Idiot in White House doubles down on "jobs" as answer to terrorism

[Viligant_Warrior]

What the 60-plus members of the anti-Islamic State coalition are doing

The so-called "60+-member coalition is a joke, and the disinterest and the lethargy of President Dumba** is nothing less than amazing. One would think a man who took it upon himself to prosecute this war would do so with something other than lassitude and non-commitment.

He hasn’t armed the pro-Western Syrian rebels, the ones who with proper arms and support would have the best opportunity to open a second front against ISIS. As it is, Assad remains in power and doesn't have to do anything but bomb his opposition, ISIS being a force to the rebels' west that they must be constantly vigilant against. They are withering on the vine and are close to being wiped out.

He has done nothing but give lip service to arming the Kurds, who despite their limited ability to field well-armed fighters have had great success based on sheer tenacity against the terrorist army.

Jordan, which is our staunchest ally in the area, is short of weaponry, short of munitions and it takes forever for that to get through. President Dumba** sends money. Great, but it doesn't solve the logistics problem of getting the arms that money can purchase into the hands of the pilots and soldiers who need them.

It shouldn’t even be an issue. A president steps in and says to the State Department and Defense Department “I want this done.” Nixon did an airlift in the middle of the October war, the ’73 war in which he airlifted munitions to the Middle East overnight. Truman broke the Soviet blockade of Berlin with the same strategy.

This doesn't even get into the issue of The Ukraine, Ukrainian Americans and Congress entreating Dumba** for over a year to do something to support the nationalists against Putin's blatant territory grab, but we're talking about Islamic terrorists here so I'll stick to that subject.

Yes, the anti-terrorist/ISIS coalition is a joke. Belgium is on the list? Wow, they must be the heart of this coalition. Jordan is out there alone and we could suffer a huge setback if it’s not helped from the outside, meaning us and the other states in the region. Dumba** is doing nothing but posturing, feigning, pretending, and speechifying. In other words, he's useless, and will never be better than that relative to necessary foreign and military policy.

 

[1still_waters]

The so-called "60+-member coalition is a joke, and the disinterest and the lethargy of President Dumba** is nothing less than amazing. One would think a man who took it upon himself to prosecute this war would do so with something other than lassitude and non-commitment.

He hasn’t armed the pro-Western Syrian rebels, the ones who with proper arms and support would have the best opportunity to open a second front against ISIS. As it is, Assad remains in power and doesn't have to do anything but bomb his opposition, ISIS being a force to the rebels' west that they must be constantly vigilant against. They are withering on the vine and are close to being wiped out.

He has done nothing but give lip service to arming the Kurds, who despite their limited ability to field well-armed fighters have had great success based on sheer tenacity against the terrorist army.

Jordan, which is our staunchest ally in the area, is short of weaponry, short of munitions and it takes forever for that to get through. President Dumba** sends money. Great, but it doesn't solve the logistics problem of getting the arms that money can purchase into the hands of the pilots and soldiers who need them.

It shouldn’t even be an issue. A president steps in and says to the State Department and Defense Department “I want this done.” Nixon did an airlift in the middle of the October war, the ’73 war in which he airlifted munitions to the Middle East overnight. Truman broke the Soviet blockade of Berlin with the same strategy.

This doesn't even get into the issue of The Ukraine, Ukrainian Americans and Congress entreating Dumba** for over a year to do something to support the nationalists against Putin's blatant territory grab, but we're talking about Islamic terrorists here so I'll stick to that subject.

Yes, the anti-terrorist/ISIS coalition is a joke. Belgium is on the list? Wow, they must be the heart of this coalition. Jordan is out there alone and we could suffer a huge setback if it’s not helped from the outside, meaning us and the other states in the region. Dumba** is doing nothing but posturing, feigning, pretending, and speechifying. In other words, he's useless, and will never be better than that relative to necessary foreign and military policy.

Hmm I remember when people scoffed at the small countries in Bush's coalition, people rebuked those scoffers.

Jus sayin.

 

[blue_ladybug]

If it wasn't so sadly true, I'd be triple lolling your post!

here ya go....

 

[Billyd]

First I'm tired of the waste of resources, including weapons, on the entire region. We have spent at least the last sixty years propping up one side by using the excuse that in is in the world's best interest. What have we accomplished? A few rich dictators, and a world full of angry people. And we are going to change this by killing all the people who are angry with us. The only thing that we will accomplish is a major world population reduction. We will still have more angry people "terrorist" than we started with.

President Obama may not have the best answer, but at least he is exploring different paths. All I hear from the others is that we need more armed boots on the ground, more bombing campaigns, and arming the opposition. We may not be as evil as ISIS (at lest we aren't publicly cutting the heads off the opposition yet), but we are getting closer every day. Come on Christian Brothers and Sisters. Why can't we take self out of it and put a little more effort into finding God's solution?

 

[p_rehbein]

First I'm tired of the waste of resources, including weapons, on the entire region. We have spent at least the last sixty years propping up one side by using the excuse that in is in the world's best interest. What have we accomplished? A few rich dictators, and a world full of angry people. And we are going to change this by killing all the people who are angry with us. The only thing that we will accomplish is a major world population reduction. We will still have more angry people "terrorist" than we started with.

President Obama may not have the best answer, but at least he is exploring different paths. All I hear from the others is that we need more armed boots on the ground, more bombing campaigns, and arming the opposition. We may not be as evil as ISIS (at lest we aren't publicly cutting the heads off the opposition yet), but we are getting closer every day. Come on Christian Brothers and Sisters. Why can't we take self out of it and put a little more effort into finding God's solution?

Those God fearing believers who have traveled over there to do just that have been murdered. Just saying......


Do you think God's solution is "jobs" and "economic growth?"

Which begs the question "what would be God's solution?"

I know I pray for all of it every night, as does my church........that God work His will........

Just wondering..........not fussing at you.........

 

[Sirk]

I think the only thing we (they) have done "over there", is prop up the dollar and the world bank by keeping oil pegged to the dollar while the money changers raped and pillaged the people and treasury of this great nation. But that's just my conspiratorial mind working I suppose. 

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Hmm I remember when people scoffed at the small countries in Bush's coalition, people rebuked those scoffers.

Jus sayin.

The difference being they actually contributed something besides financing to that coalition. Qatar had boots on the ground in Iraq. Bahrain Air Force personnel manned allied Command & Control. UAE had forward spotters just outside of Baghdad, dressed in traditional Arab garb. Belgium seems to be on the list just to be on the list. That's not contributing. That's Dumba**'s propaganda.

 

[1still_waters]

I was in favor of keeping advisory personnel in place as we did after Desert Storm, as doing so would have actually prevented ISIS from rising up to fill a vacuum.

So keeping troops on the ground in Iraq until we win, which could span 30+ years.... you're all like...

But a full coalition with ground troops isn't formed, and air strikes haven't worked after a few months..and you're all like...

These things take time man.

 

[PennEd]

So keeping troops on the ground in Iraq until we win, which could span 30+ years.... you're all like...

But a full coalition with ground troops isn't formed, and air strikes haven't worked after a few months..and you're all like...

These things take time man.

We've had ground troops in South Korea for 60+ years resulting in a very prosperous, free nation, instead of enslavement torture and death, if that deterrent wasn't there.

 

[1still_waters]

We've had ground troops in South Korea for 60+ years resulting in a very prosperous, free nation, instead of enslavement torture and death, if that deterrent wasn't there.

The USA taxpayers should pony up millions every year to maintain peace in a country that doesn't want to maintain their own peace, and who after a decade of training turned tail and ran to ISIS? Not to mention putting American lives in danger for that...

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

So keeping troops on the ground in Iraq until we win, which could span 30+ years.... you're all like...

If the only way you can "win" a discussion is by misrepresenting what I said, there's little point in having a discussion. You're as dense,arrogant, and knot-it-all as President Dumba**.

But a full coalition with ground troops isn't formed, and air strikes haven't worked after a few months..and you're all like...

Get this through your thick little skull into that microscopic brain, if one can be found inside all that bone structure:

Air strikes alone will never work! Not only does history prove that, but my 20 years as a combat unit commander in rotary wing convinces me that air power alone can contain a theater of operations for a limited time, but eventually will fail.

There will be no "combat coalition" formed, not by this idiot in the White House, not by an European knotheads, not even by moderate Islamic Mideastern governments. Why?

Because this White House is unwilling to place America in the leadership role that would assure victory, for a myriad reasons including his own not-so-secret historical and genealogical connection to Islam, and the Europeans won't because of their irrational fear of the Muslims living among them who could be controlled by police and national security forces if necessary.

As for the Mideastern moderates, they can't afford it, and the West -- for the aforementioned reasons -- will not properly arm them or finance the level of operations necessary. Anyone who thinks it won't take boots on the ground, properly commanded, financed, and armed, do defeat ISIS, is just plain ignorant.

 

[1still_waters]

You're as dense,arrogant, and knot-it-all .

uh uh

Get this through your thick little skull into that microscopic brain, if one can be found inside all that bone structure:

...................

 

[kennethcadwell]

I think the issue needs to be handle with the forces that are over there, with the U.S. continuance of leading it in training them to take care of themselves instead of running away like the Iraq forces did.
The other thing is that people need to stop doing is blaming Obama for taking troops out of Iraq in the first place. For starters the American public was screaming for that to be done while Bush jr. was still in office. Obama listened to the American public and pulled the troops out, and not the public is split about putting troops back on the ground or not. Which has swung from a few months ago when the majority of the American public still said no to troops on the ground. So yes lets keep blaming Obama for doing what the majority of the American people want.

 

[Billyd]

We've had ground troops in South Korea for 60+ years resulting in a very prosperous, free nation, instead of enslavement torture and death, if that deterrent wasn't there.

Yet we still have North Korea, and they now have Nuclear Weapons. What is the cost of maintaining that border security? Who pay's it?

 

[Billyd]

As for the Mideastern moderates, they can't afford it, and the West -- for the aforementioned reasons -- will not properly arm them or finance the level of operations necessary. Anyone who thinks it won't take boots on the ground, properly commanded, financed, and armed, do defeat ISIS, is just plain ignorant.

What do you define as defeat of ISIS? When we left Iraq, they were well armed. What is the first thing that they did when attacked by a small horde of radical fanatics? They threw down their arms, and ran. What was the total investment in dollars and American blood? Is the Country any better off than when we flew the first sortie?

I'll go a little farther. When I was a young man, our children could walk the streets of most of the US. Today there are few streets left where it is safe for children or adults to walk on. What happened? A few "experts" told us that they could make things better for us, and we let them do it. I'm tired of the waste of our resources on never ending battles. Keep them at home and out of politicians' pockets.

 

[krow]

We should not support ANY of the rebel groups in Syria. This is part of what started this mess... we should have supported Assad and let him crush the rebellions. Now Syria is a stalemate and a black hole where we have no idea of what is really going on. We have supported dictators in the past that massacred many of their own people because it made the larger area more secure. You have to always choose between the lesser of evils.

Propping up the economies of the nations where the extremists live? Let's make them more wealthy so its easier to get get supplies to kill people they dislike...yes sounds like a great idea.

 

[notuptome]

These things must come to pass. Just a little while longer and we will see our Jesus return in the clouds. We are on a hot spot but we know how it all shakes out in the end. The victory is already won.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

What do you define as defeat of ISIS?

Total annihilation. That's the only way they will be defeated.

When we left Iraq, they were well armed. What is the first thing that they did when attacked by a small horde of radical fanatics? They threw down their arms, and ran.

Incorrect. This is the same crap that was spread about ARVN at the end of the Vietnam War. The famous "Got an ARVN rifle for sale: Never fired and only dropped once." Was a crock of male bovine excretory material from I don't know where. I returned to SE Asia for a second combat tour, after U.S. personnel were to be out of Vietnam. That didn't keep us from flying recon and cover out of Laos. Same with the ISF. They've got some cowards and traitors, yes. The majority are solid soldiers who know what they need to do, and do it on a regular basis.

What was the total investment in dollars and American blood? Is the Country any better off than when we flew the first sortie?

Given Saddam had killed over 400K of his own people, and even though ISIS is running rampant over western Iraq, the unequivocal answer is "Yes."

I'll go a little farther. When I was a young man, our children could walk the streets of most of the US. Today there are few streets left where it is safe for children or adults to walk on.

Again, a created lie. Most streets in the U.S. are, tonight, safer than they have been in the last 30 years. New York City was once the most dangerous city in the U.S., perhaps in the western hemisphere. Today, it has the lowest murder rate of any city, per capita, than any other U.S. metropolitan area. So your "statistic" is an urban legend, not a fact to hang anyone's hat on.

What happened? A few "experts" told us that they could make things better for us, and we let them do it. I'm tired of the waste of our resources on never ending battles. Keep them at home and out of politicians' pockets.

You don't want to be a part of the destruction of terror, then don't be. But don't keep others from doing what has to be done -- unless, of course, you have no problem living under Sha'ria law and your wife and daughters wearing burqas for the rest of your and their existence.

 

[Reborn]

If the only way you can "win" a discussion is by misrepresenting what I said, there's little point in having a discussion. You're as dense,arrogant, and knot-it-all as President Dumba**.

Get this through your thick little skull into that microscopic brain, if one can be found inside all that bone structure:

Air strikes alone will never work! Not only does history prove that, but my 20 years as a combat unit commander in rotary wing convinces me that air power alone can contain a theater of operations for a limited time, but eventually will fail.

There will be no "combat coalition" formed, not by this idiot in the White House, not by an European knotheads, not even by moderate Islamic Mideastern governments. Why?

Because this White House is unwilling to place America in the leadership role that would assure victory, for a myriad reasons including his own not-so-secret historical and genealogical connection to Islam, and the Europeans won't because of their irrational fear of the Muslims living among them who could be controlled by police and national security forces if necessary.

As for the Mideastern moderates, they can't afford it, and the West -- for the aforementioned reasons -- will not properly arm them or finance the level of operations necessary. Anyone who thinks it won't take boots on the ground, properly commanded, financed, and armed, do defeat ISIS, is just plain ignorant.

So angry?,.......and a little mean.... do you need a hug VW?

.....ahem.......
.......THERE IS MORE TO THIS WORLD THAN AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

P.S.
1still_waters is a administrator.

 

[Billyd]

Total annihilation. That's the only way they will be defeated.

Incorrect. This is the same crap that was spread about ARVN at the end of the Vietnam War. The famous "Got an ARVN rifle for sale: Never fired and only dropped once." Was a crock of male bovine excretory material from I don't know where. I returned to SE Asia for a second combat tour, after U.S. personnel were to be out of Vietnam. That didn't keep us from flying recon and cover out of Laos. Same with the ISF. They've got some cowards and traitors, yes. The majority are solid soldiers who know what they need to do, and do it on a regular basis.

Given Saddam had killed over 400K of his own people, and even though ISIS is running rampant over western Iraq, the unequivocal answer is "Yes."

Again, a created lie. Most streets in the U.S. are, tonight, safer than they have been in the last 30 years. New York City was once the most dangerous city in the U.S., perhaps in the western hemisphere. Today, it has the lowest murder rate of any city, per capita, than any other U.S. metropolitan area. So your "statistic" is an urban legend, not a fact to hang anyone's hat on.

You don't want to be a part of the destruction of terror, then don't be. But don't keep others from doing what has to be done -- unless, of course, you have no problem living under Sha'ria law and your wife and daughters wearing burqas for the rest of your and their existence.

Thanks for your rebuke. I suppose that you believe it all. It's a waste of my time and yours to debate it with you, so I'm not even going to try.