home

Trump's First Raid in Yemen: U.S. Military Member Dies

By Jeralyn, Section Trump Administration
Posted on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 03:18:25 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

An American commando has lost his life in a battle with al Qaida in Yemen (not ISIS) in the first authorized military raid of the Trump Administration.

The raid also killed women and children, including the 8 year old daughter of deceased al Qaida preacher Anwar al-Awlaki. (Photo of her vibrant, happy and alive here.)

< Constitutional Rights Apply to Everyone, Including Immigrants | Trump Excludes Muslim Countries With Trump Org. Financial Ties From Ban >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Trump's First Raid in Yemen: U.S. Military Member Dies | 30 comments (30 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    So (none / 0) (#1)
    by FlJoe on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 03:38:53 PM EST
    it begins. At first blush this looks like a relatively large and dangerous mission. I see the Trump administration risking American lives early and often to use as political cover, yes I definitely think they are that craven.

    i feel (none / 0) (#2)
    by linea on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 03:50:40 PM EST
    this is a continuation of the absurd "fight them over there so we dont need to fight them over here" nonsense.

    it all needs to stop. stop dropping bombs, stop the drones, stop sendong u.s. soldiers, stop using special operations groups, stop sending cia advisors, stop training "friendly rebels" and stop funding civil wars and insurrections. my opinion only.  

    Parent

    I (none / 0) (#3)
    by FlJoe on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 05:00:31 PM EST
    would agree totally.....but the game has spiraled out of control. There are just too many players in the game and the risks are insane, if we were to leave the table right now the world might very well slip into total chaos. Even if we were to cease and desist right now the game would go on with perhaps with dire consequences, such as full scale war in the Persian Gulf or the emergence of a strong Jihadist State, maybe even nukes.

    I am no fan of military adventurism, but history has backed the world into a dangerous corner and we are largely to blame. There is a lot of you broke it you own it going on here.

    But as always there is a lot to be said for when you find yourself in a hole stop digging.

    I believe in a judicial use of force, with limited scope and the distinct objective of reducing chaos(ie. helping to defeat Isis).

    Parent

    True (none / 0) (#4)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 08:26:45 PM EST
    would agree totally.....but the game has spiraled out of control. There are just too many players in the game and the risks are insane, if we were to leave the table right now the world might very well slip into total chaos.

    We did leave the table , and lead from behind. And the world is definitely more unsafe now than 8 years ago

    Parent

    We "left the table" ... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Yman on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 08:39:32 PM EST
    ... after the American people grew sick of a war of choice based on premises that were somewhere between false and outright lies.  After "leading" from the front resulted in thousands of American soldiers killed and mamed, with hundreds of thousand of Iraquis dead.  After that ridiculous was resulted in a greatly destabilized Middle East and a power vacuum.  After GWB signed a SOFA requiring us to leave.

    So you might want to check your timeframe.  It's at least 8 years short.

    Parent

    And 8 years later (none / 0) (#6)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 08:50:07 PM EST
    The world is in a worse place.

    Parent
    Probably the lesson (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by jondee on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 09:38:14 PM EST
    is that ONE country can't make the "world" over in it's own ideal image so easily.

    Something Bush's neocon/PNAC brain trust should've reflected on a little more 16 years ago.

    Parent

    16 years later (none / 0) (#7)
    by Yman on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 08:52:48 PM EST
    ... the world is (arguably) in a much worse place.

    Tends to happen when you support unnecessary, foolish wars.

    Parent

    So (none / 0) (#8)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 08:58:38 PM EST
    You are telling 2 wrongs make a right?

    Nope

    Parent

    No - I'm telling you ... (none / 0) (#10)
    by Yman on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 10:16:02 PM EST
    ... you should look at GWB (and in the mirror) before trying to blame Obama.

    But you already knew that ...

    Parent

    This is true (none / 0) (#12)
    by Chuck0 on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 10:26:34 PM EST
    8 years later we have president who is a clear and present danger to the safety and security of the USA. The doomsday clock has been advanced 30 seconds, which is an indication thatt this lunatic in the WH is danger to the entire planet. So agreed. The world is now a less safe place.

    Parent
    No, it is not (none / 0) (#15)
    by MKS on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 01:35:04 PM EST
    This is just put out there as fact.

    The "worse off" position amounts to how right wingers "feel" about things.

     The Middle East is more stable than it has been in a while.  The deal with Iran help forestall a crisis that could have resulted in imminent war.

      We are losing few troops around the world.  We do not have a hot war in the Middle East, aside from the siege at Mosul and the massacre at Aleppo.

    You want to know what the Middle East looks like in flames--the metaphor conservatives are using?  Try the Yom Kippur War and the potential it created for confrontation between the U.S. and the Soviet Union and all that could have entailed.

    Iraq.  Actually better off--once Mosul is taken.  The Iraqis would have largely used their own ground troops in taking back their own country.  This shows much greater stability for that country than many assumed.

    And we had not been torturing people under Obama and had outlawed that practice by any U.S. agents anywhere.  That is a far better place to be.  A huge improvement.  But if you like torture, you can disagree and have hope that Trump will find a way to revive its practice.

    And there is an objective way, albeit a ghoulish one, to measure the difference.  How many Americans died under Obama and how many under Bush?  Just look at the numbers, as callous as that may be.  

    Obama kept us safe from any major 9-11 style terrorist attack.  He took out Bin Laden and rendered Al Qaeda largely impotent.

    ISIS is an Al Qaeda offshoot that has failed to attack us with a 9-11 style attack here in the U.S.

    We were vastly better off under Obama.

    Parent

    Number of terrorism fatalities (none / 0) (#16)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 02:11:22 PM EST
    under Bush 3025. Under Obama: 159. The numbers are from the Independent Journal Review article. These are not ONLY muslim related deaths but rather ALL terrorism be it right wing white power or christian extremists. I'd say MKS is right on the mark. We were vastly better off under President Obama. The current lunatic in the WH is setting fires to encourage attacks on US soil. And depending on how he "feels" on any given day, we are faced with the possibility of him launching a nuke and bring about nuclear annihilation.

    Parent
    And deaths of U.S. troops (none / 0) (#17)
    by MKS on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 02:28:00 PM EST
    Bush sent them to death at rapid pace.  Obama pulled them out.

    Parent
    Sorry (none / 0) (#20)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 06:35:39 PM EST
    I can't find 1 , not 1 news article or opinion piece, that will say the world is safer now than 8 years ago.
    That is just so not true.

    Parent
    Maybe not 8 years ago... (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 31, 2017 at 05:20:49 PM EST
    but the argument is certainly compelling that it's the safest time in human history. Link

    And it's just our minds f#cking with us. Trump's mind especially;)

    Parent

    Sure, it is (none / 0) (#24)
    by MKS on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 09:23:57 PM EST
    Just open your eyes.

    Parent
    Still can't (none / 0) (#27)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Jan 31, 2017 at 05:34:40 AM EST
    Find one

    Parent
    You mean an authority (none / 0) (#28)
    by MKS on Tue Jan 31, 2017 at 10:00:15 AM EST
    who will tell you what to think?

    Parent
    Trevor's search is narrower (none / 0) (#29)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 31, 2017 at 04:26:50 PM EST
    than that.

    It has to be an authority who tells him what to think who also believes in privitization, deregulation, and the hollowing out of the un-American "jack booted EPA".

    Parent

    less safe (none / 0) (#25)
    by linea on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 09:37:25 PM EST
    HALF of the entire french military is on the public streets armed with military machine guns. it's not worse? only if somebody's smoking hash.

    Parent
    The feelings of conservatives (none / 0) (#26)
    by MKS on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 09:45:33 PM EST
    Like I said, aside from subjective feelings, we are safer (until the last week.)

    Getting rid of Bin Laden and the Iran deal were huge improvements that are taken for granted.

    But conservatives usually look for someone to follow who is authoritative.  Without it, they just don't know what to think. Just look at the objective facts, not feelings of conservatives.

    Parent

    We (none / 0) (#14)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 10:31:28 AM EST
    didn't leave the table so much as fold that particular hand(large scale military presence in Iraq, You apparently do not understand the concept of throwing good money after bad.

    Parent
    And thats why (none / 0) (#19)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 06:34:29 PM EST
    We started putting troops back in Iraq, and Afghanistan, well, that was at one time   "the good war"
    Until after he got elected

    Parent
    And as he said at the time (none / 0) (#21)
    by Yman on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:08:17 PM EST
    ... the increase in troops in Afghanistan was temporary.  Moreover, he campaigned on withdrawing from Iraq - which he did - after Bush signed a SOFA requiring us to withdraw from Iraq.

    Parent
    Collateral damage - my prediction (none / 0) (#11)
    by Lora on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 10:25:29 PM EST
    I fear there is going to be a whole lot of it during this administration.

    Innocent people will be killed, in greater numbers than we have seen lately.

    There will be condolences and rationalizations about unfortunate necessities to make the world a safer place.

    I don't even expect condolences (none / 0) (#13)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 10:27:29 PM EST


    Parent
    Trump Stirs Up the Muslim World (none / 0) (#18)
    by RickyJim on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 05:34:21 PM EST
    His policy is to maintain or even expand US interventionism in the Muslim world abroad while domestically harassing Muslims more.  Israel has long been the main reason Muslims have attacked the US and he has green lighted that country to grab more West Bank land.  This must increase the grievances of potential terrorists and one expects more attempts to murder US citizens.  There is only so much you can do against those on a suicide mission.

    i disagree with your meme (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by linea on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:32:42 PM EST

    re: "the main reason Muslims have attacked the US"

    Jeralyn often posts "why we kill you" type topics where the radical islamists explain their motivations and israel isnt their primary motivation. im not defending israel, just clarifying that radical islamists arent murdering parisians because of an empathy for palestinians.

    Parent

    Word salad (none / 0) (#22)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:30:04 PM EST


    Parent
    Trump's First Raid in Yemen: U.S. Military Member Dies | 30 comments (30 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment