COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

ISIS is gaining ground against our Kurdish Allies...

4

4est_4est_Gump

Run Forrest! RUN!
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Posts
89,007
Meanwhile, our ally Turkey is merely watching and taking bets on when the massacre will actually begin.

Air power WORKS!

They must be afraid of getting accidentally hit by the UAE bombs...

PS - Baghdad is close to being encircled and Panetta and Gates are bugging out. One suspects Mrs. Clinton too...
 
The administration (Obama) has worked assiduously to rid the DoD of any leadership that would dare to speak truth to power. What remains are generals and admirals that tell him what he wants to hear, not what he needs to hear. Social engineering and political correctness within the ranks has replaced war fighting as job #1. And even some of those PC flag ranked officers are beginning to publicly voice their concern that troops on the ground may be necessary.

Further for solely political considerations Obama is NOT going to respond with troops on the ground. He considers the complete withdrawal of troops from Iraq and the near complete withdrawal from Afghanistan as the center piece of his foreign policy. He sees any retreat from those decisions to be a smear on his legacy. All of which goes to prove the axiom that any mistake continued beyond the 6th month becomes policy.

What I see as most distressing is his inability/unwillingness/bullheadedness with regards to his policies in the face of changing conditions. Be those policies economic, diplomatic, militarily, etc. Its as if he's at the wheel of state and driving with blinders on.

While I do applaud his attempt to build a coalition of Arab allies to participate in the fight against ISIS, the fact remains that there are only three nations on the face of the earth capable of dealing with ISIS in a timely and decisive manner, the US, China, and Russia and neither of the latter two show any interest in participating. In the absence of the US willingness to commit to the decisive elimination of ISIS, they will not be eliminated. Due to the nature of ISIS force structure and tactics they are not a candidate for the use of effective use of air power, at least air power used within the construct of the "Horner Doctrine." The targets dictated by that doctrine just don't exist.

Where would air power be effective against ISIS? Air power would be decisive when used in the role of close ground support and that requires troops on the ground to support. No troops on the ground, no effective use of air power.

Ishmael
 
He just seems to want to make it to the next administration so that they can take the hit for any unpopular choices with the Democrat base. Krauthammer was contrasting Bill Clinton and Barack Obama by saying that no matter the circumstance Bill loved the job while Barack seems to hate the job. Don't know how much of that is true, but he is a smart guy trained in head-shrinking.

:D

He is, however, putting boots on the ground and trying to hide them behind the careful parsing of his words.
 
4est_4est_Gump said:
He just seems to want to make it to the next administration so that they can take the hit for any unpopular choices with the Democrat base. Krauthammer was contrasting Bill Clinton and Barack Obama by saying that no matter the circumstance Bill loved the job while Barack seems to hate the job. Don't know how much of that is true, but he is a smart guy trained in head-shrinking.

:D

He is, however, putting boots on the ground and trying to hide them behind the careful parsing of his words.
Click to expand...

Yes he is, but in such parsimonious numbers as to be only marginally effective. The goal should be "timely and decisive" and I just don't see that happening at all.

Ishmael
 
Well he has to cover his bases, he has to be able to turn on a dime and yell at the "neo-cons," I did what you wanted and it didn't work! See what I get for listening to you guys!

;)

His low-information voters eat that shit up like green M&Ms...
 
4est_4est_Gump said:
Well he has to cover his bases, he has to be able to turn on a dime and yell at the "neo-cons," I did what you wanted and it didn't work! See what I get for listening to you guys!

;)

His low-information voters eat that shit up like green M&Ms...
Click to expand...

That much is true. He better pray that ISIS mounts no attack on US soil that can't be swept under the carpet as "work place violence" happens on his watch.

Did you see the article concerning how ISIS is looking for volunteers to be "Ebola Mary's?" That is a credible scenario.

Ishmael
 
I'm guessing, while at once praying that it will not materialize, that our President will have his Black Hawk Down moment.

:(

If it happens before the election, it will be years before his party will be able to get over the damage done.

I think that is why he is trying to act like he's doing something of substance while at the same time trying to actually prevent just such a scenario.
 
4est_4est_Gump said:
I'm guessing, while at once praying that it will not materialize, that our President will have his Black Hawk Down moment.

:(

If it happens before the election, it will be years before his party will be able to get over the damage done.

I think that is why he is trying to act like he's doing something of substance while at the same time trying to actually prevent just such a scenario.
Click to expand...

The problem is that his desire to not allow that to happen is in direct conflict with his immigration(?) policy. He's actually making it easier for such a scenario to come to fruition.

Ishmael
 
Ishmael said:
The administration (Obama) has worked assiduously to rid the DoD of any leadership that would dare to speak truth to power. What remains are generals and admirals that tell him what he wants to hear, not what he needs to hear. Social engineering and political correctness within the ranks has replaced war fighting as job #1. And even some of those PC flag ranked officers are beginning to publicly voice their concern that troops on the ground may be necessary.

Further for solely political considerations Obama is NOT going to respond with troops on the ground. He considers the complete withdrawal of troops from Iraq and the near complete withdrawal from Afghanistan as the center piece of his foreign policy. He sees any retreat from those decisions to be a smear on his legacy. All of which goes to prove the axiom that any mistake continued beyond the 6th month becomes policy.

What I see as most distressing is his inability/unwillingness/bullheadedness with regards to his policies in the face of changing conditions. Be those policies economic, diplomatic, militarily, etc. Its as if he's at the wheel of state and driving with blinders on.

While I do applaud his attempt to build a coalition of Arab allies to participate in the fight against ISIS, the fact remains that there are only three nations on the face of the earth capable of dealing with ISIS in a timely and decisive manner, the US, China, and Russia and neither of the latter two show any interest in participating. In the absence of the US willingness to commit to the decisive elimination of ISIS, they will not be eliminated. Due to the nature of ISIS force structure and tactics they are not a candidate for the use of effective use of air power, at least air power used within the construct of the "Horner Doctrine." The targets dictated by that doctrine just don't exist.

Where would air power be effective against ISIS? Air power would be decisive when used in the role of close ground support and that requires troops on the ground to support. No troops on the ground, no effective use of air power.

Ishmael
Click to expand...

Coalitions are for timid losers or serve to save the face of Brits, Frogs, and Ozzies who aren't necessary. Grant had no coalition, Robert E.Lee had no coalition. They went at it and hurt each other till it couldn't go on. The Indians rarely joined forces. Great commanders don't.
 
Odd how the President is "war-weary" while conveniently ignoring the fact that it is the nation and its people that are "war-weary".

I guess what citizens want is really secondary to one's ideal dictatorship disguised as a democracy.
 
Incidentally, can the OP clarify as to whether he views the Kurds as "sub-human"?

TIA.
 
Then why is he saying we're going to be at war for a very long time?


Maybe because Jihad is not weary?
 
vetteman said:
He's repeating what Bush said in the beginning, that this would be a very long war. Liberals are just tired of undermining the war effort, so they are weary.:D
Click to expand...

It's amazing how quiet they have become.

They must be weary...

;)
 
vetteman said:
Only one percent of the population, a volunteer military, is fighting this war. We know you're tired of hearing about it, and reading about it. So take a fuckiing nap.
Click to expand...

Two things:

1) You ignore the fact that these 1%ers have families, so, what percent of the population do they make up? More importantly, "all-volunteer" doesn't mean "chum". If it did, your ass wouldn't be alive today to be able to look down your nose at your active brethren.

2) You're fine sending others to pay for your tough talk, Mr. Wannabe John Wayne. Let us know when you take a family member to a recruiting station soon, okay?
 
vetteman said:
They have pre-election traumatic syndrome.:D
Click to expand...

I'm an independent, you know, the ones the Republicans and Democrats are tripping over themselves to blow.

Your party is already on its knees, and especially so in MI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

THROBBS
ABC Exhausting, though not Exhaustive
Replies
7
Views
6K
dombeotch
D
clit_licker30
If The Bush Administration Lied About WMD, So Did These People
Replies
6
Views
141
overthebow
overthebow
Don K Dyck
Case Against The US-Iraq War
Replies
1
Views
220
Dixon Carter Lee
Dixon Carter Lee
Back
Top