Oh! Really? "Obama Is Open to Ground Troops in Iraq, Top General Says"

[99th_Monkey]

So which is it? Boots on the ground in Iraq? .. or Not?

Obama Is Open to Ground Troops in Iraq, a Top General Says
George Zornick * The Nation * September 16, 2014 - 11:14 AM ET

President Obama has repeatedly declared there will be no combat troops on the ground in Iraq to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. But a Senate hearing Tuesday with top US military officials revealed that pronouncement is on very shaky ground—there is now no question ground troops are under active consideration at the highest levels of government.

General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in his opening remarks he isn’t ruling out asking Obama for ground troops. “To be clear, if we reach the point where I believe our advisers should accompany Iraqi troops on attacks against specific ISIL targets, I will recommend that to the president.” Dempsey also testified that the president asked him “to come back to him on a case-by-case basis” on the subject of ground troops.

There are currently about 1,600 US troops on the ground in Iraq serving in “advisory” roles. Dempsey reiterated several times he could imagine scenarios in which he would want them to switch into more active roles, though his potential rationale for doing so changed in striking ways throughout the hearing.

Dempsey first said, in a response to a question from Senator Carl Levin, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, “If there are threats to the United States, then of course I would go back to the president and make a recommendation that may include the use of US military ground forces.” But moments later, in a response to a question from Senator Jack Reed, he outlined an entirely different scenario that would involve US troops heading into battle without a clear threat to the United States.

“If the Iraqi security forces and the pesh [peshmerga, Kurdish fighting forces] were at some point ready to retake Mosul, a mission that I would find to be extraordinarily complex, it could very well be part of that particular mission to provide close combat advising or accompanying for that mission,” Dempsey said. “But for the day-to-day activities that I anticipate will evolve over time, I don’t see it to be necessary right now.”
http://www.thenation.com/blog/181630/obama-open-ground-troops-iraq-top-general-says

[merrily]

1. .....

[AtomicKitten]

2. deadly semantics

Last edited Wed Sep 17, 2014, 09:53 PM - Edit history (2)

[karynnj]

3. The Nation title is overblown - the general said that IF needed, he would recommend it to

the President. The closest you get to their title is that Obama gives him an opening to come back to speak of specific cases - ie if something unexpected happens that could warrant troops on the ground. (Question to Nation - the US did introduce elite troops to try to rescue the journalists - Are they unhappy with that? Was that too close to boots on the ground?)

That is not the same as the General said that "Obama was open to ..." I guess you could say the saving grace is they do include the quote, but this is the Nation hearing what it - in its purer than thou rage - wants to hear.

[NYC_SKP]

5. Yep. "I will recommend that to the president.”

Usually the Nation is above this kind of manipulation by article title.

People would LOVE to nail down Obama's position on this, but he's too smart for that.

He needs to keep his options open AND if he did become much more specific, the media and the haters on the right would say he's a traitor for divulging too many details or showing his hand.

Obama can't win.

[karynnj]

7. Not to mention, this is NOT the kind of thing where you could rule

anything out 100% for all times in the future. Had he done so, the questions would then shift to the "but what if a, b, and c happened? These could continue on forever and are completely useful.

[MohRokTah]

17. Clicks are EVERYTHING in modern journalism.

Clickbait headlines are now the norm.

[madokie]

11. We have those here who'll do anything possible to make it appear that Obama is the opposite of what

he clearly says. I'm not saying this is the case all the time but this one sure seems to be insinuating the opposite of what the president is saying. Of course there is no way that the President can see into the tomorrows so conditions do change which can and do require a rethink of original thinking. I like that a person can change as conditions warrant.

[morningfog]

25. The headline is accurate. The general said if the air war

doesn't work, ground troops will be recommened. At the same hearing, the general said why the air war won't work. IS is dispersing into the cities. It's going to take reliable ground troops to actually destroy IS.

The general also said that we would recommend imbedding US troops if needed, which is a different request and one even more likely to be made.

[karynnj]

34. Given that you need several sentences to bridge the comments to the title, it is NOT accurate

The point is what the general says he could recommend under circumstances does not equate to Obama is open to (something that is the opposite of his stated policy).

Note - I would not have quibbled with something that said " top Obama general is open". That would be accurate. Here, the magazine wants a sharper title that will energize their antiwar base more than saying "top general".

I get the concern that things could expand - or even the concern that leaders often intentionally understate what they think the likely effort will be. However that can be written honestly. In fact, that is what YOU just did and what many at the hearings are saying - and all of you have the right to say that. As I drafted my first comment, I edited myself from initially saying "dishonest" to saying "overblown". The reason was that as I rethought what I wrote, I could not justify the use of dishonest (as in lie) as it likely was exactly what the person believed. I wrote it as "overblown" because they conflated what the general said with what Obama thought - even as Obama was saying his intent was the opposite and he clearly had his entire administration in sync with his position.

[DesertFlower]

4. i don't want any troops in iraq even as advisors.

we trained the iraq army and when confronted they ran away.

let the other mid-east countries take care of their own.

i don't want anymore american lives lost or maimed.

enough already.

[madokie]

12. We broke it, its our responsibility to the Iraqi people to help fix it

this coming from a guy who spent 15 months in country in a war that I realized early on what we were doing was wrong. So I think that gives me some right to weigh in on this subject.

"War is an admission of failure." - David Maner. Think about those words for a moment and see if you can understand what the author is saying.

[99th_Monkey]

14. I think the USA has done quite enough "nation building" in Iraq ~nt~

[madokie]

15. You're entitled to what you think

I'd like to see us not do any war's but we did and nothing will change that now.

This mess was not created by Obama and never will it be his fault. He can turn and walk away or try to give a helping hand. In this case I'd rather he do the latter.

[Boreal]

22. Have you ever heard of cutting your losses? n/t

[morningfog]

26. Everything after august 9 is Obama's.

[DesertFlower]

19. meanwhile our country is falling apart.

no one ever talks about how much money was and is spent on those wars.

let's rebuild our infrastructure and give jobs to americans.

[99th_Monkey]

28. Yup. nt

[DesertFlower]

18. we did break it. we had no business

invading that country -- so many innocent lives lost on both sides. like i said we trained the iraq army and they ran away. what more can we do?

saddam was a bad guy but he didn't allow terrorists in the country.

we started a civil war.

[DesertFlower]

21. are you willing to go over there?

[madokie]

30. I don't think they'd let a 66 y.o. COPD, PAD and peripheral neuropathy person in the country

let alone join the army. Last I heard the president isn't talking about a ground war anyway.

[AgingAmerican]

37. Yeah, right

We have such a good track record of 'fixing' things in the middle east. We need to just go away and stop trying to 'fix' things.

[amandabeech]

13. I don't want them training and arming so called "moderate" Sunni Syrians.

We have done enough in this part of the world, and the only thing that changes is the muddle of which countries or groups will work with others.

[Skink]

6. How do the troops feel about it.

[gwheezie]

8. When did obama say this?nt

[Cali_Democrat]

9. He didn't.

See reply #3 in this thread.

[OilemFirchen]

16. Put simply,

the OP baits us with: "So which is it? Boots on the ground in Iraq? .. or Not?".

The answer? Not. As indicated by the article which, despite the sensationally false headline, provides the evidence.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. Send the boots without the troops.

[DesertFlower]

20. my friend's son served in both

iraq and afghanistan. he's still having nightmares.

[gwheezie]

23. Both my nephews served

They did 8 combat tours between them. Both believe Isis is a threat at some point. Both also think before we continue with the war we started we need a declaration of war by congress. A draft including women. Raise taxes. Nationalize private industry and turn it into a war machine. Prosecute investors who fund the enemy. Ration resources. Otherwise it's not worth fighting.

[madokie]

31. I served 15 months in VN

45 years ago and I still have nightmares. In fact that is why I'm up at this hour right now this minute. So what ever you do lets not question my priorities or where my allegiance is or what I might do. I did it!
You can take your 'I know it all' and place it where ever but I don't want to hear about it understand. Thanks, I thought you might.

[DesertFlower]

33. no one is questionning your priorities. sorry you

had to go to VM. years ago i had a boyfriend who served there -- got a purple heart. he became an alcoholic.

[spanone]

24. i trust President Obama's word over the general.

[morningfog]

27. I don't. I don't trust any of them, but they give

information that helps see what is going on and what might happen.

Everyone involved has said this will take 3 years just to really get going in Syria. So the general's recommendation of troops will likely be made to te next president. It's impossible to trust an unknown person.

[99th_Monkey]

29. It's like they keep trying tp "put the turd in the other guys pocket"

When Obama "changes his mind" to put more boots on the ground,
it will be because the "military experts" have advised him to do so.

[madokie]

32. Or our all knowing know it alls here at the du armchair anti-warrior table

anti-warrior/anti-obama table I should maybe have typed

[hobbit709]

35. Hey General, be a real leader and ride in the first vehicle on the way in.

[99th_Monkey]

36. +10 n/t

[B2G]

38. "The situation has changed"

"It is now indicated that we we need"

"At this stage of the engagement"

It's coming sooner or later.

[99th_Monkey]

39. Watch out for flying weasel words! ~nt