US Defending / Protecting ISIS, Making 'War' Harder

[JakeStarkey]

 

[JakeStarkey]

easyt's way nearly lost Iraq.

And France is responsible for France.

 

[easyt65]

What happens when you allow thousands of Islamic Extremists / 'refugees' into your country, let alone IMPORT them?

1. PARIS TERRORIST ATTACK
2. BELGIUM BREEDING GROUND... (Headline)


10 OUT OF 10 SPECIALISTS AGREE...LESS OF A CHANCE TO HAVE TERRORISTS ATTACKS INSIDE YOUR COUNTRY IF YOU DON'T IMPORT TERRORISTS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES...

 

[Camp]

Yeah. 24 bombs will hurt ISIS so badly they will never fuck with France again.

Drone strike on an individual:
New #1 tomorrow.

24 Bombs on an ISIS HQ in Raqqa, Syria:
1 HQ Destroyed
DOZENS of ISIS Killed
Message sent 'We can reach your ass anywhere, and we're coming back'

France is just starting and is doing a helluva lot more than Obama has / is doing.

No, they aren't. France has been bombing and part of the coalition since it started. They were also active in bombing Libya. They are stepping up the quantity of their missions. To soon to tell about the quality of them.

 

[Siete]

When 220 Marines were killed on Reagans watch, guess who did his fighting for him and who did they fight?

first part of the answer is France ..

so this crap has been going on for decades.

 

[TNHarley]

Arm, train, supply, and use our AF and Navy to help the ME get rid of the crazies.

But no more American armies will be sent.

Arm, train and supply WHO?

 

[TNHarley]

So, suddenly it worked, even though al qaida eventually used that same training against us. Yeah, let's train those guys and give them weapons, like we did in Iraq & Afghanistan, that turned them on our own. And create a much greater isis, alqaida, whatever, that will find us here at home, once again. Great idea!

Sort of like we did in Afghanistan so they could fight Russia, that I always hear was a mistake?

Arm, train, supply, and use our AF and Navy to help the ME get rid of the crazies.

But no more American armies will be sent.

THAT failed policy, along with preventing other nations from mercilessly bomb ISIS, is what is allowing ISIS to win. Don't want to fight to win, great - just get the hell out of the way.

Yes, that American policy of sending armies failed.

Arm and train the Arabs and Muslims who will fight ISIS.

It worked. Russia left. We tried to stay after the Northern Alliance defeated the Taliban. The Taliban control more than 70% of the country. Sounds like Vietnam in 1970.

I agree! Hell, we have been fighting those fucks for 20 years now. And when the fascists kill Assad and the caliphate takes over Syria, we will be fighting those terrorists too.
IDK why people cant learn from history..

 

[JakeStarkey]

You tell us, TN. Because we are not sending an army back to the ME for the third time in 25 years.

 

[jillian]

The United States refuses to LEAD in a war against ISIS, but it is simultaneously making it harder for anyone else to do so!



Thus a CIA veteran with long experience hunting Osama bin Laden and trying to outmaneuver ISIS, speaking privately, tells The Daily Beast, “Everybody is going to respond to this thing with solidarity, tying little ribbons on trees and that sort of bullshit,” when what’s needed, in his opinion, is “to drive a stake in their heart.”

How do you do that?

“Put together a force of 6,000 or 7,000 airborne soldiers and just take Raqqa. Don’t issue warnings. Don’t assemble tank columns. Train the force, then use it,” said this gentleman, a veteran of the clandestine services, but not of the military. “They have made Raqqa the capital of their state. Take it and you have changed the ground immediately. You can’t fight ISIS with baby steps, and what happened in Paris gives you the immediate rationale to do something strategic. Otherwise ... THEY ARE WINNING!"

Alain Bauer, a leading terrorism analyst and adviser to officials in Paris about counter-terror strategies, said, "“If we really want to do something, we need to erase Raqqa.”

What keeps this from happening?

"In Bauer's opinion, the United States. “Every bombing is a nightmare to negotiate,” he said. “Here’s a target. ‘Oops, there’s a garden there. Oops, there’s a family there. Oops, you cannot destroy this, you cannot destroy that.’”
(To hell with esthetics, gardens, parks, libraries ISIS is using as a headquarters.)

While ISIS is fighting a barbaric war without mercy - beheading and burning civilians while wiping out historic world monuments and history, the Obama administration is trying to fight a 'Gentleman's War with ISIS using pin-prick drone strikes.

France declared after the attacks there, 'No Mercy' and proceeded to strike at the heart of ISIS in Syria - RAQQA! It is beginning to be the opinion of many inFrance and other nations that such a barbaric enemy must be fought with ferocity and determination, a will to DEFEAT and DESTROY this evil enemy.

If Obama and the US aren't going to do it FINE....just get the hell out of the way so those who have that will to do it get on with it.


LINK: After Paris, Is It Time to Roll on Raqqa, the ISIS Capital?

clearly you know nothing about mid-east politics. perhaps if you did, you'd put the blame for the state of the mid-east where it belongs... on the neo-cons who yell bomb bomb bomb ....

 

[Camp]

Arm, train, supply, and use our AF and Navy to help the ME get rid of the crazies.

But no more American armies will be sent.

Arm, train and supply WHO?

Kurds are doing a good job. Yazididi's are helping them out. Iraqi's are slow in getting there, but making progress.

 

[jillian]

So, suddenly it worked, even though al qaida eventually used that same training against us. Yeah, let's train those guys and give them weapons, like we did in Iraq & Afghanistan, that turned them on our own. And create a much greater isis, alqaida, whatever, that will find us here at home, once again. Great idea!

Sort of like we did in Afghanistan so they could fight Russia, that I always hear was a mistake?

THAT failed policy, along with preventing other nations from mercilessly bomb ISIS, is what is allowing ISIS to win. Don't want to fight to win, great - just get the hell out of the way.

Yes, that American policy of sending armies failed.

Arm and train the Arabs and Muslims who will fight ISIS.

It worked. Russia left. We tried to stay after the Northern Alliance defeated the Taliban. The Taliban control more than 70% of the country. Sounds like Vietnam in 1970.

I agree! Hell, we have been fighting those fucks for 20 years now. And when the fascists kill Assad and the caliphate takes over Syria, we will be fighting those terrorists too.
IDK why people cant learn from history..

how do you fight a tactic? because that's what terrorism is.

 

[JakeStarkey]

 

[TNHarley]

You tell us, TN. Because we are not sending an army back to the ME for the third time in 25 years.

Arm train and supply WHO?

 

[easyt65]

clearly you know nothing about mid-east politics. perhaps if you did, you'd put the blame for the state of the mid-east where it belongs... on the neo-cons who yell bomb bomb bomb ....

I like how you CLAIM to know anything about the ME while spewing such ignorance.

Hey, Jil....ask Hillary why she supported the war and why she now collects millions from countries that support terrorism, that oppresses women and engages in the mutilation of female genitalia, and who murders homosexuals...

 

[easyt65]

how do you fight a tactic? because that's what terrorism is.

You try to PREVENT terrorism...you don't IMPORT IT into your country, which Obama is still intent on doing despite Paris.

 

[jillian]

how do you fight a tactic? because that's what terrorism is.

You try to PREVENT terrorism...you don't IMPORT IT into your country, which Obama is still intent on doing despite Paris.

I think most of the people involved there were French citizens. no?

I don't think you should import terrorists either.

so how do you figure out who's a terrorist? seriously? i'm asking because a) I know what our history is when we turn away refugees; and b) most of the people who are refugee are simply decent people who want to save their families. so how do you do the right thing... while protecting yourself.

i'm listening.

 

[easyt65]

I don't think you should import terrorists either.
so how do you figure out who's a terrorist? seriously?
i'm listening.

You ask. 'HOW DO YOU DETERMINE WHICH ONE IS A TERRORIST OR NOT?' That tells me you do not know how....

DONT'CHA THINK PUTTING ALL PLANS TO BRING SYRIAN 'REFUGEES' HERE ON HOLD UNTIL YOU CAN FIGURE THAT ONE OUT AND BE ABLE TO DO IT IS A GOOD IDEA? OR DO YOU JUST WANT TO BRING THEM HERE BY THE THOUSANDS AFTER PARIS AND HOPE FOR THE BEST?!

 

[jillian]

[QUOTE="jillian, post: 12825831, member: 3135:]
I think most of the people involved there were French citizens. no?

I don't think you should import terrorists either.

so how do you figure out who's a terrorist? seriously?

i'm listening.

You ask. 'HOW DO YOU DETERMINE WHICH ONE IS A TERRORIST OR NOT?' That tells me you do not know how....

DONT'CHA THINK PUTTING ALL PLANS TO BRING SYRIAN 'REFUGEES' HERE ON HOLD UNTIL YOU CAN FIGURE THAT ONE OUT AND BE ABLE TO DO IT? OR DO YOU JUST WANT TO BRING THEM HERE BY THE THOUSANDS AFTER PARIS AND HOPE FOR THE BEST?!

why are you screaming? I asked you a question. your hysteria tells me that you think we should just let people die because they come from a certain area. I think that's immoral.

so again, how do you TELL? I agree we need safeguards. you're missing the point because you went into overdrive.

what safeguards which would allow us to do what our national morality demands we do:? -- pointing out that if these were white Christians, there wouldn't even be a discussion. that said, I understand the discussion and i'm asking HOW?

 

[Camp]

Terrorist attempt to inflict culture changing fear when they inflict acts of terror on a culture or society. Refusing to accept refugees is a sign of weakness and highlights the success the terrorist act has accomplished. Taking the hits with an attitude that you will not retreat or surrender is a sign of strength. Retreating and surrendering only invites future attacks.

 

[easyt65]

why are you screaming? I asked you a question. your hysteria tells me that you think we should just let people die because they come from a certain area. I think that's immoral.

so again, how do you TELL? I agree we need safeguards. you're missing the point because you went into overdrive.

what safeguards which would allow us to do what our national morality demands we do:? -- pointing out that if these were white Christians, there wouldn't even be a discussion. that said, I understand the discussion and i'm asking HOW?

I am not screaming, Jil, just emphasizing to make a point.

Libs say 'not our fight', 'we're not the world's policemen', why should we send our kids there to die'; yet, they are all for importing terrorists so they can kill our kids here. The US doesn't have to do it. This is one reason why the U.N. EXISTS! make the U.N. actually do it's job for once!

Which safeguards? That's my point - I am not sure but neither it our government, and the idea of just bringing them here without knowing and without putting those safeguards into effect is CRIMINALLY irresponsible.

You ask 'what if they were Christians'? Bogus question..
1) Christians are not beheading people, burning them, and did not attack Paris. That would be Islamic Extremists, ISIS...

2) Even if they CLAIMED to be Christians from Syria right now, sorry but you're not getting in until we can figure out who you are and establish the safeguards we are talking about.