    “Iraqis are crying out for fairness, recognition, justice, appreciation and meaningful participation in shaping their future – a process that goes forward and not backwards.”
    “All the leaders of Iraq, at every level, in both word and action, need to demonstrate a far greater commitment to peace, equality and to the rule of law than to grievances or to vengeance hardwired by sectarianism. There is a worrying absence of a political narrative that brings together all the diverse communities in Iraq, a narrative that includes all the minority communities. This must be urgently addressed,” she added.
    Gilmore stressed that Iraq’s challenges are not military alone and its future is not solely a matter of defeating ISIL and liberating its territories.
    “The existence of armed conflict in certain regions does not excuse or justify the absence of the rule of law in the broader Iraq. Judicial independence, an end to arbitrary detentions, respect for due process, the prohibition of torture – these are neither ideals nor luxuries, but are indispensable foundations of stability,” she said.
    “Firm steps must be taken – now – to plan for the day after ISIL, steps that broaden inclusion and deepen fairness, including through structured local, regional and national dialogue on inclusion, peaceful co-existence and mutual respect. Unchecked corruption, lack of accountability for past and present crimes, the problem of tribal militias, the growing number of internally displaced people, the partial or total destruction of entire villages and towns, violence against women, and the need for constitutional and legislative reforms are some of the many pressing human rights concerns in Iraq that need priority attention.”
    During her mission to Iraq, Gilmore visited Baghdad, Najaf, Erbil and the Shariya camp for internally displaced people (IDPs) in Dohuk. She met the Minister of Foreign Affairs and other senior Government officials, as well as the President of the Kurdistan region of Iraq, leaders of civil society, including religious and ethnic communities, human rights defenders, and survivors of human rights violations.
    “The blight of ISIL was made tragically clear by the stories of survivors of violations that we met in IDP camps in Dohuk. The Yezidi man who was forcibly convicted, subjected to mock executions and who witnessed a pregnant woman stoned to death; the woman who was subjected to sexual slavery for more than a year; the man whose entire family – wife, daughters, son – were abducted by ISIL and who couldn’t afford the USD 30,000 ransom demanded for their release,” Gilmore said. “The human rights abuses being perpetrated by ISIL must neither be forgotten, nor silenced. The right to truth is crucial, as is the possibility of accountability for those who have committed what may amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity or even genocide. Evidence must be preserved and testimony must continue to be gathered.”
    Gilmore also urged the international community to provide more support to humanitarian needs, the rebuilding of essential infrastructure and towards justice and reconciliation in Iraq.
    “We all have responsibilities towards the people of Iraq. While there is an international military coalition in place, a comparably resourced international coalition of practical compassion is also needed to help with the building blocks towards a sustained peace in Iraq,” she said.

    Where's the plan, Barack?

    Bombing won't bring peace.

    Political reconciliation?

    The Iraqi government agreed to that in 2007 as part of the White House benchmarks . . . they just never implemented it like they promised to.

    So until the US government is willing to hold back on weapons and aids until Iraq makes political progress, there is no progress.

     XINHUA reports a Baghdad car bombing has claimed 7 lives and left thirty more injured.

    In the US, War Hawk Hillary Clinton continues hoping she can escape her vote for the Iraq War and her years of support for it.

    HRC has a TON of experience GETTING IT WRONG! Sending kids 2 DIE in wars 4 NO REASON Except 4 offering As "a business opportunity."

    voted yes voted no; dont confuse a vote 2 sup troops once there w/a yes4war!

    Hillary devotee and Clinton cult member Debra Messing refuses to demand accountability from her pin up Hillary Clinton.  She does, however, insult everyone else.  A point made in Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Deborah Messy."