Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Winner of the most wrong post of the day.I think it has more to do whit shifting blame if things don't go well. But ultimately you're right as well. He simply doesn't posess the stature to LEADI'm sure a great many people thought Obama should go through Congress instead of making changes to and delaying key parts of Obamacare on his own yet he didn't. Funny how he needs Congress to do things his base won't like but doesn't when it's things his base will like.The House, and McConnell, are NOT interested:
Nearly three out of four voters said Obama should ask Congress for the authority to use additional military force and 82 percent said Congress should approve that request.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has been noncommittal on legislation proposed by Florida Democratic Senator Bill Nelson that would give Obama congressional authority to bomb Islamic State targets in Syria.
Nothing scheduled, nada, zip, -0-.
Congress Demands IS Framework With No Plan to Act on It - Businessweek
Except he's gotten a real live coalition together, including France and Turkey. That's something that Bush couldn't do.
And it looks as if the Arab league is getting on board and the Iraq government has been changing into something more functional and inclusive.
You guys think war is all about killing people.
It's alot more than that. You have to have a plan as to what happens after you "win".
Like we did in Viet Nam? Tell me, what did those 58,000 americans die for in Kennedy and Johnson's war?
the thin veneer we call 'freedom'
are you claiming that 58,000 americans died protecting freedom? whose freedom? we lost that war, we declared defeat and came home. Viet Nam became one country and is doing fine. The domino theory was bullshit. Nothing going on at the time in viet nam posed a threat to the USA.
Unless we learn from our stupid blunders, we are doomed to repeat them.
We went in to stop the spread of communism. I know there is a little more to it than that, but ultimately it was a proxy war representative of the larger global tensions of the cold war.
SEATO, a treaty got the US involved, Redfish is correct; started under Eisenhower, escaleted by Kennedy and Johnson.....Nixon tried escalation but knew it was not to be. Though Nixon deserves credit for the fall of the USSR.
Evidence that he has been weighing strategies over the past several months? What, between putts?I'm not making excuses for anyone. I am being realistic. He most likely has been weighing out multiple strategies over the last few months. If I were making excuses, I would be going on about how I have faith in what he will ultimately decide to do. He's had terrible foreign policy, I don't expect anything different here.
Obama is not America. Obama is not the public.You shift back and forth between "us" and "Obama" like its the same thing.Since he said he didnt have a strategy why would someone be a moron to believe him on this? So what is his strategy, other than blaming the Tea Party?No I created a thread about his speaking down to everyone as if we're all idiots and uninformed otherwise. Obama doesn't need our approval, rather just the desire to actually lead. Less than a week ago Obama had no plan and only intended to "manage" the threat.
Either way if you couldn't figure out the threads intent from the very first post I'm not gonna waste anymore time with you. Most people seemed to have grasped the concept of the thread minus one or two slow ones.
You are a moron if you think he actually had no strategy. Also, I don't see how him addressing the nation is speaking down to everyone. If we are taking military action - which has has said we will do - it's his job to address the nation and make sure everyone is on the same page. He would be in-the-wrong if he didn't address the nation.
I don't even like Obama, but give me a break. There is no need to be so dense and reactionary.
We obviously keep tabs on the region, as so much of our money and efforts are intertwined with the social, political, and economic issues that happen there. The US knows what is going on. Chances are, he had multiple strategies, but was in the process of negotiating with our allies to also provide support because us going into the region alone is going to be a more politically unpopular action than us going into the region alongside a handful of other developed countries to fight this entity we will all label a threat. It's not like 9/11 where our allies would openly pledge support without much too it. Him saying "I have no strategy" is most likely code for "I am not ready to talk about our strategy at this time because it might not work out."
Also, let's be real, it isn't Obama's job to come up with a strategy, that is why he has top generals and other advisors. Just like any other president. To willingly believe the administration (which is the unit we should be discussing here) doesn't have IS on their radar is willful ignorance, most likely accepted by some reactionary conservative looking for any reason to get online and spew a load of BS about how Obama is wrong again.
Like I said before, I don't like Obama for a long list of reasons. That said, let's all be rational about it. He had a strategy, the administration probably had multiple strategies they were working through and weighing out, and that is ok. I would rather have that than a president that chooses invasion everytime it perceives a threat to its social and economic well-being.
I dont doubt the CIA and others had ISIS on their radar. I dont doubt Obama was given briefings on it. I do doubt that he actually read them, or paid attention to them, or did anything other than hope it would go away.
It is Obama's job to come up with strategy, relying on the experts on government. Of course when his experts come up with foreign policy goals like "Dont do stupid shit" what do you expect?
He had no strategy. He said he didnt. Why would you think he had one when he said he didnt? What is your evidence?
I shift between "us" and "Obama" because he is the face of our country, and I am talking about our country in the context of, you know, the world. Like I said, going in without any other support would be a terrible move, strategically and politically. That said, he isn't going to say, "My strategy is trying to get France on board to help us out" if it is still in flux or not finalized. It's easier to just not talk about it.
I find it comical that Obama can say pretty much anythings and conservatives in the US will accuse him of lying through his teeth, except for this one thing that he probably is lying about that people are willing to take at face value because it makes it easier to criticize him.
He could say, My strategy is to encourage our NATO allies to join the fight.
He could say My strategy is to send overwhelming force to defeat them militarily.
He could say MY strategy is to root out their sources of support and degrade their ability to make war
He could say My strategy is to provide intelligence, logistical, and materiel support to Iraq and others.
Instead he said he has no strategy. And buffoons like you make excuses for him.
I think it has more to do whit shifting blame if things don't go well. But ultimately you're right as well. He simply doesn't posess the stature to LEADI'm sure a great many people thought Obama should go through Congress instead of making changes to and delaying key parts of Obamacare on his own yet he didn't. Funny how he needs Congress to do things his base won't like but doesn't when it's things his base will like.The House, and McConnell, are NOT interested:
Nearly three out of four voters said Obama should ask Congress for the authority to use additional military force and 82 percent said Congress should approve that request.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has been noncommittal on legislation proposed by Florida Democratic Senator Bill Nelson that would give Obama congressional authority to bomb Islamic State targets in Syria.
Nothing scheduled, nada, zip, -0-.
Congress Demands IS Framework With No Plan to Act on It - Businessweek
Except he's gotten a real live coalition together, including France and Turkey. That's something that Bush couldn't do.
And it looks as if the Arab league is getting on board and the Iraq government has been changing into something more functional and inclusive.
You guys think war is all about killing people.
It's alot more than that. You have to have a plan as to what happens after you "win".
Like we did in Viet Nam? Tell me, what did those 58,000 americans die for in Kennedy and Johnson's war?
Skipped right over Eisenhower and Nixon did ya?
We didn't win that one.
We lost.
You do know what that means?
The Vietnamese finally got their own country.
And they got to choose how to govern it.
Kinda like our own revolution.
My point exactly, we accomplished nothing except the deaths of 58,000 americans and the expenditure of billions of dollars. It was none of our fuckin business. Just like Ukraine is none of our business and like all the shit going on in Africa is none of our business.
We should give humanitarian aid, but not take sides. Let them fight it our and then sell stuff to the winners.
and you are right, it started under Ike, escalated under Kennedy and Johnson, and ended by Nixon.
Nixon didn't end it. He escalated it. Way past what Johnson did. He secretly expanded the war into Laos and Cambodia.
The last Americans left Vietnam under Ford.
And in any case?
ISIL is threatening the United States. They've explicitly said they were going to "raise the flag" over Washington.
That's not a threat to be taken lightly. You know, like Bush did with Al Qaeda.
OMG, yes, the last left under Ford. Nixon began the withdrawal and was the one who effectively declared defeat. Is everything you think and post only on a partisan basis?
Yes, ISIL is a threat. Obama called them JV, he was wrong.
If you insist on bringing 9/11 into it, Clinton did not take OBL when offered by Sudan, and could have prevented 9/11.
Going into Iraq was a stupid mistake. Both parties authorized and funded it, and most of the world supported it. Bush did not, and could not, do it solely on his own.
I doubt it no matter how hard the right tries.irrelevantLibya....Our conversation is over....
I forget....
Was that before or after our embassy was burned and ambassador murdered?
It will be more relevant in 2016
Yep, always someone else's fault.Obama had no choice after the Iraqi prime minister Maliki refused to sign the mutual defense agreement preventing US troops from remaining stationed in that country, who was the hand picked successor supported by the republican Administration, so blame Bush.
Now that Obama is going to invade Iraq again, what do you say? Do you support the illegal invasion of Iraq?
I dont doubt the CIA and others had ISIS on their radar.
You would think Republicans would stay away from foreign policy after all their debacles, fiascoes and disasters under Bush. No one in the world thrusts them.
Obama has topped Bush baby. By a wide margin.
Afghanistan is balancing and Iraq was holding till ISIS invaded from Syria.
Obama almost managed to wreck Egypt by getting rid of Mubarak and giving them the Muslim Brotherhood, completely fucked up Libya and has brought the world ISIS because he was so intent on getting rid of Assad he turned a blind eye to them becoming the most wealthy and powerful terrorist army on the planet.
Oh and there's that little issue of so many losing their heads in Iraq because Obama refused to help Maliki because he didn't like him.
And how about that civil war in Ukraine that started because he backed the coup with muscle provided by Svoboda and Right Sector that overthrew a duly elected President and his party?
I don't know what world you live in rdean but it has no basis in reality.
Oh Gawd, not another one of his preachy "Teachable Moments?" He sure does like to talk down to people huh? I find that to be a trait in most Communists/Progressives. It's very insulting and annoying. Especially when it comes from an inexperienced 'Community Organizer' asshole. I mean, that is his only claim to fame for God's sake. So he can spare us the preachy arrogance. Save it for the programmed Obamabots.
I'm not making excuses for anyone. I am being realistic. He most likely has been weighing out multiple strategies over the last few months. If I were making excuses, I would be going on about how I have faith in what he will ultimately decide to do. He's had terrible foreign policy, I don't expect anything different here.
For conservatives? ISIL popped into existence yesterday.
For conservatives? ISIL popped into existence yesterday.
For conservatives? ISIL popped into existence yesterday.
Because that's how long their memory lasts. It's kind of a "daily" thing. Explains why it's so difficult for them to "lean".
I'm not making excuses for anyone. I am being realistic. He most likely has been weighing out multiple strategies over the last few months. If I were making excuses, I would be going on about how I have faith in what he will ultimately decide to do. He's had terrible foreign policy, I don't expect anything different here.
I dont doubt the CIA and others had ISIS on their radar.
just like they had Benghazi on their Radar ? - they were totally outflanked by IS.
this country is being poorly served by its politically motivated intelligence apparatus beginning from 2000 to the present time.
.
Now back to the OP. Sheesh.
It's pretty pathetic when the President feels the need to give a fatherly chat to bring Americans up to speed.
For conservatives? ISIL popped into existence yesterday.
Are you sure you really want to run with this line of a lie?
I like you Sallow but I can crucify you.
