Obama wants to talk to Americans to get them up to speed on ISIS.

[jon_berzerk]

I think it's the other way around. Most of us knew the threat ISIS presented MONTHS AGO. But Obama is gonna "inform us" lol

That was the part I found most amusing about his Meet the Press interview.

I alao find it amusing that he refuses to use the last S in ISIS. Just can't admit he is behind the curve.

the prezbo must have been reading the morning news again

--LOL

 

[tosacco]

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.

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?

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.

You shift back and forth between "us" and "Obama" like its the same thing.
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.

 

[Sallow]

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.

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?

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.

You shift back and forth between "us" and "Obama" like its the same thing.
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?

Eyah.

You are probably going to keep saying that well after most of the ISIL fighters are dead and buried.

Heck you folks STILL call Clinton's Balkan's campaign a "failure".

And Bush's Iraq invasion a "success".

 

[Sallow]

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

I'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.

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 LEAD

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".

 

[Kondor3]

Libya....Our conversation is over....

I forget....

Was that before or after our embassy was burned and ambassador murdered?

irrelevant

It will be more relevant in 2016

Yes, I believe that will prove to be the case, to HildeBeast's great discomfort.

Why?

Especially if Romney is her opponent.

For the first time in history, a Presidential candidate blamed his opponent for a foreign attack on the United States. What Romney did was unprecedented, despicable and disgusting. Several republicans (Like McCain) were even disgusted until FOX gave them the meme.

Romney is yesterday's news, and has already indicated that he will not run in 2016, so he is irrelevant in this context.

HildeBeast, on the other hand, bears responsibility, on several levels, for what happened in Benghazi, and for how we dealt with that afterwards, in several respects.

Something tells me it's not going to go away, and that it will prove to be a thorn in her side, if she runs in 2016.

I dunno... we'll see, soon enough.

 

[Redfish]

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.

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?

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.

You shift back and forth between "us" and "Obama" like its the same thing.
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?

Eyah.

You are probably going to keep saying that well after most of the ISIL fighters are dead and buried.

Heck you folks STILL call Clinton's Balkan's campaign a "failure".

And Bush's Iraq invasion a "success".

Sooooooooooooooo, you are still claiming that Bush did the Iraq fiasco all on his own? Did congress authorize and fund it, both parties? Did the UN sanction it? Did the rest of the world support it?

You are full of shit, swallow. you are nothing but a dem/lib talking point repeating machine. you have no capability of individual thought. In short, you should be institutionalized.

 

[Kondor3]

...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".

Yes - if we worry about Nation Building or Winning Hearts and Minds.

No - if we (uncharacteristically and unexpectedly) just go in, kill the bad guys, level their home ground, and then just walk away, without even bothering to try Winning the Peace.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003

Afghanistan,
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Czech Republic
Denmark
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Hungary
Italy
Japan
South Korea
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Philippines
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan

Fact Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya - Fox Nation

 

[Redfish]

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

I'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.

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 LEAD

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?

 

[Katzndogz]

I think it's the other way around. Most of us knew the threat ISIS presented MONTHS AGO. But Obama is gonna "inform us" lol

That was the part I found most amusing about his Meet the Press interview.

I alao find it amusing that he refuses to use the last S in ISIS. Just can't admit he is behind the curve.

Why should he use "the last S" in ISIS?

"ISIS" isn't actually their name.

Because that is where they are based. He is simply too stubborn to admit it. He avoids using the word Syria at all costs. I find it amusing.

That doesn't make any sense. What do you think he should "admit"?

He should admit that he was wrong about supporting the rebels in Syria against Assad.

 

[Geaux4it]

Another gramps fail thread.

ISIR is correct.

The rest is just garbage.

Carry on.

Another gramps fail thread.



ISIR is correct.

The rest is just garbage.

Carry on.

Your dear failure in Thief is going to educate you liberal anti-Americans waz up. Get your pen and paper ready.

-Geaux

 

[tosacco]

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

I'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.

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 LEAD

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'

 

[Sallow]

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

I'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.

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 LEAD

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.

 

[Redfish]

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

I'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.

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 LEAD

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.

 

[Redfish]

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

I'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.

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 LEAD

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.

 

[tosacco]

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

I'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.

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 LEAD

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.

 

[Sallow]

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

I'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.

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 LEAD

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'

Because if you aren't free to invade other people's countries and bomb them into the stone age, are you truly free?

 

[Peach]

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

I'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.

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 LEAD

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.

 

[Sallow]

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

I'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.

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 LEAD

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.

 

[The Rabbi]

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.

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?

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.

You shift back and forth between "us" and "Obama" like its the same thing.
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.

Obama is not America. Obama is not the public.
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.