How Obama repeatedly ignored warnings about ISIS
- Thread starter townpete
- Start date
townpete
Corn Field
- Joined
- May 30, 2008
- Messages
- 4,654
- Reaction score
- 3,634
SHOT-----------> 'Nearly impossible' to find jihadists among migrants, Greeks warn
CHASER------> Paris attacker welcomed ashore in Greece and given help and clothes by French volunteers
Drink up liberals, yet another of your narratives destroyed.
CHASER------> Paris attacker welcomed ashore in Greece and given help and clothes by French volunteers
Drink up liberals, yet another of your narratives destroyed.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
What does calling out a troll have to do with working on aircraft?southwind said:
Jesus said to...EastUS1 said:
This is a Christian country, if one is to believe what the right has been trying to sell.
So why would we, or how could we, not do what He said?
Logically, sure, the US gets along just as well without them. Yeah, some of them become a burden, or welfare queens, or whatever. We might even admit an actual terrorist.
We grow all of those things right here all on our own.
The downside of a blanket refusal to accept any?
Recruiting tool for IS, plays right into their "narrative". The US is seen as a hypocritical bully state in huge parts of the world. Lots more fighters sign up to fight the evil US.
Stuff like that.
Ironically, and sadly, 22 governors and FOX etal have already given them the TV footage to,support that claim regardles of what we eventually do.
Brilliance... Not!
Better to say we will take them, and then vet them soooo carefully that none ever get in, if one is somafraid one is willing to disobey Jesus. We get the good headlines, no one has to be afraid of "those people"
American view of threats.
I'd say anything above Russia or NK is directly attributable to this administration.
Its also a report card on Obama/Clinton's failed foreign policy and its relationship to our national security.
I'd say anything above Russia or NK is directly attributable to this administration.
Its also a report card on Obama/Clinton's failed foreign policy and its relationship to our national security.
Got one of thse from 2002 thru 2007?
Any guess what would rank above Russia/NK during that time frame?
AQ maybe?
Iraq maybe?
Dirty Bombs from ...??? Maybe?
Were those W's "failures", or a feature of the world we live in akd the ME ?
IS began and sprouted in Camp Bucca. We handed the leaders the opportunity to formulate their ideology and plans for expansion. We supplied them with a pissed off out of work army. General Staff through Cannon Fodder complete with weapons and all originally trained by us. We created the conditions in which they were able to gain power and influence. We used them in furtherance of our interests, if your link about using them in Syria against Assad is correct.
We were kicked out of Iraq. W signed the withdrawal agreement Maliki got in bed with Iran and was not going to and did not extend the SOFA allowing US forces to stay. We could only have stayed by conducting another military action and takeover and occupation. The Iraqi army didn't "lose" when ISIS invaded Iraq, they ran away.
What good would 10,000 troops in Bahdad have done to save Mosul?
Seriously? The Pentagon doesn't think we could have prevented ISIS from taking what they did with a skeleton force focused on Baghdad. Why would you?
That's all Obama's fault?
Really?
Any guess what would rank above Russia/NK during that time frame?
AQ maybe?
Iraq maybe?
Dirty Bombs from ...??? Maybe?
Were those W's "failures", or a feature of the world we live in akd the ME ?
IS began and sprouted in Camp Bucca. We handed the leaders the opportunity to formulate their ideology and plans for expansion. We supplied them with a pissed off out of work army. General Staff through Cannon Fodder complete with weapons and all originally trained by us. We created the conditions in which they were able to gain power and influence. We used them in furtherance of our interests, if your link about using them in Syria against Assad is correct.
We were kicked out of Iraq. W signed the withdrawal agreement Maliki got in bed with Iran and was not going to and did not extend the SOFA allowing US forces to stay. We could only have stayed by conducting another military action and takeover and occupation. The Iraqi army didn't "lose" when ISIS invaded Iraq, they ran away.
What good would 10,000 troops in Bahdad have done to save Mosul?
Seriously? The Pentagon doesn't think we could have prevented ISIS from taking what they did with a skeleton force focused on Baghdad. Why would you?
That's all Obama's fault?
Really?
Ifly2 said:
You need to quit trying to twist everything over to Bush.....Bush is gone.......
Obama owns everything since 2007.
You can argue that he inherited it but what has he done with it is the dynamic.
Obama took office in 2009, yet he owns everything since 2007?
How does that work
Wasn't twisting everything over to Bush, just a little historical review, covering the big points y'all try to hang on Obama, when he did in fact inherit a century long mess of western ME policy.
I have been critical of his actions, or inaction where I think it is warranted. It is ridiculous to blame IS on him solely, or to claim that he alone is fesponsible for there not being US troops securing the Iraqi border.
The region is a disaster, all the time. W at the behest of his NeoCon buddies did in fact stray verry verry far from "First Do No Harm" and took poorly thought out measures thst really screwed things up worse, and under false pretenses.
Sad thing is, he was 100% on the right track with pursuing the Taliban, AQ, and the countries that harbored them and the people who financed them. That we all and history would support.
We fucked up. We put the Shah in Iran. We put Saddam in Iraq. We supported the muhajadeen, which morphed into The Taliban and AQ. We got rid of Saddam, but left a vacuum in which AQ in Iraq, the genesis of IS, was able to grow and flourish. We supplied them with an unemployed and pissed off army in search of a paycheck and revenge.
Should we go on?
We have a long history of winning the war, and losing the peace in the ME, and this time around it got us ISIS, among other things.
Now we have the right wing clamoring for total war against ISIS, on their ground. That is exactly what they want. They know history. They know how it goes. They know we can destroy their military force.
They also know that we will then leave, do nothing to help the people, and they gain a whole nother generation or two of followers. People who will hate the west and follow IS, or their successor, backwards into their history instead of moving forward with the rest of the world.
Just scratching the surface, but your media heroes are leading you in exactly the wrong direction. Yes, we have to do what we have to do to eliminate or at least counter and minimize the threat.
We also have to be willing to follow up.
It is the people of the ME that will determine their future, not our miltary. We can blow up everything we want and fill as many bodybags as we care to. Nothing changes until the people begin to choose our way over that of the radicals.
How does that work
Wasn't twisting everything over to Bush, just a little historical review, covering the big points y'all try to hang on Obama, when he did in fact inherit a century long mess of western ME policy.
I have been critical of his actions, or inaction where I think it is warranted. It is ridiculous to blame IS on him solely, or to claim that he alone is fesponsible for there not being US troops securing the Iraqi border.
The region is a disaster, all the time. W at the behest of his NeoCon buddies did in fact stray verry verry far from "First Do No Harm" and took poorly thought out measures thst really screwed things up worse, and under false pretenses.
Sad thing is, he was 100% on the right track with pursuing the Taliban, AQ, and the countries that harbored them and the people who financed them. That we all and history would support.
We fucked up. We put the Shah in Iran. We put Saddam in Iraq. We supported the muhajadeen, which morphed into The Taliban and AQ. We got rid of Saddam, but left a vacuum in which AQ in Iraq, the genesis of IS, was able to grow and flourish. We supplied them with an unemployed and pissed off army in search of a paycheck and revenge.
Should we go on?
We have a long history of winning the war, and losing the peace in the ME, and this time around it got us ISIS, among other things.
Now we have the right wing clamoring for total war against ISIS, on their ground. That is exactly what they want. They know history. They know how it goes. They know we can destroy their military force.
They also know that we will then leave, do nothing to help the people, and they gain a whole nother generation or two of followers. People who will hate the west and follow IS, or their successor, backwards into their history instead of moving forward with the rest of the world.
Just scratching the surface, but your media heroes are leading you in exactly the wrong direction. Yes, we have to do what we have to do to eliminate or at least counter and minimize the threat.
We also have to be willing to follow up.
It is the people of the ME that will determine their future, not our miltary. We can blow up everything we want and fill as many bodybags as we care to. Nothing changes until the people begin to choose our way over that of the radicals.
Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2012
- Messages
- 4,809
- Reaction score
- 4,343
When have you truly understood anything about any of these topics?southwind said:
