Obama ISIS Inaction-Similar to Clinton & Rwanda

[Camp]

Bill Clinton once said the biggest regret of his presidency was his inaction regarding Rwanda. After taking action to stop ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, Clinton (like other world leaders), sat back and did nothing while 800,000 Rwandans (mostly Tutsis) were slaughtered by their Hutu neighbors.

Fast foward to 2015. Now we have Obama sitting back and watching thousands of Iraqis and Syrians being slaughtered by ISIS. And all the while, Obama doesn't seem to care. He's more interested in appeasing his liberal American voter base, telling him to stay out of it.

Clinton at least expresses regret for his tragic inaction. Obama hasn't done that yet. It remains to be seen if he ever will.

The photos I could post of ISIS brutality, are ommitted only because of their exceedingly, horrifying nature.

Send those photo's to the dysfunctional Republican congress that seems incapable of being anything other than inept. Five months after we began a bombing campaign and the "do nothing" Republicans have yet to offer funding of any kind or the least bit of congressional direction in the way of legislative guidance.

For almost all that time there has been gridlock between a Rep House and a Dem Senate + Obama's anti-war at all costs approach.

Really, there was legislation passed by the House in regards to funding a military campaign against ISIS that got grid locked? I would like to review that legislation. Did it have a number on it? Is there a link to what the legislation was about?

Why would there be when the Republicans know that Harry Reid would shoot it down, before Obama could do the same ?

That is a lame and misinformed excuse. Name a bill that that Reid or Obama rejected that dealt with US security and funding of operations against terrorist operations. You just refuse to admit that the grid locked House and now, the Senate can not get past the internal Republican politics to fund the campaign against ISIS.

 

[Roadrunner]

Bush stayed out of Rwanda as well.

So did most of the rest of Africa.

You know, those folks it actually concerned.

 

[jknowgood]

Wow! You have proof that ISIS is evil and nasty??!!

What a fucking revelation.

Thanks.

It wasn't posted as a revelation. The point is the comparison between Clinton's regret, and Obama's lack of it. Are you really not on track enough to have picked up on that ?

He won't fault Obama for anything. He has the industrial strength knee pads.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is a flat lie: Yes there is a need to sacrifice American lives.

Three generals do not make American policy, and they are wrong.
"Pin pricks" is nor my phrase. It is from 3 US Generals - 3 star Air Force Lt. General Thomas McInerney, 2 star Army Major General Bob Scales, and 4 star General Jack Keane. No offense, but rather than your version, I'll go with the Generals.

We have no need to send the American military anywhere. When it comes to the defense of the USA (especially against nuclear annihilation),

 

[JakeStarkey]

Bush stayed out of Rwanda as well.

So did most of the rest of Africa.

You know, those folks it actually concerned.

So did America, which could have done something about it. We should have stayed out of Iraq as well.

 

[georgephillip]

Already refuted this dopey notion, disproved by 1400 years of constant jihad.

1400 years of constant jihad?
How much jihad did you notice in Iraq and Syria between 1945 and 2003, Moron?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Protectionist wants to blow the world up.

He is the far right's contemporary of Paint My House.

 

[georgephillip]

So again, what's all this about Iran. Are you asking about the idea of attacking them with military force. Of course . T

 

[georgephillip]

Did you have some ALLEGED "mistakes" in mind ?

US inflicted regime change in Iraq and Libya, for starters.
"In Clark's book, Winning Modern Wars, published in 2003, he describes his conversation with a military officer in the Pentagon shortly after 9/11 regarding a plan to attack seven Middle Eastern countries in five years: 'As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and finishing off Iran.'"

Mission Accomplished?

Wesley Clark - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[georgephillip]

General Jack Keane. No offense, but rather than your version, I'll go with the Generals.

How much money is General Jack making from the mass murder of Muslims?
"Keane has appeared on Fox News at least nine times over the last two months to promote the idea that the best way to stop IS is through military action—in particular, through air strikes deep into IS-held territory.

"In one of the only congressional hearings about IS over the summer, Keane was there to testify and call for more American military engagement. On Wednesday evening, Keane declared President Obama’s speech on defeating IS insufficient, arguing that a bolder strategy is necessary. 'I truly believe we need to put special operation forces in there,' he told host Megyn Kelly.

"Left unsaid during his media appearances (and left unmentioned on his congressional witness disclosure form) are Keane’s other gigs: as special adviser to Academi, the contractor formerly known as Blackwater; as a board member to tank and aircraft manufacturer General Dynamics; a 'venture partner' to SCP Partners, an investment firm that partners with defense contractors, including XVionics, an 'operations management decision support system' company used in Air Force drone training; and as president of his own consulting firm, GSI LLC.

"To portray Keane as simply a think tank leader and a former military official, as the media have done, obscures a fairly lucrative career in the contracting world. For the General Dynamics role alone, Keane has been paid a six-figure salary in cash and stock options since he joined the firm in 2004; last year, General Dynamics paid him $258,006.

"Keane did not immediately return a call requesting comment for this article."

Because he's getting rich from killing civilians, and ignorant crackers like you $wallow every load, don't you?

Who s Paying the Pro-War Pundits The Nation

 

[PGreen]

He wants Congress to shut the operation down as his time to act is running out. He wants to say the GOP-controlled Congress did it.

 

[protectionist]

We didn't do a damn thing about the millions murdered in Germany either, did we?

We just sacrificed 460,000 American lives fighting a war to stop it, that 's all. And that includes a lot of lives lost on D-Day, and 19,000 US troops lost IN ONE MONTH, in the Battle of the Bulge, in Germany. Didn't get that A in your history class ?

 

[protectionist]

Bill Clinton once said the biggest regret of his presidency was his inaction regarding Rwanda. After taking action to stop ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, Clinton (like other world leaders), sat back and did nothing while 800,000 Rwandans (mostly Tutsis) were slaughtered by their Hutu neighbors.

Fast foward to 2015. Now we have Obama sitting back and watching thousands of Iraqis and Syrians being slaughtered by ISIS. And all the while, Obama doesn't seem to care. He's more interested in appeasing his liberal American voter base, telling him to stay out of it.

Clinton at least expresses regret for his tragic inaction. Obama hasn't done that yet. It remains to be seen if he ever will.

The photos I could post of ISIS brutality, are ommitted only because of their exceedingly, horrifying nature.

Send those photo's to the dysfunctional Republican congress that seems incapable of being anything other than inept. Five months after we began a bombing campaign and the "do nothing" Republicans have yet to offer funding of any kind or the least bit of congressional direction in the way of legislative guidance.

For almost all that time there has been gridlock between a Rep House and a Dem Senate + Obama's anti-war at all costs approach.

Really, there was legislation passed by the House in regards to funding a military campaign against ISIS that got grid locked? I would like to review that legislation. Did it have a number on it? Is there a link to what the legislation was about?

Why would there be when the Republicans know that Harry Reid would shoot it down, before Obama could do the same ?

That is a lame and misinformed excuse. Name a bill that that Reid or Obama rejected that dealt with US security and funding of operations against terrorist operations. You just refuse to admit that the grid locked House and now, the Senate can not get past the internal Republican politics to fund the campaign against ISIS.

I haven't researched the "internal Republican politics to fund the campaign against ISIS" as you call it, or whatever talking points on that your liberal media is feeding you, and you haven't provided anything on it either, so I won't comment oin that, but it is absolutely not necessary to go there. This situation couldn't be more OBVIOUS. Nothing is more clear that Obama's refusal to engage against ISIS, and in quite a number of ways. Everything from wanting to close Gitmo, to putting enemy combatants into civilian trials, to even refusing refer to the war on terror as
Islamic", etc.

Sounds more like YOU are the one doing the refusing. Refusing to admit that Reid and Obama have been blocking the fight against ISIS all along. Republicans have been calling for more action, and Obama and his ass-kissers have been doing everything you could think of to not fight this war, and YOU KNOW it.

They've been doing everything from calling this war a civilian crime (like Valaerie Jarret said a terrorist was being released because he "served his time") Served his time?!! What did he do ? Rob a convenience store ? In war, you don't arrest enemies, or Mirandize them, and later release them (like all the Talibans Obama has been releasing). When asked "How do you deal with your enemy ?", I recall my ex-battallion commander said > "It can be summed up in 2 words." > "We kill them."

As far as the Congress is concerned, don't make us laugh. No war American has fought since World war II had a declaration of war from the Congress. Every one was done by the president, and Obama could have done the same. Last summer I wrote OPs saying that he should be sending ground troops and pounding ISIS (then in large convoys on open highways) with hundreds of airstrikes a day. US Generals were saying the same thing. Even Obama's own cabinet members were saying it (Kerry, Hagel, et al) as well as ex Sects of Defense (Panetta & Gates) You're talking ridiculous.

 

[protectionist]

This is a flat lie: Yes there is a need to sacrifice American lives.

Three generals do not make American policy, and they are wrong.
"Pin pricks" is nor my phrase. It is from 3 US Generals - 3 star Air Force Lt. General Thomas McInerney, 2 star Army Major General Bob Scales, and 4 star General Jack Keane. No offense, but rather than your version, I'll go with the Generals.

We have no need to send the American military anywhere. When it comes to the defense of the USA (especially against nuclear annihilation),

That's the dumbest thing I've heard on USMB in the last 2 years. You're either incredibly ignorant or you're a baldfaced liar. Of course we need to send the American military (to many places in the world). This is for the defense of the USA, and it is especially, primarily against nuclear annihilation, which is the great threat from Pakistan (Obama said so himself-don't you click links ?) and ISIS, due to all the wealth they are accumulating. I've posted this over and over. There's no reason why you would not know this by now.

You're lying, and the question now is why. It's possible you could be one of the enemy. One of the jihadists themselves. I notice you have a 2 name, very American-sounding name That's what internet jihadists routinely do (like george phillips) They hide behind an American name, not wanting to post their Arabic-Muslim name. So what's your real name ? Want to change it to your real name, Mohammed ?

Pakistan keeps Obama awake at night George Clooney - Yahoo News India

George Clooney on Obama and Pakistan - POLITICO.com

The Pentagon s Secret Plans to Secure Pakistan s Nuclear Arsenal - NationalJournal.com

Pakistan Carts Its Nukes Around In Delivery Vans WIRED

Or maybe your anti-Fox News glasses keep you pinned down in all that liberal media, that gives you a whole different picture of what's going on in the world. I notice that when I switch over to MSNBC. Incredible, the distorted way they present things. Not once have I ever heard about the Pakistani nukes on that channel, or the potential for ISIS to acquire the wealth to buy nuclear scientists and weapons - things discussed routinely on Fox. CLICK THE LINKS, airhead.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We didn't do a damn thing about the millions murdered in Germany either, did we?

We just sacrificed 460,000 American lives fighting a war to stop it, that 's all. And that includes a lot of lives lost on D-Day, and 19,000 US troops lost IN ONE MONTH, in the Battle of the Bulge, in Germany. Didn't get that A in your history class ?

We lost about 130,000 dead in Europe, about 350,000 altogether in WWII. The British lost more than American in both I and II.

And none of this has anything to do with ISIS or Iraq.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Of course we need to send the American military (to many places in the world)."
"I notice you have a 2 name, very American-sounding name That's what internet jihadists routinely do (like george phillips)."

Stupid statements such as those above are the reason the mainstream GOP is turning its back on the neo-cons and the far right reactionary social cons.

No, prick, there will be no world war against Islam.

 

[protectionist]

Already refuted this dopey notion, disproved by 1400 years of constant jihad.

1400 years of constant jihad?
How much jihad did you notice in Iraq and Syria between 1945 and 2003, Moron?

Are you going to pretend you don't know the meaning of the word, Mohammed ? How much ? How would you like your answer ? In pounds or tons ?

 

[protectionist]

We didn't do a damn thing about the millions murdered in Germany either, did we?

We just sacrificed 460,000 American lives fighting a war to stop it, that 's all. And that includes a lot of lives lost on D-Day, and 19,000 US troops lost IN ONE MONTH, in the Battle of the Bulge, in Germany. Didn't get that A in your history class ?

We lost about 130,000 dead in Europe, about 350,000 altogether in WWII. The British lost more than American in both I and II.

And none of this has anything to do with ISIS or Iraq.

I was answering the post from Gracie, and I answered it correctly. Mind your own business

 

[007]

Protectionist is scum, always has been and always will be.

Funny you can type that bull shit out with your butt buddy's ball sack half way down your throat at the same time.

You must be used to it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We didn't do a damn thing about the millions murdered in Germany either, did we?

We just sacrificed 460,000 American lives fighting a war to stop it, that 's all. And that includes a lot of lives lost on D-Day, and 19,000 US troops lost IN ONE MONTH, in the Battle of the Bulge, in Germany. Didn't get that A in your history class ?

I
We lost about 130,000 dead in Europe, about 350,000 altogether in WWII. The British lost more than American in both I and II.

And none of this has anything to do with ISIS or Iraq.

I was answering the post from Gracie, and I answered it correctly. Mind your own business

Since you have now lied twice in a row, whatever you do on the Board for the remainder of your time here has become my business.

I answered your correctly, so you can fuck off.