The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

This should have a thread.  Apparently many of Saddam's old generals have joined the Al Queada linked group ISIS as they methodically recapture Iraq and confiscate equipment and weaponry we supplied.  They are enchanting more resistance as they move towards Bagdad, but it is believed Bagdad will indeed fall unless there is international intervention.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/12/world/middleeast/iraq.html?hp&_r=1
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-12/iraq-seeks-to-check-advance-of-islamists-near-saddam-s-hometown.html

We never should have been there in the first place, once there, we never should have offered a time-table, and we never should have made our exit a political decision rather than a strategic one.

As the Taliban has warned us for over a decade "You have all the clocks, but we have all the time."  It seems that the Islamic extremists in Iraq were simply waiting the clock out.

What I have been saying would happen since 2003.



Somehow, "I told you so" just doesn't quite say it....


Another Viet Nam - we "declare victory" - "Mission Accomplished".  Leave the field.  Lose the war.

I agree wholeheartedly on the first point.  But "strategic" can cut both ways.  A true Victory, and all that entails, was never really an option for Iraq.  Sometimes you just have to leave.

Iran has deployed revolutionary guard forces without hesitation to help Iraq and have been successful in taking back most of Tikrit, and are considering pulling forces from Syria to combat the rebels. http://online.wsj.com/articles/iran-deploys-forces-to-fight-al-qaeda-inspired-militants-in-iraq-iranian-security-sources-1402592470

(http://www.rantlifestyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Obama-9.jpg)

It seems all of the predictions made were spot on.  There is no reason why we shouldn't have been prepared for this.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/11/world/meast/iraq-predictions-revisited/

I'm willing to bet we recommit air power within 24 hours.

Prepared for what? Civil war was always going to be the outcome. Always. Bush screwed it all up and there was no other outcome. The only interesting piece is that the issues in Syria have merged with Iraq. This is in many ways is a outgrowth of a cold war between Saudi Arabia and Iran (Sunni v Shiite).

1. Baghdad is not going to fall. The areas that have been taken are Sunni, Baghdad is majority Shiite. The Army had been purged of Sunnis so they didn't fight defend Sunni areas. They will fight to save their own homes. Iraq remains majority Shiite. Or what was Iraq.
2. Most Sunnis in the taken areas felt already repressed by the Shiite government that then failed to protect them.
3. Iraq, left to Democracy, was always going vote for Shiite leaders that have the country come under Iran's sphere of influence.
4. We have no side in this, we back Baghdad and we are supporting a repressive regime backed by Iran, we back the rebels and we are supporting radical Islamists. Same issues we have had from the start in Syria.

The best outcome probably is a three (four?) state solution. A rump Shiite dominated Iraq, a new Sunni run country (hopefully not run by ISIS), Kurdistan and a rump majority Alawite and Christian Syria.

I knew it was Bush's fault.

Then why have you been on the other side of history??

Absolutely.

Our aid, military and otherwise should go to the Kurds in both Iraq and Syria. Kurdistan is coming. We just have to figure out how to get Turkey on board with it.

I'll call W and get him working on that for you; okay

No, he damaged this country quite enough. We don't need his "help". I don't think we could take it. Worst President of All Time.

Bwahahahahahaha.   Catching breath.   Bwahahahaha

Truman: Yep, I was alive then but have no memory of him what-so-ever.

Eisenhower didn't really do that much except for the Interstate Highway system (which is enough for some to condemn him forever).  Sometimes not much is better that a bunch of not-so-good. I kind-of-sort-of remember him being President.

I was in Jr. High School when JFK was assassinated.  My dad said he had some good ideas but the wrong way to get there. I don't really have too much independent thought in regarding politics in his case.  His commitment to science and the space race was a good thing.  I remember the moon landing.  I was allowed to stop my menial labor (at nearly twice the minimum wage) to watch the TV coverage.

I will always remember LBJ's contribution to the Viet Nam situation, especially after he clobbered Goldwater for being a War Hawk.  (Goldwater was going to start a Nuclear War.) I  think we lost about 46,000 or so in that Police Action compared to 4000 or so in Iraq.  Civil Rights stuff was proper.  Great Society, not so much as it created a society dependent on Government for existence.  Have we really cured poverty?

Nixon kept me from getting killed in Viet Nam.  Enough said.

Ford: He probably did the right thing regarding Nixon. It kept us from becoming totally mired down in crap.  It didn't surprise me that he wasn't re-elected.  The country was ready for something different - anything different.  (Kind of like in 2008)

Jimmy Carter was a good ex-President.  Not so much a good President.  My CDs (then and shortly thereafter) did good unless you considered inflation. Remember double digit car loan and mortgage interest rates?

I know there are a lot of Reagan haters here but I did OK since I wasn't loaded up to my ears in debt that became non-deductable. Yep, my taxes went up but so did my salary as I went from beginning to experienced Engineer. 

Clinton was "blessed" with a Republican Congress which made his budget have a surplus in spite of his desires. He was a reasonable compromiser but otherwise not all that remarkable.  The Monica Lewinsky stuff was more about lying than fooling around.  He rode an economic bubble to the top. I almost voted for Algore just to let the Democrats take credit for the impending doom but couldn't make myself do it.

Knowing what I know now vs. what I knew in 2000 and 2004, I would still have voted for Bush II vs. Algore or Kerry.

Obama:  We will survive in spite of him.

If you go back in history, we have had some good Presidents and some not so good Presidents.  Bush will probably fall into the not so good arena but most likely not the "worst".

A little off-topic but Eisenhower was given credit for the interstate highway system, however he didn't design it and implement it.  The only reason he gets the credit is because he was the sitting President to sign the bill into action and he championed its passage.  It actually got started way back in the '20s with the Phipps Act, and actually much before that in 1916 with the Federal Aid Road Act.  I've been reading the book "The Big Roads" and it's fascinating.  They tell the stories of the engineers that got the roads started and how they did it.  With your background RA I think you'd enjoy it.

I probably would.  The PA TPK was an early player.  There were also some other "modern" roads in the area.  There were a few "high speed" roads in NJ from the Phila area to the Jersey Shore resorts.  I think the White Horse or Black Horse (?) Pike was 70 MPH when the next highest thing was the PA TPK at 65.  Most rural roads in PA were 50 or 55 MPH max forever.  Many weren't suitable for anything over about 40 or 45 MPH.  They literally made the road where the cows walked. Around trees, you bet.  Good sports car country but not so good for getting places.

Worst ever. He both pointlessly invaded Iraq and bungled the war in Afghanistan and he also drove the country right into the Great Recession. That’s far from his full list of stupidity and would be very hard to beat. You add in The Patriot Act, Bush’s “Not that concerned about Bin Laden”, his massively unbalancing the budget, the Katrina response and “Mission Accomplished” and he has no peer. 

Wow!  Apparently ISIS started taunting us and making their intensions known back in March on Twitter with this kind request.  It seems we have complied.

NSA should really get the Twitter.

(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bp91bazCYAAvrSm.png:large)

Have you verified that twitter?

No he hasn't. He believes what ever pablum he's fed by Fox.  He's even dumb enough to think that the NSA doesn't monitor Twitter with all we now know from Snowden. He's all cheap jokes and conservabot soundbites.

I mean, damn.   Even the blonde woman on the FOX morning show wasn't this dumbassed.

Do you have issues with blond women?

Is she a dumbs because she is blond or a woman?

No, talking heads on Fox are either stupid or are liars or most likely are both. Blond has nothing to do with it.

I'm not sure what was wrong with her.  If your issues with women are the same as the issues you have with races, you might relax them.

(http://www.rawstory.com/rs/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/fox_ff_gretchen_twerk_130920a.jpg)

Neither.  She is dumb because she is dumb, and on FauxNews.

Time for a break....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3Fkuq5Lf0Q

Did you just plagiarize Olberdoosh or Madcow?  ;D

I always thought the Great Recession was caused by lax banking laws that allowed homebuyers to purchase 3X what they could afford to pay for? 

I always learn so much from Olberdooshites.
(http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/olbie.jpg)

He find a job yet?

President's scheduled to talk about Iraq.

Let's see how loony tunes the politics takes this.

Nope, I have never seen either show.

No, it was created by massively borrowing money in an expanding economy to pay for two wars overheating the economy, very lax oversight of investment banks, new rules blurring of lines between traditional banks, investment banks and insurance companies and most importantly the Joe Biden backed and Bush signed revision of bankruptcy laws that removed the shield over personal real estate in bankruptcies. But thanks for trying.

You are aware that the genesis of the derivatives market started around 1980 and really started to expand during the over-heated ’90’s right?

Nice analysis from those who were actual players in the market:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/themes/derivatives.html

It points to the sort of degenerate gamblers who run Wall Street.

I am. But I am also aware that the SEC under Bush considered but declined to regulate or monitor Credit Default Swaps.

Yup.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW5qKYfqALE[/youtube]

President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.  Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President’s repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.

2001

April: The Administration’s FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is “a potential problem,” because “financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.”

2002

May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003

January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.”  As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market.  (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03).

September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations.

September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises” and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any “legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk.”  To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have “broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards” and “receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE.”  (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03).

2004

February: The President’s FY05 Budget againhighlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator:  “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator.”  (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to “not take [the financial market's] strength for granted.”  Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by “ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.”  (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, “Keeping Fannie And Freddie’s House In Order,” Financial Times, 2/24/04).

June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying “We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system.  Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs:  Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System.”  (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04).

2005

April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.”  (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05).

2007

July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.

August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying “first things first when it comes to those two institutions.  Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options.”  (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07).

September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.

September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years.  Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.

December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying “These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I’ve called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission.  The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start.  But the Senate has not acted.  And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon.”  (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07).

2008

January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.

January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.

February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says “A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully.”  (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08).

March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.

March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and “move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages.”  (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08).

April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and “modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes.”  (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08).

May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.

“Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans.”   (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08).
“[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator.”  (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08).
“Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans.”  (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08).
June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying “we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”  (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08).

July: Congress heeds the President’s call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.

It’s long been said they did nothing because it was so complex no one really understood the mechanics of them.  The CFMA of 2000 may have been another reason for lack of action.  One thing is for certain, taking Wall Streeters and putting them into roles which involve monetary policy and regulations for the finance industry is allowing the fox to guard the hen house.  This is a decades-old policy which needs to change.


http://baselinescenario.com/2010/04/20/clinton-rubin-summers-derivatives/

Republicans, and especially Libertarians constantly espouse laissez-faire capitalism. “Free the markets, regulation is bad”, you hear it all the time. Republicans are STILL wanting less regulation and oversight. It’s idiotic and it’s what has been pushed by the right since Reagan.

Certainly there was too much regulation in the 70s, but the pendulum swung too far and led to the Great Recession. It’s what happened in the Great Depression too but thankfully Bush and Obama did what Hoover didn’t and moved to stop the banking system from melting down like what happened in 1929. The main drivers in the 2008 crash were removal of Glass Steagall in 1999, The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005 Bush’s SEC not regulating Credit Default Swaps and REITs effectively.

Soooo yeeeaaahh...

There's news in Iraq.  Prob best if you look at BBC.  God knows out national news will be skewed like a motherscratcher.

Never a good policy to blame the fly-paper for all of the flies in the house.  Best to find the open door.
Regulation would not have been necessary if government hadn't stepped in and required banks to lend money to people who couldn't afford to pay it back, and then implied that somehow that money would be guaranteed by Fanny/Freddy under some quasi-government banking marriage.

You can't blame people, banks, or builders for taking free money, especially when the government says they have to take it!

Government regulation is almost always a reaction to previous government intervention.

They espouse one thing - capitalism - then put in place another thing - capitalistic monopolism.  Not the same thing at all.  And it's a bad thing!


No, there wasn't too much regulation in the 70's.  That's just a plaintive bleat the RWRE uses to try to somehow convince people that keeping corporate America responsible for their actions - as in "personal responsibility", since corporations have been defined as 'people' - is somehow bad!  Which it is not.

They have been wildly successful at removing many of the barriers to un-throttled "robber-baron-ism" in this country.  The effects are seen in the things you mention such as credit default swaps, all the way to the facts of real income in this country going down for the vast majority over the last 30+ years.  And the lowest incomes have suffered the most with a real drop in income of more than 30% since 1968.

Are there no moderators to this forum?

What's the problem? The, I'll get on it.

Off topic discussion.

Wasn't the Iraq issued solved ?  Iran is gonna take care of it....

1) the market collapse was because of too much government doing too little.  We subsidize the housing market, we provide a secure secondary market for lenders, and we guarantee the assets of the banks.  If they fail - we pump in billions to save them.  THEN, when it comes time to regulate them the shout comes up about government interference.

Welcome to the 17th richest country in the world, where the goal is to have the most millionaires - middle class be damned.


2). I don't understand how a country that was invaded without a followup plan could possibly be in shambles.  1) step one: invade, destroy infrastructure and social order, disband all security forces and disallow participation of anyone with leadership experience, rebuild artificial line drawn country as a democracy and gtfo as fast as possible.  2) step two:  ?   3) step 3: success.

We started evacuating the largest US embassy in the world this weekend as bombs began to fall on the capital city.  The Iraq embassy employs thousands of people, and a staff will remain to keep the embassy operational as non-essential personnel are evacuated. We still have around 3,000 contractors in the country and have moved the aircraft carrier George Bush to provide support for evacuations and possible airstrikes.
(http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2010-06/54393717.jpg)


President Obama met with his regular crisis team twice this weekend.  On Saturday, the team met at the Sunnylands course (a favorite of retired US presidents), and then on Sunday at the private course of billionaire Larry Ellison, Porcupine Creek, an ultra-exclusive course that caters to the billionaire crowd.  On both days the team (Marvin Nicholson and Joe Paulsen) spent the day playing golf working out a strategy to contain the violence in Iraq and protect American contractors, interests, and the civilian population. According to Golf Digest, Porcupine Creek is one of the best golf courses in the country and an excellent backdrop for high-level talks with Marvin who schedules all of his vacations and golf outings, and Joe who, as his Advance Lead, makes all of the hotel arrangements for the president, his family and the hundreds of secret service staff.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8KVjfCER8S8/T-M__yWfmYI/AAAAAAAAC5U/7Kjiu52Ig5g/s1600/JamesCostos_MichaelSmith_AlexJBerliner_ABImages.jpg)
Prior to teeing off, the president met briefly to discuss the crisis with interior designer Michael S. Smith and his partner James Costos.  The president previously appointed Costos, a prominent campaign donor, as a U.S. ambassador to Spain.  There are also rumors that the family is house hunting in the Coachella valley because the president likes the climate and high-end golf culture, and may be using Smith and Costos to aid in their home search. http://www.desertsun.com/story/life/home-garden/2014/06/13/michelle-obama-michael-s-smith-rancho-mirage-couple/10410567/

It is unclear exactly what strategies were discussed in these important meetings, but during these strategic discussions, the rebels began posting photographs of the mass executions of men, women, and children near the capital of Baghdad. Smith and Costos have yet to release any statements regarding the rebel wardrobe or footwear choices presented in these photographs.
(http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/Images/2014/6/16/201461624556763734_20.jpg)
(http://rt.com/files/news/28/8c/c0/00/iraq-5.jpg)
http://www.desertsun.com/story/news/world/2014/06/15/iraq-us-qaeda-insurgency/10545803/

As the executions progressed, the president met a number of challenges posed by the exclusive Tim Blixseth designed course.  Each hole (all par 4) is designed after a famous hole from great courses around the world and is intended to force the participant to imagine they are somewhere else.  Of course many of the holes have been altered since Ellison purchased the course, but most don't detract too much from the original intension of the course designer.  Hole 14, for instance, only offers a very slight fairway, and on each side there is a steep drop-off of contrasting desert terrain resembling a long dry riverbed, or mass grave, much like you might find just outside of Baghdad at this very moment.

The ultra-exclusive clubhouse and facilities were sure to delight the first family and keep them occupied during the president's strategy sessions.
(http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/d70e5b0334ada82ffe1f66c06e5e99bdf77e75e4/c=37-0-564-395&r=x383&c=540x380/local/-/media/PalmSprings/PalmSprings/2014/06/13//1402640396000--Porcupine-Creek-02jpg-20100923.jpg)

(http://itmakessenseblog.com/files/2013/07/valerie-jarrett1.jpg)
When asked about another trip in the midst of another crisis, Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett responded: "I think frankly we've all been through a cold and bitter winter and the bear has cabin fever," "His cabin is a little bit bigger and harder to escape than most."  She added that Obama has fantasized about being "on a beach somewhere drinking out of a coconut" or simply being able to walk out of the White House gate and stroll around unrecognized.
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-longs-break-white-house-bubble-120614293--politics.html

I support Obama's decision to send troops in. Maybe the bombing can now start. Wouldn't it be great if this event resulted in some sort of a detente with Iran?

About step 3....Bush DID declare MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!  In all caps....



Like one of my favorite phrases, "Declare victory and leave the field..."

Letter from the president to the speaker:
Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

Starting on June 15, 2014, up to approximately 275 U.S. Armed Forces personnel are deploying to Iraq to provide support and security for U.S. personnel and the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. This force is deploying for the purpose of protecting U.S. citizens and property, if necessary, and is equipped for combat. This force will remain in Iraq until the security situation becomes such that it is no longer needed.

This action has been directed consistent with my responsibility to protect U.S. citizens both at home and abroad, and in furtherance of U.S. national security and foreign policy interests, pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct U.S. foreign relations and as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive.

I am providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148). I appreciate the support of the Congress in these actions.

Sincerely,
Barack Obama

Perhaps they will not be wearing any boots?

I have always wondered where other Countries Embassies were located here in the U.S. This is a great link to find out where all of them are World wide. Pretty cool site.

http://www.embassyworld.com/

Sounds familiar.... a lot like how Viet Nam started.  All over again.

Why hasn't anybody mentioned Bush signed a treaty with Iraq to have all the troops out by the end of 2011?

Where would the fun be in that?  I mean, come on!  Facts?  Pshaw!

I'm enjoying watching the hand-wringing.

So Obama can take credit for pulling the troops out of Iraq, silly!

This all blows.  It doesn't matter who's work it is. 

(http://media.giphy.com/media/Ay6HrZVsDYuvS/giphy.gif)

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/t1.0-9/10481382_10152210205361733_4861384078016311592_n.png)

ISIS has seized one of Saddam's chemical weapons storage and production facilities.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/10910868/Iraq-crisis-Obama-may-launch-air-strikes-without-Congress-amid-calls-for-Maliki-to-go-live.html
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02948/al-mutannah_2948337c.jpg)
17.09 Chemical weapons produced at the Al Muthanna facility, which Isis today seized, are believed to have included mustard gas, Sarin, Tabun, and VX.

Here is the CIA's file on the complex.
Quote Stockpiles of chemical munitions are still stored there. The most dangerous ones have been declared to the UN and are sealed in bunkers.
Although declared, the bunkers contents have yet to be confirmed.
These areas of the compound pose a hazard to civilians and potential blackmarketers.
Numerous bunkers, including eleven cruciform shaped bunkers were exploited. Some of the bunkers were empty. Some of the bunkers contained large quantitiesof unfilled chemical munitions, conventional munitions, one-ton shipping containers, old disabled production equipment (presumed disabled under UNSCOM supervision), and other hazardous industrial chemicals.

17.05 The Chemical Weapons Convention, which Iraq joined in 2009, requires it to dispose of the material at Al Muthanna, even though it was declared unusable and "does not pose a significant security risk"
However, the UK goverment has acknowledgeded that the nature of the material contained in the two bunkers would make the destruction process difficult and technically challenging.
Under an agreement signed in Baghdad in July 2012, experts from the MOD’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) were due to provide training to Iraqi personnel in order to help them to dispose of the chemical munitions and agents.
The Al Mutannah chemical weapons complex (CIA)
16.52 The remaining chemical weapons from Saddam Hussein's regime are stored in two sealed bunkers, both located at the Al Muthanna Chemicals Weapons Complex, a large site in the western desert some 80km north west of Baghdad.
This was the principal manufacturing plant for both chemical agents and munitions during Saddam Hussein’s rule.
Thousands of tonnes of chemical weapons were produced, stored and deployed by the Saddam Hussein regime. Iraq used these weapons during the Iran - Iraq War (1980 to 1988) and against the Kurds in Halabja in 1988.

16.32 Isis jihadists have seized a chemical weapons facility built by Saddam Hussein which contains a stockpile of old weapons, State Department officials have told the Wall Street Journal:
Quote U.S. officials don't believe the Sunni militants will be able to create a functional chemical weapon from the material. The weapons stockpiled at the Al Muthanna complex are old, contaminated and hard to move, officials said.
Nonetheless, the capture of the chemical-weapon stockpile by the forces of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, known as ISIS or ISIL, the militant group that is seizing territory in the country, has grabbed the attention of the U.S.

I'm not sure why this is still there?  In fact, I thought this didn't exist?

Edited;

Guess you will just have to ask Daddy Bush - Raygun - he is the one that supplied all that stuff to Saddam Hussein -to give them some "toys" to use against Iran~  You do remember the history, don't you??

Added;

And Daddy Bush kept supplying things right up until the point Hussein invaded Kuwait - a "misunderstanding" by Hussein that we were "inviting" him to take back that part of Iraq that was taken from them earlier....

Well, we can't really expect to learn anything from history, can we....?

I heard on the news driving in this morning that Obama is saying if the situation escalates, we might do some air strikes.

I figured cities falling to militants was pretty much the definition of “escalation”.  It’s only a matter of time before Baghdad falls.

Iran/Iraq war was 1980 to 1988, so it was Ronald Reagan.

See edited post above...

Point noted.

This will REALLY hurt the ol' backside.



http://www.gallup.com/poll/171794/clinton-elder-bush-positively-rated-living-presidents.aspx

A task force to address this serious problem.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/20/1308404/-POTUS-Acts-to-Save-Honey-Bees-Launches-Pollinator-Health-Task-Force#

The more I look at this mess, the more inclined I am to support full military intervention. ISIS is threatening America without equivocation. And we cannot risk another 9/11.

Is ISIS really interested in bringing terror to our shores again or simply over-running Iraq?

Then the country shoulda paid attention to me back in 2003!!  Can't have it both ways - going round the world to satisfy some spoiled little a$$wipe whims - and not expect serious repercussions!!

Now, we are seeing the repercussions!  And I still say this is just one little piece of the big puzzle - other pieces we have seen lately are Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Syria.  US helping the Al Qaeda and Taliban types stitch together a large enough "critical mass" where they actually can cause us real issues!!  The full picture is to bring on "Armageddon".  Not the real one the Bible talks about, but the one that misguided zealots on the radical Christian side are trying to "force" God's hand with.  There would be repercussions to "tweaking" God, too!   If one believes in the Bible....since it does say no man knows the time, but some are trying to force the issue and set the time.

Barry thinks so.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/22/obama-isis-pose-long-term-threat-to-us

Would you prefer Saddam Hussein still be in power over Iraq? No hyperbole, no B.S. excuses. Just answer that question.

Absolutely with NO doubt whatsoever!  He was a stabilizing influence in the region - kept Iran in check.  He gave us a "bogey-man" to have a "single" point of focus for us to keep attention away from other sh$t here at home....always a flag waving moment in there somewhere...  He only had equipment and supplies that Germany and us gave him, so we DID have a known reference to work from - in spite of the lies we were told...and knew were lies from the get go.  

How many of today's radical groups now have some of Russia's missing fissionable material that is unaudited?  

We always had a military-industrial complex moment going so there was a known base of economic activity to offset the "threat" - even if it was contrived.  

And we would have over 4,000 of our kids and $2 trillion dollars back!  And I wouldn't even mind paying that $2 trillion just to keep those thousands alive plus the wounded intact and whole!!  This was in the top 1 or 2 of the most ignorant things we have done.  

There would also be about 800,000 Iraqi's alive today that we would not have been the direct proximate cause of death.  

This is all due to a complete lack of understanding of the mid-east by the Clown Show while making their "Mission Accomplished" poster.  We overlay our "John Wayne Cowboy" attitude over everything we do, making every problem and nail, and the only tool we have or understand is a hammer!!  Dealing with civilizations and cultures that are pretty much ALL hundreds and even thousands of years older than ours who do NOT adhere to our Western ways!

In much the same way we didn't understand Viet Nam.  And how we still don't understand China!  Anyone think for a second that they don't plan dozens to hundreds of years out??  Even though we have been told this repeatedly.... they are very likely working to secure their nation from outside intrusion so graphically exemplified by the Boxer War....and other insults.

This is why it went the way it did in 1991.  George H W was a VERY intelligent man, who understood global politics pretty well - MUCH better than Baby!!  (He has just gotta be SO proud of his son!!)  We stopped when we made the point that needed to be made!  And left the basic infrastructure intact giving a much more stable situation than today!  For about a decade.  And if Clinton didn't have the yammering ankle biters working against rather than with, better progress might have been made against Al Qaeda throughout the 90's....if more strikes than the one had been made, perhaps they would have eventually gotten Bin Laden and some of his buddies before turning them into martyrs....and breeding whole legions of new zealots!    Another example of how we just don't understand the radical religious fanaticism is how they can get so many true believers to carry a bomb into the middle of some place and set it off - we have the exact opposite philosophy of trying to preserve our fighters every chance we get.  Basic disconnect with reality.

Now, we are in the position where we will have to resort to mass killing of militants along with the civilians they are interspersed among.  Do you really believe we have the political will to kill another 2 to 3 million in pursuit of "stable" oil supplies??  Or to satisfy someone's ego??

No hyperbole!  No BS!  No excuses ever!


And I presume you think it was a "Noble Adventure"...??

I respectfully disagree.

I hate war like few others, but Saddam Hussein needed to go.

Sooo, Barry dithered while he knew ISIS was advancing, now he’s ready to do something as Baghdad appears ready to fall.  That’s some mighty fine leadership, right there.

Well, wait, he probably learned about the threat to Tikrit, Mosul, etc. when we all did: from the news.

That's fine...I don't have a problem with people disagreeing... (you might have guessed that I enjoy a little "controversy" from time to time...).

The best testimony on the topic is to see what was happening before, and what is happening now.  Gotta ask yourselves if you felt more safe then, or now??


Addendum;  Afghanistan is a totally different story - not only was it justified, but demanded, as far as I am concerned.  Just a shame that we got diverted by BS for some many years - about 8 - and now are also dealing with the consequences of that neglect!

Almost forgot....


Why did he need to go?

I think we need to get out and stay out.  Destabilize the region?  Let the region take care of itself or let Russia or China or someone else get in there if they want, you could make as as much a case for them having as much interest as we do if not more. All the money and lives lost by our intervening could have been used to employ those lives to check every container, airplane, ship, etc. coming into this country as one example. Plus they wouldn't be as likely to be angry at us for some made up reason or another if we weren't involved and they were fighting their neighbors or someone else stupid enough to get involved.

This from his wikipedia page...

...He convened an assembly of Ba'ath party leaders on 22 July 1979. During the assembly, which he ordered videotaped, Saddam claimed to have found a fifth column within the Ba'ath Party and directed Muhyi Abdel-Hussein to read out a confession and the names of 68 alleged co-conspirators. These members were labelled "disloyal" and were removed from the room one by one and taken into custody. After the list was read, Saddam congratulated those still seated in the room for their past and future loyalty. The 68 people arrested at the meeting were subsequently tried together and found guilty of treason. 22 were sentenced to execution. Other high-ranking members of the party formed the firing squad. By 1 August 1979, hundreds of high-ranking Ba'ath party members had been executed.

It was actions like this. He was brutal, vindictive, and unstable.

You can argue that it was not the United States responsibility to take him out, but you can't argue that he didn't need to go.

Here’s a few more highlights from his career of asshattery and despotism:

Yeah, he was a typical little tin-horn dictator - in an ideal world they all need to go.  As was Idi Amin in Uganda (worse than Hussein).  And a huge assortment of others in the world - past and present. 

Still gives no national interest justification for the second Iraq war that exceeds the "threshold of pain" test to make it valid reason....just being sleazy may be necessary, but not sufficient.  What was the pressing national interest to have 4,000+ of our kids killed, and tens of thousands wounded, and spend $2 trillion?

And the estimates for Idi Amin are about 500,000 killed.  And Rwanda, there were over a million.  Republic of Congo today is going through this.  Somalia is as big a mess.  The list goes on and on....


Pressing National Interest....to kill our kids and spend our wealth....


Example:  Al Qaeda in Afghanistan!

Do you believe turning our cheek and allowing slaughters like that to happen is preferable?  Do you believe that the life of an American is more sacrosanct than a Rwandan or Kurd or the United States amassing wealth is more important than those lives?

No.  Not what I was saying at all (as you know).  And have said here before.  If we are so concerned about humanitarian issues, then why are we not concerned about the BIG humanitarian issues?  You do remember that was one of the failed, lame selling points of Iraq intervention, don't you?  Iraq was a little popcorn fart of humanitarian issues at the same time millions were being slaughtered while we DID turn a blind eye to them!!  Repeatedly!!

And do you possibly imagine that it might have been different if there was significant oil in any of those places??  If not, then what made us decide to look past the millions to "worry" about the hundred thousand??  At exactly that same time, there were probably a dozen places where our efforts would have been better spent if we were really interested in "humanitarian issues".  All of them with NO significant oil deposits!  Will be waiting patiently for a rational answer....


Nice try, though!  Come out and play again sometime!!

Those damn facts:


Congo ranks 35th in oil reserves globally.

Rwanda has no oil reserves but does have methane reserves.  I still suspect this had nothing to do with why we dithered on Rwanda.  Probably a good question for former President Clinton.

Aside from that, there is little doubt that the U.S. involvement in the invasion of Kuwait by Iraqi forces had everything to do with protecting our energy allies and keeping global energy markets stable.

I’m not even going to address Iraq part deux as I don’t believe you are capable of having a rational conversation about it without resorting to “Baby Bush”, “Daddy Bush”,  “War For Oil”, or “Murdochian Plot”.

I'll never think highly of Clinton after Rwanda happened.

Silence is acceptance.

You are trying to compare number 35 Congo to number 2 Iraq??  As for Somalia - conjecture that it MIGHT be as high as number 20 or 25 with about 2.5 billion in reserves.  About 1/3 of our annual usage.  30%...of what we use in one year - not significant in our frame of reference.  I suspect they all have more than is admitted to now, but in 2001 - different story completely.  You are right about one thing - there can never be a rational discussion when you keep so far away from any perspective.  (It would be like earlier discussions about $500 million for Solyndra versus $90 billion to Halliburton.)

Kuwait was undoubtedly about Kuwait's oil and Saudi Arabia.  The issue there was Hussein's complete misread of conflicting signals we had been sending leading him to think it would be no big deal if he took back that part of Iraq that had been stripped away decades earlier.  He was stupid.  He didn't understand the concept of "people with money want to keep their playgrounds".  And we will help them do it.


As for the rest of part deux, well, I have made a case.  So far, you have said nothing substantive to justify why and/or what national interest was served or at stake.  Another lack of rational discussion....unless you would care to actually SAY why you think it was justified...??  I posed the question - you have completely avoided it.  But the attempted deflection is another nice "sound bite" Faux effort....

I’ve said plenty in many threads here about justification for Iraq.  You choose to hear what you want to and you misread links I post just like the link on Somalia which indicates they could become the seventh largest producer of oil, with more reserves than Kuwait.

There’s no point in discussing issues with people who don’t pay attention.

I'm sorry. Were you saying something?

I never did think much of him....he is a dipstick.

The good news is that the world is much more tranquil thanks to Barry.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/wh-weve-substantially-improved-tranquility-global-community

Yeah, Switzer is a cool guy.

Hah! That was the first image in my head too!

All kinds of good news today.
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRu6f4o8fYXyfrFAaZkSoRx3AKmy7kAvALMv7gNMI5hEL5VsRn8)
Harry Reid says the border is completely secure too.
“The border is secure,” he told reporters after the Senate Democrats’ weekly policy lunch. “[Sen.] Martin Heinrich [(D-N.M.)] talked to the caucus today. He’s a border state senator. He said he can say without any equivocation the border is secure.”

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/212328-reid-southern-border-is-secure#ixzz37Zj38xxu

Someone should alert him that a population of folks the size of Newark NJ just walked across the border.

This guy is the biggest d-bag in the federal government. Bar none. He's a racist, race baiter, liar, and Koch-addict. 

Your kind of guy. You guys drink together?

I think Harry needs to be retired along with Inhofe.  They both are getting even more delusional.

They should share a room at the "home" and we could make it a reality show.

Sooo.... you been listening to Herman Cain, huh?

He is without a doubt the most necessary Democrat in the Senate, just as Pelosi is/was in the house.  Reid serves as an example of the liberal desire for imperial power and socialist policy.  He has served as the linchpin to keep almost any legislation from being passed.  He has bent to his ruler by throwing support behind executive rule without question, and by supporting any policy (no matter how undefined and undeveloped) that the president has proposed.

As majority leader, it should be his voice in concert with the speaker of the house to act in defense of the legislative process, and against executive overreach (even if he agrees with the policies proposed). His failure in this duty, and the subsequent executive decisions made on such laws as Obamacare, and numerous other policies, makes these laws fragile, and far easier to reverse on constitutional grounds, because they were never developed in the process outlined in the constitution.

He is not a smart man, and this is good.  We need to keep him right there, right where he is, front and center, until we have a new administration.

Looks like Obama has had about enough of ISIS bullcrap.  

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/obama-weighs-military-strikes-to-aid-trapped-iraqis-officials-say.html


Ongoing coverage.

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/07/kurdish-tv-u-s-bombs-isis-targets-in-iraq/

I fully support Obama in this endeavor.

Oh, so four or five months later, he’s had enough?  Really?

I told the wife, it doesn't matter to the anti crowd.  "...... he didn't do it soon enough, he shouldn't do it at all, he wasn't forceful enough, he was too forceful, it was all his fault in the first place for pulling troops too soon, total lack of leadership, he's the worst president ever. Why doesn't he just go back to Kenya where he belongs and take the Moo cow with him".

You validate me, Conan. :)

Yeah, kinda looks to me like he's made a full recovery.

Sorry guys, if there were an R or I doing the same thing as president, I’d call it and have called it in the past.  I’ve voted for and supported many Democrat candidates, I’m not partisan for the sake of being partisan.  I’m critical of incompetence when I see it.  I realize as the leader of the free world, you can’t make snap decisions and everything is essentially done by committee.  His indecisive leadership style just drives me crazy.  

Except for Ronaldus Magnus, he was above reproach.  ;)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_sZ4QWSAlepU/TOr-V26lSvI/AAAAAAAADnI/hdZ2KFpZCaw/s640/ronaldusmagnuspost.jpg)

He was great for Twenty Mule Team Borax. After that, debatable.

Don’t forget this gem:

(http://coldfury.com/images/ReaganChesterfieldXmas.jpg)

Now your getting it.  ;D

When I wrote that I was thinking of you, Gas and Conan. It was real weird taking on your personalities. Gave me the heebie jeebies! You should try mine sometime. ;)

Need one of these.

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Lj5KP8OgZVk/SCOqfKtAOsI/AAAAAAAACFA/2zl-Lq5PzLE/s1600/8557060_f14bd4f251.jpg)

Even with all the illegal activity he was involved in, condoned, and rewarded??

But hey,....at least it was decisive!!  

HEY!!!   Don't be using that picture for other people!!   That's MY "trademark"....

Please forgive me.

Look it's old whats his name....The former TNF poster.....

No. no. Townsend still posts here.

I just read the most horrifying news story I've ever seen.  If this story at Catholic.org is true, these ISIS guys are utter monsters who should be hunted and wiped off the face of the planet.  I don't even want to link to the story because the photos are so grotesque.

The deadline for minorities (basically non-Sunni Muslim Arabs who think like them) to leave expired.   News reports say they they started executing families starting with the youngest members.  Children were dragged into the street and shot in the head, then decapitated and the heads placed on playground equipment at the nearest square/park (the decapitated body is left in the street).  Men were often crucified and made to watch their wives be stripped, raped, then held horizontal, their heads tilted back, and their throats slit like a farm animal.  Obviously many more were just summarily shot - including all POWs.  

There are "monuments" on street corners of decapitated heads arranged in lines next to cord-wood style stacks of limbs.

I cannot express how horrifying the pictures are.  And these guys are the ones releasing the pictures.  Bragging about what they did.

If only HALF of this is true, it demands immediate action.  Send in the planes.  The drones.  The special forces.  

Not to turn this immediately political, but the President knows it's so bad he decided to start dropping bombs.  And I hope he doesn't stop.

I want ISIS destroyed. Ultra violence and vulgar desecration. Send in the likes of this guy and his mates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dip_Prasad_Pun

You mean the vest? Gotta get one of those. Standard equipment for boomers.

Sounds like Kmer Rouge.

No religion would condone such activity. These are depraved, cruise missile worthy thugs.

Too easy. Too neat. Needs to be up close, personal, and fear-instilling. Think Inglourious Basterds.

I tried to once. Just couldn't do it.
 
 ;D

I understand. Its even hard for me. But for an engineer? Impossible.

You got that right.
 
 :D

Is this what the conman was getting at?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4yscR5E7f0#t=98[/youtube]

Oh, yeah....this is soooo much better than Saddam Hussein...!!    The world is a much better place today!


None of this is any kind of a surprise!  It's just that we as a nation have collectively ignored history.  And now it repeats itself....

I knew it!  Bush's fault. Here's Obama wearing gear that you would find appealing.

(http://thisistwitchy.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/obama-blame-game.png?w=190&h=190&crop=1)

Ole Mr. Mom Jeans has sure foobared this up.....!!

And remind me who it was that got us in Iraq in the first place?

At last you finally do understand!  It IS Bush's fault.  We should never have been there to start and would not have been except for the sense of entitlement engendered by his raising - his background told him he was entitled to lie in any way needed to get the use of the entire US military any way he wanted with no restraint.

That is what you mean by "entitlement" isn't it?  Since that is the real meaning and all.....

Is there a coup happening in Iraq?

http://www.news.com.au/world/troops-surround-baghdad-green-zone-as-embattled-prime-minister-maliki-appears-to-cling-to-power/story-fndir2ev-1227020033404

I do not think so. Obama said in December 2011 that Iraq was a "a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people."

(http://www.independentsentinel.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/mission-accomplished.jpg)

Failure to "community organize."

Best to just sit back and watch this happen.   :(

We've got a war Bush started to
A troop withdrawl treaty signed by Bush to remove troops from Iraq
A Prime Minister fanning the flames that was brought in by Bush to lead.
Luckily Bush looked al-Maliki in the eyes.  he wouldn't try to start a coup against an elected government would he?  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/17/AR2006061700662.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/17/AR2006061700662.html)

Never quite understood why Obama would say this if by treaty all the troops would be home anyway.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/10/21/remarks-president-ending-war-iraq

(Emphasis).

But with his "new strategy" he took credit for the removal of troops from Iraq. Now, of course, it was someone's fault the U.S. is not there. Is it Bush's fault? Mailiki? Who know, we just know it's not Obama. From the article:


http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/385069/obama-not-my-decision-pull-troops-out-iraq-joel-gehrke

So much for that ol' Bush treaty. And ENOUGH about Iraq being Bush's war. Do we need to trot out the videos of Biden, Hillary, Clenis, Harry Reid, and everyone else who was favoring regime change? Do we really? Oh, okay.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5p-qIq32m8[/youtube]

So stop rewriting history Sheen and Sons and deal with the fact there was a war, it was won, we got rid of a threat even RM believes was necessary. Obama is now president, and all that is happening right now is on Obama. Not Bush, not Blair. ON OBAMA. Hell, this mess with ISIS could been minimized if Barry wasn't not drawing his little wussified red lines in the sand in Syria--where ISIS grew. I guess that was Bush's fault too, right?

And here's some BS from politifact with a "pants on fire" ranking on rewriting history.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/sep/16/democrats-supporting-syria-action-rewrite-history-/

You gotta step away from the Faux Non-News a little bit....  It isn't someone else' fault we aren't there - it's someone else' (Baby Bush) fault we were there to start with and got this big ole stinkin' pile of carp mess that exists now in Iraq!

Focus!!

I am focused. One thing is certain, it is not Saddam Hussein's fault we invaded. He did nothing.

Well Hell, let's do something about this.

You guys pull the truck 'round.  I'll grab the twizzlers.

To blame Bush is simply a convenience. He followed through on what Bill Clinton and the UN threatened would happen if Iraq withdrew from the inspection process, and did exactly what the US said it would do if Iraq crossed the red line.  At least he understood what a red line was.  To say that anything Obama has done is positive, is ridiculous.  He has been nothing but political on everything foreign and domestic, with little or no regard for the consequences.  He just seems to leap from one poor decision to another, until only one course of action remains.

That does not change the fact that it was our mistake for getting involved in the first place. . .and by "first place" I mean participating in the creation of wealthy, powerful, weaponized tyrannies, fueled by a hunger for cheap energy, and a disregard for our own free market principals.

Wealth is dangerous when not earned, and power is destructive when not deserved. We are guilty of arresting the development of whole civilizations by subsidizing them, allowing their economies, governments, and people to remain culturally primitive, devoid of innovation and evolution.  Most of these, especially Iraq, are made up of tribal groups that still refuse to recognize government, and for good reason.  They have been subject to puppet after puppet, and generations of war and hunger caused by the tug of war.  Our gift to them has always been the guns that kill their children, paid for with oil that allows soccer moms in Iowa to drive to their pedicures.

Bush has no more guilt than all of those before him, and he who followed. They just generate different mythology to justify their actions.
It will have to stop at some point.
Either the slaves die or they kill the master.
Until then the bullshitt will continue.

TL/DR...

Never heard Bush blame Clinton for us ending up in Iraq nor the recession he inherited as he came into office either.

Bwahahahahahahahaha....


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VX1gdpEFAzg[/youtube]

Again...lessons in perspective... 

Did nothing....as compared to who?  Or what?   Certainly nothing to raise it to the level of being worth killing 4,000 + of our kids!  Or spending $2 trillion off budget.  Going by the militaristic, geopolitical criteria, North Korea should have been in line WAY before him.  Even Iran, but that would have led to the same crap storm we have today, shifted east a ways. 

From a "humanitarian" standpoint; Congo, Rwanda, Uganda, Somalia, Cambodia, North Korea again, and probably a half dozen others would be light years ahead of him on the list.

So which "justification" is the valid one??

Oh, yeah....  oil...!!   Almost forgot for a second...   (And where IS that Keystone pipeline, anyway....we gotta have those 3 dozen jobs!!  And the added risk to the aquifer in the middle of the country!!)


Like I said - step away from the Faux Non-News!!  And away from the accompanying tunnel vision that afflicts all Faux addicts!!

Truthiness really gets under your skin, doesn't it??


Only Faux apologists are ranting about this starting up again, because they couldn't see 15 minutes ahead - to understand what would happen there and Afghanistan as soon as we left!  We couldn't learn a lesson from Russia's involvement for over a decade in Afghanistan!  We thought that simply because we are 'Mericans....the fanatics would just realize that they didn't have a chance, would give up after we killed a few of them, roll over and we could go home and do some farming in the desert, and we could sit back and bask in our munificence at having lavished our blessing upon the area!

Very different culture in the White House then.

Blame is the enemy of improvement.  

Purple sky in your world today?

Wait, wouldn't Bush had to have blamed Bush for getting the party started?

No silly, he was a Republican!

Oh and they had the Republican Guard in Iraq?

Stirrin' up the smile, those Republicans...with their guard and all.

I think so. It's always Bush's fault. Except this of course. I just cannot get enough of this.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VX1gdpEFAzg[/youtube]

Except when Republicans, the ones who can remember that far back, were quick to blame the financial meltdown of 2008 on Clinton and Democrats from 12 years earlier. Totally bypassing the previous two terms and Republicans who protected their big money friends. No, compadre, its always Dems, Unions and the minimum wage that is to fault. Always.

WE GET IT. EVERYTHING IS BUSH'S FAULT. Can we move on now?

Obama, the Dems, and Unions should have easily overcome the evil Republicans and gotten the economy stormin' great by now.  Who is Hillary going to blame in '17?

Did not see my last post Red?

Yes.....let's!


Ironic how Faux can't, though....ever!

Yep.  Had to ask anyway.

If Hillary is anything like Bill, blame won't be a big part of the game. Even when she was SS, it was obvious she had a hard time regurgitating the blame mantras she was fed.  If she's like Bill, she likes control and power. 

You cannot remain in control and wield power if you rely on blame.  A good lesson we are witnessing from the novice.

Are you referring to the guy who is on his 2nd term as President the United States?

Oh, that won't matter to the clairvoyant

I never said that or believed it, but if it calms your nerves.....Look, you're stuck like a record. Both sides play this game for their own benefit. All of them are at fault, all of the press for not doing a better job and all of us for tolerating them.

Politics is difficult if you aren't in the game. Don't try to understand. Its just grade school playground stuff. Public grade school, of course.

Same as private school playground stuff...without the ascots and uniforms...

As designed since the 80's.  Everybody with money is doing great.

It seems to me that there was significant Democratic Party (and by association, Labor Union) influence in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate in the 80s.  You must be saying that the Democratic Party is NOT the friend of the "working person".

I think most everyone with money has been doing great a lot longer than just the '80's.

The Underhills sure seemed happy.

Fox Fantasy. 


To Democrats, low wages are the problem.  To Republicans, low wages are the solution.

I know Lacy sure was.  :o

You're right. He has no novice excuse. Obama is a failure with experience. Feel better?

Do you feel better?

I just farted and....

E.F. Hutton

Wow we're old.  :(

Didn’t E.F. Hutton go bankrupt?

Not enough people listened

I listened... they were idiots!

Did just the opposite and cleaned up!!

The Pope weighs in (according to the media)...


http://bigstory.ap.org/article/pope-oks-protecting-iraq-minorities-wants-un-ok

(http://37.media.tumblr.com/8ac0764d87228594cee500d90c423c67/tumblr_mjmch3Q2Kd1ru5h8co2_r1_500.gif)

Ok, the NYT posted this article right after the president's press conference at 12:45.
Obama, Outraged Over Beheading, Vows to Stay on Course
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/21/us/politics/james-foley-beheading-isis-video-authentic-obama.html?_r=0

The presidential travel log then reported: "POTUS, the president arrived at Vineyard Golf Club at 1:05 p.m., following statement on James Foley and ISIS.

This is the most accurate headline the NYT has posted in almost 20 years!

They changed the headline to "Obama, ‘Appalled’ by Beheading, Will Continue Airstrikes" after realizing the irony.

Don’t you know some intern or cub editor was laughing his or her arse off when they wrote the original headline?

I am very angry about this brutality. As I wrote earlier, I am looking for more than words. I am looking for obscene retribution of a magnitude that would demonstrate power in its rawest form to the world.

Not quite like this, though.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ft7kkXO98c[/youtube]

Yes.  Quite like that.  And more.

They know we 'have' the power - the whole world knows we have the power.  They also know we do not have the will to use it in what would be the only effective manner.  The only thing that will actually stop this conflict is the elimination of the enemy.  Which no civilized nation has the will to pursue - in particular, I don't believe WE currently have the will to pursue a goal of extermination again.  While they, on the other hand, are pursuing that goal to the degree they are able - killing as many as possible, as brutally as possible as object lesson.  It does not matter what response we have - be it restraint or no restraint.  They are motivated by a religious belief that glorifies death for the cause, while we don't, to that degree.  This will continue, as it has for many years.


This link shows the Israeli/Palestinian situation as template of what has happened in the area in a slightly different venue.  The political will does not exist to do what Rwanda, Uganda, Congo, etc had happen.  And for all the disparity between casualties, they are no closer to resolution.  We will in all likelihood have similar results - except we will kill many times more of them than they will of us....we see those results in Iraq death tolls to date.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/casualtiestotal.html

How's this? 

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugVorF6TayU#t=23[/youtube]

Don't need all that extreme, 'cause what we've been doing has worked so well.....

But yeah, he is right.  Him and the goat he rode in on....



Better ideas anyone?  Since we blew every other chance we had before reaching this point, I'm betting somebody in DC would love to have some help that would actually work at this point!!

Holy Cow!
He's lost the NY Daily!
Yesterday it was Ezra Kline at MSNBC, now the NY Daily.
Making things worse, David Cameron canceled his vacation and returned to London yesterday.
“U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron cut short his summer vacation to return to London and chair urgent meetings on the threat posed by ISIS in Iraq and Syria, calling the video ‘shocking and depraved.’”

(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bvh_jvSCUAAOlaT.jpg)

(http://namebrandketchup.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/barack-obama-deal-with-it-on-the-phone-meme.jpg)

It seems the president is now at odds with hid Secretary of Defense.  Obama says they are the "JV Team" and Hagel says they are 'beyond anything we've seen'
http://news.yahoo.com/hagel-islamic-state-beyond-anything-weve-seen-202140920.html

Here's a take. Not sure if its reasonable, but its a take.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aa7T0UdBOW0[/youtube]

Feel good story of the day. Kudos to the title.


http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/21/that-isis-guy-who-promised-to-raise-islamic-flag-over-the-white-house-hes-dead/

How Russia deals with terrorists.

http://articles.philly.com/1986-01-15/news/26052630_1_hostage-crisis-soviet-captives-islamic-liberation-organization

You advocating?


That is the single most effective mode of operation.

Just passing along information...

Pretty telling when even Al Qaeda won’t associate with these guys because they are too radical and dangerous for them.

I sometimes think we went just a little too far with that "kinder, gentler, machine gun hand" thing.  Sometimes it needs to be unkind, ungentle, brutal, and vicious.  This is one of those times!

The rule is simple and timeless. 

When we are attacked, the US must respond with frightening and terrible force. 

Anyone who considers attacking the US, our people, or our interests should be so fearful of doing so that the idea becomes unthinkable.

This new-age concept of "proportional response" is ridiculous because it only produces a parlay, where each side slowly increases it's actions, and creates a sustainable conflict that is long lasting and politically comfortable.

Sec. of Def Hagel seems to understand this but has been put in a very uncomfortable position. The president stated that ISIS is not Al Qaeda, and that they are just the "JV team," in an effort to downplay the need for any responsiveness on his part.  This was a very very stupid thing to say just to expedite his journey back to the golf course.  The very next day, Hagel came out and said that ISIS is like no threat we have ever encountered before, and he is correct.  By saying this Hagel realizes that he has no choice but to contradict the president in order to do his job and protect this country.

This is why Hagel takes this position:
First, Al Qaeda was only about 25K - 30K strong at its most powerful, and though well funded, they were very disorganized, and regional. They did not get along with governments, or military groups, and employed a decentralized power structure. This did not prevent them from being highly effective, and carrying out successful terrorist plots world-wide.

ISIS is documented at 80K in strength, and made up of significant organized military might from the former Iraq Republican Guard, as well as Iranian, Lebanese, and Syrian forces. They have deep government funding as well as an organized methodology of seizing money and equipment in the regions they occupy. They are highly structured with stated goals and a command hierarchy based on standard military formulation with a functioning caliphate government. They are also not confined to a single region or ethnic group.  Their membership is world-wide and embraces a diverse cultural makeup.

They have no need to cower in caves and send, cryptic notes and VHS tapes by curriers that take weeks to arrive.  They are live on Twitter, Facebook and use technology as just another weapon.  They are fearlessly posting images of US targets with very literal intent, like this tweet from August 9th.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BuoZxHsIgAE-IX2.jpg:small)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BuoZx0aIQAA_bSA.jpg:small)
@Sunna_rev
#AmessagefromISIStoUS
We are in your state
We are in your cities
We are in your streets

You are our goals anywhere

If you had the stomach to watch the video of Mr. Foley being decapitated, you noticed that the hooded man was not speaking in arabic. He was speaking english with a british accent, and directly addressing President Obama. He has in fact been identified as a British citizen. ISIS also offered a degree of symbolism by clothing Foley in an orange outfit reminiscent of those worn in Guantanamo. The significance of which is speculated to indicate that the person carrying out the act may have been a former detainee, or that they want to focus attention, or send a message to others being held in Guantanamo.

We have this whole foreign policy thing so screwed up now that unfortunately something much bigger is going to happen to make us wake up and realize who we are.  We bought a lemon on this one, but unfortunately we are going to have to drive it until the engine catches fire.

Our foreign policy has been messed up for decades. We should not have been funding and protecting these governments who were repressing their people.  We should have kept being a beacon of freedom and enlightenment (education).  I remember being in Egypt in the 90s before the first Gulf war and seeing how the people were repressed by that government and how powerful the US was to them.  I remember getting off a bus to see the pyramids and a vendor was being a little overly persistent "won't go into details" but I got angry and started yelling at him then a bunch of guys carrying machine guns came up and whisked him away. Everywhere you could see that there were a few huge companies that seemed to dominate just about everything, likely government supported.  All in all not a pretty picture but I could only imagine what things were like in other countries even less free and with even more dictatorial leaders like Iraq and Saudi Arabia, but there we were making the government rich, doing deals with them while the even good people couldn't help but look on with resentment, and the bad becoming more and more radical  and more numerous decade after decade. Regardless of whether we may have seen it as having been up to the people to make their governments change it wasn't our job,,, we were there doing deals with and helping the people that were and still are, repressing them.  It couldn't stay like that forever.  Things would have to change some day, some how. Meanwhile technology progresses giving both good and bad people more and more power to do good or ill.

Except that doesn't work, either.  Until you get to the point of extermination.  I put some links to Israel versus Palestinians....it is anywhere from about3:1 to 6:1 on deaths.  The Jews didn't stop attacking in Palestine area from about 1900 to 1947, and the Palestinians haven't stopped attacking in the area since 1947.  In spite of frightening and terrible....

So given that history, one might be tempted to pursue a policy of 10:1 or 1000:1 - step it up a notch or two.  Does anyone believe public opinion would allow that without a 'bigger' attack on us?  Or even with a bigger attack...?  Suppose we kill maybe 15 million - that might be kinda frightening and terrible - any chance of that helping anything?   We turned 80 - 90 million Native Americans into about 300,000 by 1900.  Do we have the will to repeat that?  On a half billion scale?

We seem to have cultivated a resistance to massive overkill as was used in WWII.  Tokyo fire-bomings, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, Berlin.... hundreds of thousands of civilians killed.  So, if we want to "win" this one, just eliminate all living beings in those red areas I see on the news as Isis controlled.  We could do it....set a perimeter around the area, move toward the center and kill everything that moves.   Could make it worse....probably would.

Still wouldn't "solve" the problem.  Still waiting for valid ideas.  Or even one glimmer of an idea that might actually make a positive difference.  None here so far...none on a national scale....none on a continental or global scale.  Maybe we will just have to keep on with a "holding action" until the UFO Aliens show themselves and bail us out.....or eat us!

This says it all I guess.

https://twitter.com/BecketAdams/status/502674824347803648/photo/1

100% agreement with that.
The issue is that we are now in a position (that I would never deny was our own making) where we must take action to protect our own interests and our own people.  We can't just treat this a politics and sound bytes for fundraisers. We have to stop telegraphing our response, and our weakness.  A handful of highly publicized air strikes will not serve as a deterrent for an international force of 80,000.  All that serves to do is poke them with a stick.  They need to learn that to attack us is to face annihilation.

Mind if we play through?
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvlP19AIUAAdwMq.jpg)

That's brutal. How does this one measure up?

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/t1.0-9/10574315_10153271935994657_9000639328180642723_n.jpg)

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/t1.0-9/1394252_762283873817854_593056906634072448_n.jpg)

Pres. spox calls the beheading of Foley a "terrorist attack". Take a look at this take.

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/22/white-house-murder-of-james-foley-was-a-terrorist-attack-on-the-united-states/

Just thinking, but could Obama be planning something HUGE, masking his surprise by playing golf?

Here is an interesting article.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/is-islamic-state-the-best-possible-enemy/article20171956/

Except for one man leading the crusade. How is this any different from Nazi Germany?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2736764/Marched-deaths-Sickening-ISIS-slaughter-continues-250-soldiers-captured-Syrian-airbase-stripped-led-desert-mass-execution.html

Well, so much for that thought. Apparently we have no strategy. So much for my Spock-ian expectation.

He checked-out after the last election. Probably best that he say away from the White House and spend as much time as possible fundraising and vacationing.  Only 13 more weeks until he heads back to HI for his big vacation!

“Here, take care of this foreign policy sh!t, I’ve got some really important golf outings and fund raisers to attend.  For the sake of my golf game I just can’t have these distractions, Valerie.”

The lib media is even starting to beat on him about his absentee style.

In the same breath, they point out the amount of time Bush spent away from the Oval.

Meanwhile, NPR points out the reason the US presidents get no respect internationally is largely due to the lack of respect they received domestically.

This included Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush.

At this point he is simply serving as a walking campaign ad for his previous opponents, because all of the things they warned about have either come to be or are developing exactly as they predicted.

It’s 3 a.m., and your children are safe and asleep, But there’s a phone in the White House, and it’s ringing. Something is happening in the world.

And today, this according to Judicial Watch:
Islamic terrorist groups are operating in the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez and planning to attack the United States with car bombs or other vehicle born improvised explosive devices (VBIED). High-level federal law enforcement, intelligence and other sources have confirmed to Judicial Watch that a warning bulletin for an imminent terrorist attack on the border has been issued.  Agents across a number of Homeland Security, Justice and Defense agencies have all been placed on alert and instructed to aggressively work all possible leads and sources concerning this imminent terrorist threat.

Specifically, Judicial Watch sources reveal that the militant group Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) is confirmed to now be operating in Juarez, a famously crime-infested narcotics hotbed situated across from El Paso, Texas. Violent crimes are so rampant in Juarez that the U.S. State Department has issued a number of travel warnings for anyone planning to go there. The last one was issued just a few days ago.

Intelligence officials have picked up radio talk and chatter indicating that the terrorist groups are going to “carry out an attack on the border,” according to one JW source.  “It’s coming very soon,” according to this high-level source, who clearly identified the groups planning the plots as “ISIS and Al Qaeda.” An attack is so imminent that the commanding general at Ft. Bliss, the U.S. Army post in El Paso, is being briefed, another source confirms. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not respond to multiple inquiries from Judicial Watch, both telephonic and in writing, about this information.

If true, this would make Dick Cheney's Darth Vader's 2008 prediction about Obama come to pass as well, and make the White House look pretty foolish for giggling at Rick Perry's warnings.
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5560/15075143635_42c11a0a4f_z.jpg)

“Where is this exactly happening?"

"Juarez is just a chip shot or five iron shot from ElPaso, depending on how the ball is lying, Mr. President.”

“Oh, well can you arrange an 8am tee time for me?"

Apparently David Cameron is going to step in and fill the void:
"The UK Threat Level from international terrorism has been raised to Severe. We will respond calmly and purposefully, but without compromise. On Monday, I will speak in the House on the measures we're taking to defeat extremism, protect our way of life and keep all our people safe."

Meanwhile back at the White House:
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5570/15075608382_38179c2c7b_b.jpg)

The ODS is strong within this thread.  I'm wondering how long #beigeghazi will take to be mentioned on here by the Holy Trinity of the ODS.

(https://armedlaughing.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/misdirection.jpg)

It's like some unholy Borg entity linked by Faux News, (R) talking points, and the World Nut Daily.

I agree. Because I was told ISIS/ISIL are the Jay Vee team. I mean, it's not like the Obama folks said the Foley beheading was a "terrorist attack", or that Obama has no strategy to deal with them. Nothing to see here.  ::)

Not really.  I’ve been pretty adept at identifying slackers since middle school.

Just when Obama couldn't say anything dumber...



Yeah, it's the nightly news' fault. I guess Bush was not available for blaming.

Hell, I didn't obsess this much over Bush in 8 years than these guys are doing in this thread, which isn't nearly as old.  Man-crush maybe?  Crushin' on that beige summer suit?

You'd think he was beheading kittens at this rate.

Warning: NSFW audio.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkQxHlr2fXM[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ndJNXCkNxg[/youtube]

Are you sure?
 
Maybe it was someone else but there was a lot of obsessing about Bush.

Oh you are going to get it now. Just you wait...

Uh, sure there was.  But it wasn't me.  And surely not to this tune.

Look dude, Obama ate a litter of my kittens then washed them down with a keg of my fine home-brewed Kolsch.  I got reasons to be hatin’.

No problem.  I am ready for the BS responses from the TNF Posters that i have no respect for.

Well, what the hell is wrong with that?  You know he likes beer!

Not all beers are created equally.

Wow. You're going to get it twice as bad now. Just you wait until the other wonder twin hears about this!

You need to check your short to mid term memory.

I'm surprised "he" hasn't already chimed in. 

Since I don't respect their opinion, it doesn't really matter.

Want some Ghost Peppers?  I have a few.

I think I should have written "for whom I have no respect".  I need to check with my sister (PhD credentials)
I'm just an Engineer, you all will have to cut me some slack.

Ann Coulter!!!  Exactly!!

It's uncanny.

You need to be thinkin' about why you gave Prez Obama access to your Kolsch.   I don't care about the kittens.  ;D

What's the matter with you??  Grilled kitten is good, too!!

Cite a reference then.  Gimme a link to a post where I ramble on for 15 pages about Bush going to the Crawford Ranch for 400 days of his term or where I ramble on about the Iraq invasion..oh wait..I didn't.

Nice try.  You might want to reboot your engineer brain.

Oh, and that 'respect' thing.  Meh.  It's overrated.  Especially with guys like you and Guido who seem to think that the only opinion that matters is your own.

Enjoy your weekend.

Not all posts are on topic, this is Tulsa Now Forum after all.

Guido        53
Heiron       38
Gaspar      28
Conan        25
Townie      16
Red Arrow  13
Aqua Man   11
Hoss          11
Swake        10
+ a few others

Just looks like the usual players to me.

Phooey. I was hoping my numbers would be higher. I suppose I'll just have to become more opinionated rather than merely right all the time.

Me too.   ;D

And how did you get these numbers?  I don't believe them - we all....everyone on that list... must be much higher than that!

Not even a question - it's assumed that an engineer will do that.

For the love of Gawd! just shut up and get naked already. That's why guys watch her videos anyway. It's definitely not the topics or her voice.

Upon further review, she is more like Megyn Kelly....

ISIS just beheaded the second journalist.
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bwi7MEAIQAAATCP.jpg)

^^^Somebody check the president's golf and fundraising schedule.

Well, this is interesting. I wonder if they will be welcomed by the media as that @ssclown Cindy Sheehan.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdinjWefshg[/youtube]

Jen Psaki at the State Department is on it!
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bwi_iRHCAAAeCYG.jpg)

As for the president's schedule today, he is in the air on the way to Estonia, home to one of the top 100 courses in the world, according to Golf World Magazine.

Psaki gave a press conference a little while ago and made a fool of herself. She was combative to reporters and provided ZERO information on anything.  Not really sure why she called the press conference at all.  Quote of the day:

"Our actions speak to our commitment to take on the threat of ISIL."
--Jen Psaki

Somewhere a sorority is missing their rush director.

OK that picture has to be Photoshopped or a joke. No way would anyone be standing there smiling and giving the ol thumbs up. Duh ain't I cute look.
Anyone making light of another human being killed in this manner has no soul. It's absolutely appalling.  >:(

. . .and I give you your Deputy Secretary of State.
You're in good hands.  Sleep tight.

http://amanpour.blogs.cnn.com/2014/09/02/isis-iraq-syria-brett-mcgurk-steven-sotloff/

I was waiting to see McGuirk say: "Over in The Iraq..."

It's like everyone was in a hurry to go on TV today but completely unprepared to answer any questions.  Perhaps the president was the smartest of the bunch by just saying "&uck it!" and jumping on AF1 without making any statement.  At this point there is really nothing he can say.  Cameron and other world leaders have already voiced their condemnation, and showing up late for the party really serves no purpose, especially since there is obviously no plan in place.

ISIS has already announced the next victim (a Brittish reporter).  It would probably be safe to expect some escalation as we near 9/11.  Too bad all of this terrorism stuff falls during vacation season.

Meanwhile in Nantucket.
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BwjjgTLIYAEBhQi.jpg)

Okay. Can anyone that supports Obama give us any reason to be hopeful that our country will do something substantive to respond to two of our countrymen having been beheaded now?

That's what we get when our government is made up of un-serious campaign people. WHERE ARE THE DAMNED ADULTS IN THE ROOM?

“Obama" and “substantive” in the same sentence?  Really?

Generally I've decided to stay off any posts in the "National & International Politics" section because (a) they are pointless and are simply a place to biotch about Obama, or Bush, or whatever..., and (b) I still don't see why "Tulsa Now" even has this section in their forum as it doesn't seem to fit the greater site objective.

But hey, I have an honest and I hope not-to-provocative question.   What does "something substantive" mean in this case?  I assume you refer to military action, but I cannot see the efficacy of that path at this time against ISIL (or ISIS, or "the Islamic State", or whatever...).

And that's fine about your view about a military action, but can you make any suggestions?

You want my suggestions?   I didn't make the initial comment requesting somebody do "something substantive", and was simply asking (honestly) for clarification from you on what you think that might be.  If you in fact are advocating military action, I'd ask what you think it might be and what you think it might accomplish.  I agree it would be very emotionally gratifying to smack somebody hard, after all we've got plenty of hardware laying around, but to what end?  Honest question, as I don't see the end-game in that route, at least at this time.

No, you said you "cannot see the efficacy of that [military action] path at this time against ISIL." If you got nothing else, that's fine.

So to clarify, by "something substantive" you do mean military action?  You never clarified that.  Is that in-fact what you are advocating? 

I've got opinions, for what they are worth, and will gladly opine, but again you first advocated a position.  I was, and am, not clear on what you are advocating.   What is it that you are suggesting is a good course of action, and why.  I'm just curious.  I'll give you mine if it's still of interest, but I am simply asked for clarification on your initial suggested course of action.   Trying not to be antagonistic, just asking for something more concrete than "substantive action".

Sorry if you thought I was advocating something specific. I have already made clear how I think these monsters need to be taken care of, and it involves something just short of this:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ft7kkXO98c[/youtube]

Make them afraid of what goes "bump in the night".

Fair enough.  And I definitely get the emotion.   The analogy (with the Nazis) really doesn't hold, though.  We were part of a declared war against a specific country,  with a large contingent of allied forces, etc.  We stayed out of that war until we were actually attacked on US soil by Japan.  And we had a very clear end-game in mind for our engagement in WWII in Europe:  Defeat Nazi Germany at all costs.   Because the Germans were a people and a country, with a defined leadership to represent them, this was a viable goal.  Not sure how that applies to ISIL and the other radical Islamic factions.

So I said I'd offer my opinion, for what it's worth. (and admittedly it's worth very little on this topic)

We wait.  We wait just like we did in WWII.  We wait and don't react to journalists getting murdered. We wait until the region is being overrun, and even our former foes are afraid of ISIL and their ilk.  We wait and take no military action unless/until all the affected parties over there are so desperate that they practically beg for our help.   That will mean sitting by while a lot of bad things happen, and a lot of people die, and the enemy consolidates power.   And then we do what we did in WWII.  We align with our (new) allies, and we destroy this newly consolidated power so definitively that they no longer metastasize somewhere else, and our new allies help us maintain the new power structure in our stead when it is over.    Just like WWII.

But unless and until it gets that bad, we wait.  We gather intel and we wait.  We give that intel and other non-military support to our friends over there, and we wait.  We start back-door talks with those countries that aren't our friends, but also fear ISIL, and we wait.  And we get ready for when it comes.  Because I think you are right, it will eventually come.  It's just a matter of when, and how strategic we are in managing our engagement.

It’s an interesting strategy, Rebound and I appreciate your input.  With all due respect, my problem with this approach as it sends the message to potential recruits that they can continue with no consequences.  I simply wince when I hear: "Let it get overrun” At least if you go in and carpet bomb the crap out of their units, it’s going to make recruiting a tougher sell and you keep the growth slow and maybe the ranks even shrink.  As well, the longer we dither, the more assets they capture, many assets you and I have paid for.  More lives perish, lives our American soldiers fought and died for.

The other problem is in the Middle East, today’s allies are tomorrow’s enemies.  We need to quit arming varying splinter factions there, you’d think we would have learned this 30 some years ago.

I’m as war weary as anyone else who has watched this nightmare unfold for 13 years.  I’d prefer it not require military engagement, but that appears to be the only remedy with these radicals.

rebound is my new favorite poster on TulsaNow.

Sorry Townsend. You had a good run.

Hey rebound, Inglorious Basterds was just a movie dude. Aldo Raine did not blow up the Nazis in a movie theater, and Donowitz (with Ulmer's help) did not machine gun Hitler in the face. The point I was making was make the terrorists fear America, make them afraid to sleep at night. That's my view. But if you want to just sit back and watch Americans getting beheaded until Europe gets frustrated enough, I get you. I disagree vehemently, but I get you.

And your point also presupposes the terrorism problem is in Iraq. It's in Somalia, Syria, Nigeria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and throughout the world. I would like to know where it can consolidated so we can knock it all out as a matter of geographic convenience.

Pretty bright guy. I like him too.

Thanks,  I appreciate the reply  and I get where you are coming from.   And like I said,  my opinion isn't worth much and might be wrong.  I am 100 with you on the "quit arming various splinter factions" aspect, as no doubt this has lead to where we are to a great degree.   But just as today's allies may be tomorrow's enemies, it may be possible for today's enemies to become allies, or at least "the enemy of the enemy", which could be a starting point.  And I also am resigned to the fact that force will be required (by someone, and eventually...) as part of the final solution.   I just think it might be better in the long run for the US to allow for the locals over there to see us, and our presence in the region, in a somewhat better light.

Thanks Guido, and all, for a "not quite as heated" discussion.   It's a tough topic, no doubt, and emotions run high when Americans are in harms way. 

I realize it was movie, but the vehicle used to make the point was specific to Nazi Germany, and the point of reference in that scene is imbued with all the background mythos that all WWII-based movies utilize as part of the plot device.  So while I understood the point, I just thought it important to note that the greater analogy wasn't as clean as in the movie. 

You bring up a good point related to the world-wide spread of terrorism.  But this, to me, illustrates my point.  I do not think the US can, both for practical and political reasons, assume the role of world-wide-terrorist-chaser.  At least not alone.  We need for not just the Europeans, but all countries (even those that would not currently support or assist US actions) to publicly acknowledge their alliance with (or at a minimum, their alignment with) the US in fighting this systemic threat.   I sincerely do not think we can "win" this ourselves, and it will unfortunately be a while before the rest of the world is forced to the same level of awareness as the US.   As I said in an earlier post, I am resigned to the need for eventual military action.   But I think it will have to get a lot worse for the greater world community before we will see the required reactions from others.  As hard as it will be, we should wait until then to aggressively engage.

The more I think about it, the more I am liking the idea of maybe Donowitz, and the actor portraying that character, Eli Roth, should assume control of our foreign policy decisions as to terrorism.

(https://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1398/52/1398522971162.png)

(http://cdn.screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/eli-roth-hostel.jpg)

No one would sleep wondering if that guy was coming around.  :o

But on a serious note, I am not advocating world wide cop. I am looking out for what is in our country's best interest. If that means we have to knock down the doors of 8-10 countries to flush out and exterminate terrorist cells--so be it. We can never tolerate our countrymen to be brutally murdered and act passive, or publicly proclaim having "no strategy", or other bullcrap coming out of this administration. I am also entirely against a policy of "let's wait until the problem becomes the absolute worst, then act".  How many have to die, or how many family's get to watch their children get their heads chopped off, or how many mass graves discovered, or women kidnapped, or women raped, or children slaughtered, and on and on before we as a humanitarian nation do something? We did that in Rwanda, and how did that turn out for the tutsis? And what about other genocides in the world, including what ISIL is doing to Christians and Kurds RIGHT NOW. Even the Pope has weighed in favoring action.

The psychology is simple. 

ISIS is not new. They have been around since the 70s. They want power.  They seek to unify many governments and control many people under a theocracy.  They are barbaric and primitive but have been fueled, funded, and well armed by the failures and insecurities of the United States. They are able to achieve and sustain power through force and fear.  They have swollen in the vacuum of leadership and law that we chose to leave to them with.

They did exactly what reasonable people knew (and warned us) they would do.  They listened to the politicians tell them "we're leaving."  They waited until we left, and they took what we left them.

Our president has become too politically entangled to protect or defend us without contradiction, and far to narcissistic to admit failure and take corrective action. He wants to believe that barbaric and primitive actions can be countered with diplomacy, but he has never understood diplomacy, or negotiation from a position of power.  He is skilled only at pointing out the faults of others in comparison to himself, and offering condolence, and gesture.  ISIS is intimately aware of his weakness, and using it to their advantage by painting a picture of the United States as an impotent (self absorbed) enemy without teeth or claw.

As in the past we will hear the word COALITION over and over again, in hopes that the issue of ISIS will fade away.  As things continue to happen, others will be blamed. All will be beyond our control because we don't want to be in control.

There is no doubt that if we allow this evil to swell, it will be at our door soon, if it is not already.  It is sad that our sons and daughters will have to fight this, but there is no doubt that it is our fault and failure to act that allowed it.

Boy.  Hate to say "I told ya so."  But this just happened.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWnAwhC_kzo#t=35[/youtube]

Really painful to watch him now.

Has anyone put any credibility to the reports that ISIS is already operating in Juarez, Mexico?  This seems to be a popular email and social media topic in the last couple of weeks.  Not sure what to put into it, if it’s simply people making anything up to claim it’s not just teen aged Guatemalans as a reason to close the leaky southern border.

A simple Google search on it only brings up moon bat blogs and some reports from TV stations who say “purported” and credit government watchdog, Judicial Watch with the report. 

I think if this was actually happening we would be seeing a rather large and unmistakable response by Homeland Security.  I can't imagine the consequences of failure to prepare if the threat is real.

One would think.

Maybe Obama skimmed over that part on his briefing prior to taking off for another round of golf?  :o

I tried to resist posting this.  Really.  I did.

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/10527692_10152235270407680_2022830245910804372_n.jpg?oh=41d18c4f52dafab8f39c663311defd57&oe=54710EB1&__gda__=1416536924_b39d4a09f603b0a9fd85e64b17940d58)

Piers (I got fired) Morgan is urging Briton to take on ISIS. 
History is obviously hard for him.

"Britain didn't win 2 World Wars by sitting around watching murderous thugs behead our citizens or those of our allies."
http://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/507063367077732353

Besides, David Cameron has been very vocal and already revoked the passports of upwards of 3,000 British citizens suspected of working with ISIS (something we have yet to do to any of the Americans we know to be fighting with them).

I wonder if Piers is in favor of using guns to take on ISIS?

I doubt he’s thought it through yet. 

We could use some more Rebound posts in politics.

(http://www.tpnn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Al-Franken.jpg)
Al Frankin has now written a strongly worded letter to AG Holder concerning the President's lack of strategy.  What the hell does he think Holder is going to do?

“I was troubled by the President’s recent suggestion that the Administration has not yet developed a comprehensive strategy to address the growing threat of ISIL’s activities in Syria,” Franken wrote to Holder. “One American who went to high school in Minnesota has been confirmed to have been killed in Syria while fighting with ISIL, and others have traveled there to fight with ISIL as well. We must act diligently and responsibly to prevent Americans from taking up arms with ISIL, or from reentering if they do.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/al-franken-obama-isil-strategy-110557.html#ixzz3CH4Nij5w

. . .and now Joe Biden gives the only appropriate response so far from the administration.
(http://buzzpocom.c.presscdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Fightin-Joe-Biden.jpg)
“When people harm Americans we don’t retreat, and we don’t forget,” he said. “They should know, we will follow them to the gates of hell until they are brought to justice, because hell is where they will reside! Hell is where they will reside!”

Perhaps he is gearing up to exercise Section 4 of the 25th amendment?

Get more no-knock search warrants from the World Court, I mean, after we get a coalition of attorneys general together and on the same page. Franken is facing a potential tough reelection, so he wants to appear tough. He also wants to also treat the televising of chopping off of American heads as a criminal matter.

I think he's good enough, and smart enough to win, and dogonit, people like him!

Does anyone really take "Stuart Smalley" seriously? But then again. Doggonit! people like him.

He still polls really strong, so apparently so.

Real quick question. Since ISIS has come around. Has the Taliban went out of business?

Talaban is regional (Afghanistan).  Taliban is more of a tribal islamic organization compared to ISIS which is more like a global corporation.  The Taliban are fundamentalists who believe in Shira law, but are not nearly as extremist or consumed with domination thorough creation of the caliphate as ISIS is.

Basically the Taliban is a Geo Metro, and ISIS is a much larger vehicle.
(http://carspics-db.com/data_images/gallery/02/geo-metro/geo-metro-05.jpg)(http://www.heavyequipmentforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1867&stc=1&d=1156532446)

You should probably look elsewhere for reliable information on Isis v Taliban

Oh. There you are.

Always around. 

Our national/international politics section is a mess.  It's not the best place to get reliable information.

I'm sure you're well aware, little car v big car guy.

ISIS really isn't that big....probably less than 10,000 total - and I suspect that is high.  They are an ongoing evolution of radical Islamists...like al Qaeda, etc.  More of the same - we are not looking at a 'whole new organization' - this is the ongoing of what we have been fighting for a long, long time.  Radicals from Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, especially Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the US and UK.  So, it is really pretty silly to try to 'parse' this into something that shouldn't have a response until they do something - they have been doing something.

Appropriate response - and I just bet that Obama doesn't have the co-jones to do it;

Mobilize the entire US military in the gulf/middle east.  Use every satellite, ground, drone, resource available to get the best location data possible on these forces across Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and anywhere else they are to be found.  Get everybody ready to fire whatever missile, JDAM, drone, cruise missile, artillery - anything and everything it takes.

Start at 8:45 am this coming Thursday.  Target each and every person involved in ISIS, al Qaeda, and whatever little bunch of stuff is in Pakistan in their northwest sector, be it a siege around a mountain, a city, or just a convoy of our stolen equipment running around in the desert.  Kill everything.  Spend any and all time required to destroy them.  Follow them, track them, let none get away.  We destroyed about 150,000 Iraqi soldiers in Desert Storm in 100 hours.  Surely we can kill a few thousand in a few weeks.  If not, why not??

And tell Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria if they don't get on board and show some real interest in helping any way they can, they might just be next.  It is WAY past time for all these so-called moderate Muslims who "don't believe" in what the radicals are doing to make a stand - either with the compassion and human decency as they claim, or not!

Rather bad idea to minimize a threat for the sake of politics.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/11/isis-iraq-numbers_n_5659239.html
http://rt.com/news/183048-isis-grow-expand-jihadist/
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/08/islamic-state-50000-fighters-syria-2014819184258421392.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amb-marc-ginsberg/a-field-guide-to-the-isla_b_5733062.html

Your JV team is ready for the pros.

Should BOOKMARK this in case it becomes the dumbest post ever. 

I wish it was true though. :(

My approach makes a sweeping statement of intent, resolution, and demonstrates capabilities.  I am NOT saying I think this is what will happen - I will be beyond stunned if even a fraction of that response occurred.  What I think is that type of response is needed RIGHT NOW to make some points in this specific event that will have some political ripples along some other areas of activity in the world.  

And as always, the board awaits comments/ideas/thoughts - rebound had some well thought out reasoning (I don't agree with some of it mostly because of the disassociation of ISIS from the previous radical groups - they are all ongoing derivatives of the same movement) - but there are a lot of "sound of crickets" from the "other" side.

guido advances an idea for the first time in a long, long time - the "kill the Nazi's" approach - then quickly tries to back-peddle away from it.  Take a stand, guy, and stick with it!!  

In general, if one is going to deploy and use the US military, it should NOT be as cop.  It should be as an instrument of mass annihilation/destruction of whomever it is deployed against to the point where there are no further personnel/resources/territory available to continue in any fashion.  Otherwise, they should not be mobilized.  They should be held at the ready for when that action is required.  Another "sense and knowledge of history" moment - we have chosen to become more "gentile" in our warfare!  That is a crock of carp - war is ugly, nasty, disgusting stuff that is appalling and abhorrent - there is no glory to it (refer to George Patton's comments about dying for one's country).  One should make use of it as a last resort, but use it to maximum effect when it becomes necessary!


And Thursday - think about it - the time/date are notable.

CNN just reported that the president now has a strategy for ISIS and will give a "Major Speech" about it on Wednesday.

(http://moots.com/wp-content/uploads/frageelay.png)

Should be good.

Last week he vowed to take action on immigration reform as soon as he got back from his Stonehenge mini-vacation.  Over the weekend he vowed to delay that until after the elections.  Seems like he always wants to delay things until after the elections.  6 years of delaying things until after elections.

If your policies are so good, why do you feel they will have a negative effect on the people you are supposed to serve?
(http://www.newsrealblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/cartermissmeyet.jpg)

I wouldn't bet on it.  He doesn't have stones enough to stand up to Bay-Ner, let alone ISIS!

But the timing is interesting, don't you think??  Wednesday....


As for immigration - well that bill has been passed and sitting on the the House Clown's table for well over a year - with no action whatsoever!  No counter proposals, counter bills, no nothing.  Like around here so many times - sound of crickets!  What is Boner waiting for if not the "next election"?

Sure he does.  “Executive Order"

You get your news from odd places.
The house actually has several such bills, but none will ever get passed by the Senate.
H.R. 4279
H.R. 3732
H.R. 5079
H.R. 5400
H.R. 5053
H.R. 4962
H.R. 5160
H.R. 4620
H.R. 5114
H.R. 4303
H.R. 5118
H.R. 5105
H.R. 4936
H.R. 5163
H.R. 4949

One was passed by the Senate and is awaiting a House vote now, but when and if it goes back to the Senate, it will sit until after the midterms.
S. 744

The Democrat party cannot afford any action on immigration before the election.  That is why there is such a mad rush of immigration bills in the House.  Unfortunatly there is very little room on Harry Reid's desk to put anything. After the election I assume there will be action, but it will only be in gesture. Nothing real that could harm Dems in 2016, and nothing the president will introduce.  He likes to keep this at arms-length.  Immigration reform is napalm.  No matter what he does, it will stick to him and burn.

Unless. . .something happens that forces the president's hand.  I pray that is not the case.

He has a pen and a phone, but is not sure what to do with either.
(http://api.ning.com/files/m5DCNqwNmKb4yWzFxs5APxBcPYkuXL0wmAmtARULhL3p5bKymwMyANKmULnwkJ5qMgTILUrJ5XQ6nrkjTp6jgvNMJxjqPZRf/ItsapenANDaphone.jpg?width=720&height=576)

Oh, yeah...those bills are certainly addressing the topic head on and in a straightforward manner!!   (LOL!!  I crack myself up sometimes....)  But let's look at some of these, shall we??


HR4279
Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 with respect to the establishment in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) (formerly the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement).

HR3232
To amend the Pay Our Military Act to ensure that all civilian and contractor employees of the Department of Defense and the Coast Guard and all members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces are paid in the event of a Government shutdown.

Really??  Could you at least make it LOOK like it has something to do with immigration?  Oh, I guess not…that would counter the intent of dissemination and distraction, wouldn’t it?


HR 5079
Amends the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 to declare that any unaccompanied alien child who has not been a victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons or does not have a credible fear of persecution on returning to his or her country of nationality or of last habitual residence shall be: (1) placed in removal proceedings, (2) eligible for voluntary departure at no cost to the child, and (3) provided with access to counsel. (Currently such expedited removal requirements apply only to unaccompanied children from countries that are contiguous to the United States.)

Oh…you mean undo what they did wrong in the first place back in 2008….


HR 5400
To provide for State enforcement of border security, and for other purposes.


The “Let’s all get on board and blame Obama, because the Republican’s gave amnesty to millions and refused to do anything effective about immigration” bill.


HR 5053
Expedited Family Reunification Act of 2014 - Amends the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 to provide that any unaccompanied alien child (UAC) who has not been a victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons or does not have a credible fear of persecution on returning to his or her country of nationality or of last habitual residence shall be: (1) placed in removal proceedings, (2) eligible for voluntary departure at no cost to the child, and (3) provided with access to counsel. (Currently such expedited removal requirements apply to unaccompanied children from countries that are contiguous to the United States.)

Ok, all us fellow Republicans – let’s repeat ourselves, just like in HR 5079!


HR 4962

https://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/4962

Read the summary yourselves….and oh, by the way, since a fence/wall has always throughout history been shown to be the most effective device at keeping people out, let’s build one!!!


HR 5160
Prohibits any federal agency or instrumentality from using federal funding or resources to: (1) consider or adjudicate any new or previously denied application of any alien requesting consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals, as authorized by Executive memorandum on August 15, 2012; or (2) authorize any alien to work in the United States who was not lawfully admitted into the United States and who is not in lawful status in the United States on the date of enactment of this Act.


Stupid.  Very, very, stupid!  Not to mention inadequate, but hey, they get to say they are “doing something”….


HR 4620

https://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/4620

Again, read the summary at the link.  Over half way through the list and still no meaningful anything related to fixing the immigration “problem”.  So the Republicans actually realize that they really don’t want to do anything meaningful, since it would be cutting off their nose to spite their face.  The cost increases for their good buddies in corporate agriculture would get them voted out very quickly!



As opposed to S 744, which addresses the topic of actual immigration reform...cursory scan shows no outright amnesty, unlike the previous two amnesties provided by Republicans.  And does indeed contain many of the things the Republicans are making mouthing noises about - check out the fencing section.  Which is still stupid.  So, much like the idea of Affordable Care Act, when Romney did it, it was a wonderful solution.  When Obama and the Democrats agreed, well - suddenly not so much!

Text for S 744 for anyone who is interested in facts versus jingoism;

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c113:3:./temp/~c113Xttaeb::

Colorado democrat channeling beheaded Americans Sotloff and Foley, and naturally his supporters applaud.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrcLYL5_ZHg[/youtube]

I expect a thorough Bush blaming, followed by a late evening golf game...

Just re-read both of these, and actually I don't think what I advocated was all that different from what you are suggesting, except with regard to urgency and alliances.   A couple of discussion points:

"In general, if one is going to deploy and use the US military, it should NOT be as cop.  It should be as an instrument of mass annihilation/destruction of whomever it is deployed against to the point where there are no further personnel/resources/territory available to continue in any fashion.  Otherwise, they should not be mobilized."

That is almost exactly what I said.  If/when we decide to go, we go all-in.  This idea of small ops all over the world has proven in the past to by ill-advised.

"And tell Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria if they don't get on board and show some real interest in helping any way they can, they might just be next.  It is WAY past time for all these so-called moderate Muslims who "don't believe" in what the radicals are doing to make a stand - either with the compassion and human decency as they claim, or not!"

This, I think is the crux of the issue.  The implication in your position is that the US will go in, regardless of whether we are supported and aligned with these moderate Muslim nations and groups.  Here we are at polar ends.  The US, perhaps rightly perhaps not, perceives ISIL as an almost immediate threat.  The local nations are not yet to our level of alarm, but will almost certainly get there.  I expect the even Iran is privately very concerned.  Again,  I am virtually certain that the need for force is, unfortunately, coming.  But we (IMHO) should wait for now.  Wait for the locals to finally get to where we are, band together against ISIL, and ask for our help.  Then we can unleash our forces  in support of this new coalition.  I worry though that the US does not have the discipline for this sort of long-term thinking, as we have been so reactionary in the last few decades that those lessons of the past have been forgotten.

^^^^If by unfortunate you mean that the use of force has come this point, then I am okay with your point. If, however, you are naturally opposed to military force, then I wholly disagree.

That said, I am tired of waiting this out. We know what ISIL brutally murdered, in as public of a way as can be, two Americans. We known they are spreading like a disease in Iraq and recruiting foreign fighters right now. We know that Muslim extremists have a history of attacking the U.S. homeland (9/11, 1993 WTC) and our interests abroad (U.S.S. Cole, Khobar Towers, embassies, and on and on. Waiting around has proven to be borderline fatalistic and wrongheaded. We need to go all in, and with this in mind:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-K8qi_AoXI[/youtube]

Not sure why I find this funny (it's a poll, so, you know), but I do.

https://today.yougov.com/news/2014/09/04/air-and-drone-strikes/

I'm on a plane right now (technology is cool...) and theoretically working, so didn't watch the video this time.  I'll catch it later tonight in the hotel.

To clarify my position on force.  I am a realist.  While my preference (and I like to think the preference of most people, but I could be naive in that position) is for everybody to get along, I fully appreciate the world doesn't work that way.  I am for a robust military. I simply think it is sometimes required, rather than preferred, to go to war.

And again, I certainly appreciate and understand the emotion and visceral "need" for a response.  But we (and this is simply an opinion) should be more logical than that.  It is not a show of weakness to wait, nor is it uncertainty.  Rather it is a matter of allowing the situation to manifest itself in a manner that best supports the long-term benefit of the US.   

Regarding the examples cited, again I understand the emotion.  However, I would suggest that even the  most egregious of these (the 9/11 attacks), did nothing to actually "damage" the US as a nation.  Instead (and particularly with regard to 9/11) they provided a rallying cry for decisive action, very similar to Pearl Harbor in WWII.   The death of two journalists that of their own volition went "into harms way", again while vile and very visible, does not rise to this level of impetus to action. 

By waiting, would we expect another direct attack on US interests or US soil?  Maybe,  perhaps even probably.  And while that will be terrible on a personal level of those involved, it will (almost certainly) not be unduly detrimental to US interests as a whole, and will provide a building block for escalated engagement from that point on.   Certainly this is not a "pleasant" strategy.  However, it is one that will galvanize both the US populace as well as provide the rest of the world with logical and reasoned opportunity to align with the US as we engage at a very fundamental level.  I sincerely hope it does not come to that, but if so this is the most practical go-forward direction with the most logical long-term upside for the US.

Good discussion.    And I really don't think there is a perfect solution here.

I guess I wasn't as clear as I wanted to be...first, I agree with most of what you said - the big difference going to the point of origin of ISIS versus previous radical groups we have encountered.  And maybe I got your comment wrong, but it seemed like you were saying this was a 'new' group, leading to the need for patience and waiting for them to make the first move.  My disagreement is that I don't believe it is a new group.

As for us going all in, I guess I wasn't clear enough about that either - I think that is what is needed, and I think the symbolism of what I am advocating for Thursday is the preferred sequence of events.  I have essentially NO expectation that it will happen any time soon if at all.  I don't think it will ever happen with this regime.  I am not even sure our previous regimes would have done it either (Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush).  Every one of them has been more concerned about what wins the next election than what is the right thing to do.

We lost 2,977 on 9/11.  Just over 2,500 at Pearl Harbor.  We were electrified by both as a nation - but the Pearl Harbor had a more "participative" effect on the country - essentially everyone was involved for 4 years!   We got full "audience participation" over 9/11 for maybe a year or so (?? anyone want to make a case on that, I am open to suggestions), then we went back to yearly acknowledgements and occasional attention when a news article highlighted an event, or return of bodies (even Viet Nam kept your attention with the published lists of KIA/MIA/wounded in the Tulsa World on essentially a daily basis - I watched that closely...had friends end up on those lists).  WWII everyone had "skin in the game".  9/11 - we all went shopping at the mall as the big support of the war effort.  Just one of the unintended consequences of a volunteer military versus a draft system.

Everyone was pretty much behind Iraq and Afghanistan until the ’04 election.  Democrats decided they could gain momentum with anti-war rhetoric and candidates flat out denying they supported the WOT.  Power grab, plain and simple.  Many people who marginally follow politics were taken in with memes like: “Bush lied, thousands died”.

The main mistake the Bush admin made was not a big enough push-back over the “missing WMD”, “war for oil”, and “Baby Bush finishing daddy’s war” bull crap.

I still say if that had been an in and out one year mission, leaving a security detail behind to keep the lid on groups like ISIS, Bush would have looked brilliant.  Instead, we took on two fronts at once with too many scattered insurgencies to keep up with.  I can play “If I were Bush” as well as anyone: If it were me, I would have tightened the noose on Hussein or simply arranged a good old fashioned coup like Bush Sr. used to arrange.

As far as body counts, that was published daily in the Whirled when Bush was in office.  Might have even been done for a few months after Obama assumed the hot seat.  I don’t recall seeing any such thing in five years even though deaths in Afghanistan increased after 2009.  I’m not saying the increase in casualties had anything to do with Obama, just that there was not the constant reminder of the toll. 

If all you are capable of farting out is your usual screed on Baby Bush, don’t waste your time, I won’t read it.  Post something intelligent like the post I replied to and you have all my respect.

Everyone was behind Afghanistan.  Most still are - it was the real war...not contrived BS.  By the Bush regime - Bush lied.  Thousands died. 

What Baby Bush actually said was;  That man tried to kill my daddy....
So, yeah, it was trying to finish Daddy's war.  Except that Daddy was more than capable enough of taking care of himself!  And had a brain, too!!  IF there were any justification to take out Hussein, Daddy would have done it.  But he knew better.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1408573/That-man-tried-to-kill-my-dad-says-Bush.html

As for in/out - still the wrong war.  Still stupid thing to do.


Well, I wouldn't expect you to read anything related to reality....

I guess we are going to war. I wonder if this guy got the Obama memo.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tb1uoNkqYRE[/youtube]

Looks like audit time!

You mean this is not a sport?  Not an awkward distraction from a perpetual vacation? 

I thought we could just sweep through and degrade ISIS to a manageable level? 

Shouldn't take more than a day or two? 

I'm sure the president will have super strong words, and show genuine concern tomorrow in his speech. 
TELEPROMPTER:
Fellow Americans [make grumpy face]. . .
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/01/01/article-0-07BB015E000005DC-571_468x286.jpg)

Good thing they upgraded the situation room last week.
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxHYO3mCQAEmXak.jpg:large)

How the he$$ did you get into my office???   I know none of the alarms went off....

This is unfortunately hilarious.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buVodp9kU7w#t=26[/youtube]

Interesting turn. . .
The White House is NOW calling ISIS a "Core National Security Priority."

It has gone from JV to priority because ISIS, who now controls a region the size of Great Briton, has seized Iraqi and Syrian oil fields and is making hundreds of millions in black market oil sales to fuel their movement.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/08/18/business/al-khatteeb-isis-oil-iraq/
http://abcnews.go.com/International/isis-makes-million-day-selling-oil-analysts/story?id=24814359
http://www.vocativ.com/world/iraq-world/isis-oil/#!bSyVHS

Tonight the president will announce his strategy, and has said that he has war powers to act on ISIS without congress (which he indeed does).

So, if we are going to go to war with ISIS in the name of "National Security," and that has only now become a priority because they have, and continue to acquire oil fields. . .

EXTRA CREDIT (fill in the blank):

The war against ISIS is a war for ___.

Wonder if ISIS has stumbled upon Saddam Hussein’s missing WMD cache yet?

And as to the war for oil comment, don’t you bet there are some sweet no-bid contracts awaiting Halliburton?

There was a report today about concerns with Obama bombing Syria because of unreported WMD stockpiles.  Assad is losing to ISIS and really needs our help, but it is also very likely that his (and what's left of Hussein's) goodies are hidden in that desert.
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxKnnA9IIAAg49h.jpg:large)

The president will have to be very careful on two fronts.  One, not to uncover or release any of Assad's chemical stockpiles that were claimed to have been destroyed, and two, not to uncover or release any of Uncle Saddam's that don't exist.

Saw news report last night that said there is an estimated 7,000 - 10,000 active fighters in ISIS....  wow!  That sure sounds familiar!

Daily Show?

Very interesting piece by Matt Welch today.
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/10/obamas-grotesque-flip-flops-on-congressi

Naw...one of the "mainstreams"....

What?  This has to be a joke.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/10/politics/isis-obama-speech/index.html
The President has asked Congress for the authority to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels to fight ISIS, administration and congressional sources told CNN. Obama is seeking the authority under Title 10 of U.S. Code, which deals with military powers. His request was sent soon after he met with Congressional leadership Tuesday night.

A. Based on things like history, history, and history, this is a very very bad idea.  These are the same rebels that sold Steven Sotloff to ISIS to begin with, and are currently fighting against one of the same enemies as ISIS (the Assad Regime). http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/09/us/steven-sotloff-killing?sr=tw090914rebelssoldsotlofflocation930avodtopphoto

B. There is a 100% chance these "moderate" rebels will use the weapons and "training" to kill other groups like the Kurds and Yazidis, and ultimately us.

C. There are no "moderate" rebels (like that means something).  There are rebels fighting Assad. Lots of different groups.  They are the same as rebels we have armed in the past like Al Qaeda, and the Talaban, and a host of other wonderful folks.  Someone please define what "moderate" is.  Are these the more laid-back rebels?  The Jihad-light folks?  

D. We will be supplying weapons to them so that they can fight the weapons we supplied to Iraq that ISUS has captured.  They can also use those weapons to fight Assad, essentially serving as a US declaration of war against Assad.  Of course Russia will step up their arming of Assad, and we will have a full-on puppet war.  Eventually we will have to clean this up, but not until we make a really really big mess, and plant the seeds for future wars.


The presidential confidence level has just gone from the 30% range to about -20%.

ISIS has created a very odd group of allies to stop them. They are a separatist group splintered off of Al Qaeda and a threat to stability throughout the Muslim world. A lot of countries and Middle East leaders want them stopped

We are but a bit player in this so far. I hope the President can keep it this way. Yes, it is dangerous to work with former enemies and I don't trust many of the groups we are talking to. Maybe this can lead to improved relations in that part of the world.

This isn't just a terrorist group. They are a full blown military. That might make them easier to identify and defeat.

Peace through weapons sales.  We've never really made that work.

Peace in the Middle East.  That's never really worked either.

I grow weary of the US being the World Police.  If they are a DIRECT threat to the US and/or it's citizens, then so be it, but measure the response, please.  It stands to history that 'shock and awe' only works for so long.

Actually, history shows that we can either commit 100% or 0%.  If we try to contain or manage, we end up with prolonged and expensive military involvement that ultimately results in failure, and furthers the cause of our enemies. 

Our choice is to take on ISIS as an enemy, and utterly destroy them, or to withdraw from the region and allow these factions to sort out their own issues.  Any half-donkey attempts will produce half-donkey results, as Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Clinton, Bush, and Bush learned.

Unfortunately our weak messaging has positioned us (politically) so that we cannot withdraw, therefore our only choice for success is to utterly destroy ISIS.  Leaving any of the tumor intact will lead to metastasis. . .It always does.
(http://www.mudchix.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/yoda.jpg)

Really hitting the fan today. This is Tim Arango of the New York Times explaining why we are here today with Iraq.
(http://c0.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/pic_corner_091014_iraq.jpg)

(http://undergroundmgzn.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/obama-mission-accomplished.jpg)

BREAKING:  The Obama administration has identified the "moderate" Syrian rebel and will arm him.  His name is Abu.
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxMxLL_IgAAFSPC.jpg:large)

Yep!  That's kinda the whole problem with the lack of leadership we have been saddled with for so long. 

Just finished listening.... will continuation of this thread be adequate or do we need a new one for Obama Iraq??


We shall see....I am still skeptical.  Will be watching closely at 8:45 tomorrow morning.

Funny....


Megyn doing her Ann Coulter thing.  Dana Perino trying to get credit for Baby Bush for phrases used by Presidents for many decades!  Well, at least they are sounding almost mildly rational....  almost.

I've read that ISIS is largely financed through oil sales. Who are they selling to, and how are they transporting it? It would seem obvious that applying pressure to the buyers - whether they're corporations or states - would dry up the money supply. And the means of transport would have to be either trucks or pipelines, both vulnerable to air attack.

But we're Americans, and anything that disrupts the steady flow of oil is heresy.

Yeah....that won't happen.....


Good grief, WHAT happened to Rand Paul???   He is having a particularly bad hair day today!!

I agree. But thankfully these past five years have gone by fairly quickly.

The last 13.

But there still may be hope for you....

Didn't listen to the speech. All I saw was this on Drudge. So we are going to war then?
(http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.608041178958070421&w=300&h=300&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-VaVWb8KkrPA/UbmXA-VXIXI/AAAAAAAABXw/OvndFxZpnq8/s1600/Naftaproduktionsbolaget_Bröderna_Nobel_2.jpg)

Weird pseudo-committal spaghetti at the wall speech. He went from trying to sound like he was in control, to talking about jobs and ebola.  It almost seemed like he was aggravated that he had to give the speech, and was forced to do so.

It was obvious that he is waging a painful debate against himself.

Probably not.  They control areas with modern oil moving facilities.

Who is buying it?  ...well, besides us....   Should stop, except that would mean all those big SUV's would have to move less.

(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxRRPu6IAAAAp35.jpg)
This is not good.  After last night's speech, Turkey, Germany, and (perhaps) Britain have backed out.  So I believe that leaves the coalition at just a handful of arab states (The Suni).  

That's not really a problem for us from a military standpoint because we have more than adequate air power, and the coordination with other allies is unnecessary, but it is a rather harsh political hit to a president who vowed a "Broad-coalition of partners" to counter previous claims that the 40 countries that partnered with us against Al Qaeda in Iraq somehow represented a president "acting alone."  

I didn't see anywhere where Turkey was going to restrict airspace, but I suppose they could.

http://www.debka.com/article/24262/Grave-setbacks-for-Obama’s-strategy-Turkey-backs-out-of-US-led-war-on-IS-Germany-UK-say-no-to-air-campaign
http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-speech-gets-muted-gulf-region-response-1410414757?tesla=y&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204168304580147073831131074.html

Hopefully Saudi Arabia won't back out when they learn that the administration thinks "Saudi Arabia has an extensive border with Syria."

"ISIL has been I think a galvanizing threat around the Sunni partners in the region.  They view it as an existential threat to them.  Saudi Arabia has an extensive border with Syria." http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/09/10/background-conference-call-presidents-address-nation#.VBH-xrMzc7I.twitter
(http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/images/map-saudi-arabia.png)

So where are the attacks?  Haven't heard/seen anything yet....


Lame-oid.

Just another Obama fail....!!   Should have had about half of ISIS dead by now...

About what I expected, but I always hold out hope at some level.....

I cannot believe I am going to say this, but:

(http://sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/i/enhance-your-calm-john-spartan-2.png)

Well, according to John Kerry yesterday, "We are not at war with ISIS." We are just engaging in aggressive diplomacy with bombs, guns, drones, and soldiers.

He can't bring himself to use the word "war" against those who are beheading our citizens, and killing entire families and villages in the most horrible ways, but he won't hesitate claiming there is a war on women or any other number of political issues to scare up votes.

They are trying to avoid the optic of Shock and Awe, for political reasons.

Watching the news and it looks like several middle eastern countries are getting on board.

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10383631_831039680289496_7475812214888496299_n.jpg?oh=27e3f8d5acd9b201c216696672f73a3b&oe=5492F0B5&__gda__=1419079529_7d300032cd2abe9e599a1ac02bb8a304)

Much like Curtis Knapp is a Baptist...also claiming to be Christian.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/kansas-pastor-stands-sermon-government-kill-gays-article-1.1087886

I am so calm, it's hard to lift my arms to type this note....

Dempsey was less than impressed and Hagel was less than impressive in the hearing today.
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bxq7K9gIEAAHWlz.jpg)
As Hagel put it, we are planning in a "modest" and long-term engagement instead of any "shock and awe."

Hagel did admit there would be about 1,600 US troops involved.  Even though both were sitting at the same table and representing the same "strategy" they looked and sounded like they had completely different understandings of what the plan was. Hagel was attempting to be political and not say anything that would upset anyone (but he failed with his "long-term" comment) and Dempsey just looked like he desperately wanted to do his job.


Now we just have to wait for the inevitable back-paddleing on the language, and incoherent post-back-nine commentary from the president.

The strategy unveiled.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WU3rGr1ezMQ[/youtube]

Kinda like the 'war on drugs'.  Ambiguous, undefined, imprecise.  Waste of time, resources, but most especially our kids!!

Either take it to them and exterminate, or just come on home and let them duke it out....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxD-5z_xHBU

Dempsey looks like he’s trying to pass a bowling ball.

Woman on CNN at about 6:30 this morning was pissed.  I believe her phrase was "The President needs to get his generals in line."  As if general Dempsey saying he "may" recommend boots on the ground to the president in a case by case manner, was somehow treasonous.  It's his freekin job as advisor to the president to provide advice. 

Even dictators have advisors.

(http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060816131037/marvel_dc/images/c/c0/Super_Friends.jpg)
Unfortunately the Superfriends don't actually exist, and President Obama's attempt to generate a "coalition of countries" fell flat (as is par for most of his endeavors).  By blowing an uncertain trumpet, he has, again, generated what is now an international atmosphere of uncertainty. Basically, his foreign policy reflects his domestic policy.  At least we have consistency.

So here are our new allies:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/17/world/middleeast/shiite-militias-pose-challenge-for-us-in-iraq.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=LargeMediaHeadlineSum&module=photo-spot-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

We will recruit kids, teens, and whoever we can find that will pledge to fight for us against ISIS.  We will give them guns and bombs.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/16/us-iraq-crisis-sunnis-insight-idUSKBN0HB0BD20140916

Don't really see anything that could possibly go wrong here?

Bombing ISIS in Syria. Go get some!!!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJGbN38hxcc#t=35[/youtube]

I support the President.

Rather discouraging.  So far we are not producing much Shock or Awe, but I must admit, the Kurds are awesome!
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kurdish-female-teen-fighters-on-front-line-against-isis-in-syria/

The latest were reported overnight by Syrian activists, who said several strikes hit ISIS targets in the northeast.

But Commander Hussein told us that, so far, the air campaign has had little impact on the ground.

He's still hopeful, though, that the U.S. will come to the rescue -- with more airstrikes, and a desperately-needed infusion of weapons to battle the well-armed extremists.

"Tell America we need weapons," he said. "If we can't defeat ISIS, their next target will be Europe and the U.S."

The Kurds are the Klingons of the Middle East.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2773452/The-REAL-road-warriors-Mad-Max-battle-buses-tanks-built-Kurdish-fighters-repel-ISIS-soldiers-Syria.html

It's almost like we are allowing it to unfold this way.  We have enough assets in the theater.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/06/world/meast/isis-airstrikes/index.html


. . .and why can't we keep Biden on a leash?  We've had 6 years to realize how much of a rambling risk he is in public.  Now he's injured an already battered foreign policy.  

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/10/05/242222_biden-continues-to-apologize-first.html?rh=1

"I think we're looking at kind of a 30-year war," he says, one that will have to extend beyond Islamic State to include emerging threats in Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and elsewhere."  -Panetta
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/10/06/leon-panetta-memoir-worthy-fights/16737615/

Sounds like we could be holding back to encourage local participation...?  Turkey is getting ready to jump in on this too.


Panetta -  blah, blah, blah, blah...  exactly how is it he would have kept troops in Iraq??  Since the government there was absolutely adamant about NOT allowing that to happen... So, I guess he is just advocating that we break international law...?  Again....  Better approach would have been to leave the guy there that was keeping a lot of this nonsense in check!  But Obama just couldn't leave Saddam Hussein well enough alone...he had to go in there all "macho-man", tear down the regime, kick some a$$ to save face for his Daddy, and then kill the SOB!!   Oh, wait...

Panetta is very much correct about missed opportunities with Assad using chemical weapons.  Obama is fail on that...big time!!

I was pleased when the president chose Panetta because he has always been a smart guy.  I think he probably wishes to have a career after this disaster, and is refusing to go down with the ship. History will certainly remember him as the guy that got Bin Laden, and I doubt he wants to jeopardize that.

Panetta seems to be a pretty good guy to me.  I think he is wrong about SOFA in Iraq....there was no way a legitimate agreement was going to be made no matter who was in the White House.  The biggest sticking point seemed to be our insistence (everywhere in a SOFA) that American soldiers are NOT subject to courts in the country of occupation.  Iraq was never gonna budge on that, and neither should we....so, impasse.  Add that to the fact that we never seem to leave an occupied country, they were not gonna let that particular camel get it's nose under the tent.....  so to speak.

I don't think any of the Obama 'stuff' will splash on him - kinda like not much of the Bush 'stuff' splashed on Colin Powell.  Both good guys with losers for 'bosses'....

The chemical weapon thing was just another in a line of really stupid carp from this guy (Obama).  He has shown he doesn't have the co-jones for the messier part of this job over and over again!

As anticipated by most, our flaccid efforts are having little effect. Might as well just give up and bring our troops home. We have no business fighting them unless we are going to actually put up a fight.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/isis-within-8-miles-of-baghdad-airport-and-armed-with-manpads/
Instead, and in spite of weeks of U.S.-led airstrikes, ISIS has gradually extended its reach. The extremist group is now either present or in control of a huge swath of countryside, forming a 180-degree arc around the Iraqi capital from due north around to the west, and all the way to the south.  Around this zone there have been skirmishes, and occasionally heavy fighting, with Iraqi security forces and Shiite militias battling ISIS.  American jets have carried out more than two dozen airstrikes in the area, mainly near Fallujah and the city of Ramadi, further to the west.  Inside Baghdad itself, there are ISIS sleeper cells that carry out almost daily bombings and assassinations.

Can't find anything yet online, but heard a little blurb on tv that ISIS has appeared to withdraw from Kobani...  Anyone see anything about that?

Looks like Turkey is going to use this opportunity to get rid of some Kurds now.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/14/us-mideast-crisis-idUSKCN0I30ZI20141014?utm_source=twitter
At least 35 people were killed in riots last week when members of Turkey's 15-million-strong Kurdish minority rose up in anger at the government for refusing to help defend the Syrian border town of Kobani from an Islamic State assault.

"For the first time in nearly two years, an air operation was carried out against our forces by the occupying Turkish Republic army," the PKK said. "These attacks against two guerrilla bases at Daglica violated the ceasefire," the PKK said, referring to an area near the border with Iraq.

The unrest in Turkey raised serious concerns that a peace process between Turkey and its Kurds could be in danger of collapse, a new source of turmoil in a region consumed by Iraqi and Syrian civil wars and an international campaign against Islamic State fighters.

What can we do to help?  We can send the Kurds weapons, and give them training, and we can encourage Turkey to join the coalition.  No.  Wait.  What?

We have a name.  Obama's war in Syria/Iraq/Turkey. . . is now to be called "Operation Incoherent Inherent Resolve" according to the pentagon.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/10/15/u-s-names-isis-military-effort-operation-inherent-resolve/?utm_content=buffer93806&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bz__mg7CUAAd08J.jpg)

That's some stain fighting power!

While I generally think you're brain damaged, I'm with you on this.  The names are crap to anyone with half a brain, damaged or not.

It seems wrong to package something up like this to sell to the general public.

Now they will send out crazy Uncle Joe to make it even more incoherent.

(http://www.gunssavelife.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/joe_biden_2012_7_13.jpg)

The only reason they gave it a name was because members of the military demanded it, otherwise veterans would have no status for fighting in it.  No patches.  No certificates of foreign war status.  It would kinda be like calling a terrorist attack "workplace violence" to avoid the political fallout.

Everything is politics, and I have a feeling that the flaccid name offered is almost intended as an insult, because it was already rejected by the Pentagon.
"Oh you hate the name Inherent Resolve?  Perfect!  Inherent Resolve it is!"

Congo has an interesting anti-ISIS policy.

[Emphasis]
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2816159/Mob-stone-death-suspected-ISIS-member-burn-corpse-EAT-revenge-series-attacks-Congo-left-100-people-dead.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

Let’s hope he didn’t have ebola.

Hey, the Atlantic Ocean is the new Mississippi River.  If it's east of the Atlantic, it doesn't exist.
 
 :D

(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7Y405zCIAAirof.jpg:large)

Not particularly good. ISIS has gained more ground in Syria despite our efforts.

(http://s.telegraph.co.uk/graphics/MobileSwitcher/v2/images/430-1421230259686332861.png)

Today ISIS is gathering gay men and throwing them to their deaths from buildings in Iraq.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7aqF0aIYAAlXv3.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7aqFhgIAAAj4Vq.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7aqFw3IMAEWYxq.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7aqFvqIMAAIC1T.jpg)

I must be home brewing too much.  The graphic reminds me of a broken carboy.

War Powers resolution to congress just a few minutes ago. 
@AP  BREAKING: Obama says Islamic State 'going to lose' as he asks Congress for military force authorization.

We failed to contain them.  We are going to war against the JV team.

Sending some of these with hugs and kisses.
(http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/a-10/images/a10_2.jpg)

Unconfirmed but there are lots of military folks tweeting that ISIS has just taken a military base in Anbar, and may have taken several US troops.
Reuters is reporting that the Iraqi town of al-Baghdadi where the base is located has fallen. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/12/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-anbar-idUSKBN0LG23120150212?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

Just more validation that we should never have gone there in the first place and should have been completely done with working with Iraq years ago.  If we are gonna have people there, keep them as a collective, cohesive force, not dispersed among the slackers that we put in power!

I thought that base was closed?  Not sure why we still have anyone there?

Pentagon is now saying that the city was taken but the base is secure. I suppose we have to wait until the dust settles a bit.

Probably some kind of "training" BS.

As I have said before - we need more drones.


We could alternately use a few hundred thousand jdams.  Approach this like humpback whales approach dinner - start with a wide circle of bombs around the eastern half of Syria, separated by no more than the kill zone of each (couple hundred feet??), then move progressively toward the center of the circle, with another circle of jdams - smaller diameter - again, .  Followed by another, smaller circle another couple hundred feet smaller.  Lather, rinse, repeat....  Keep on big daisy cutter or moab for the center of the circle, just for effect.

Then Iraq.  Then whatever part of Afghanistan they occupy.

Obliteration.  Extermination.  Elimination.

I disagree.  So do they.
(http://www.aworldatschool.org/page/-/images/content/Iraq%20girls.jpg)

Yeah, me too....


Isn't that what the Repubs are calling for with boots on the ground...only with our kids instead of theirs??

Who knows. Let's ask Kayla Mueller, James Foley, et.al who they think should be bringing the fight to ISIS. Oh wait....

So putting thousands more at risk will certainly bring back the ones already lost....

What happened to all that "personal responsibility" talk we have heard in the past?  What happened to these and many others is tragic!  Also preventable.  They chose to put themselves at risk, and from all most of what I have heard, they understood those risks.  Personal choice.  Turned out horrendously for them.

I absolutely believe in helping others help themselves.  We should be loading up the king of Jordan with all the equipment/ammunition/arms that he can stand - choke him on it....  And the Kurds - same thing - but then there is the issue of pissing off Turkey, so that's why we have held back from them. Turkey is just hanging back waiting for the Kurds to weaken themselves before getting seriously involved - when the Kurds are decimated, they will get into it if still needed.

And both Assad and the Syrian rebels if they will fight ISIS.

We got no business putting people there.  Have you taken nothing from our relationship with Israel??  Let these others be our proxies!  But we can certainly load up everyone who is willing to fight them - and we should.  If you look at the air strikes, there have been thousands, but it's gonna take people confronting them on the ground.  And those people should be the ones with the true vested interest.

I thought Obama's "selfie-gate" is BS and the video funny, but there is this.

(https://scontent-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10988917_10152839029401107_6568924352720535755_n.jpg?oh=2b9caea89103f1d2b1bc74122b0fba54&oe=558EC9A0)

CNN is reporting that ISIS is growing at "warp speed" now.  This is all Gene Roddenberry's fault.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/16/africa/isis-libya-north-africa/index.html?sr=tw021715isis630aVODtopPhoto

Here is a quick synopsis, without a lot of the media BS...up through about the end of January-ish.

Over 16,000 air strikes from Aug to mid Jan.  Iran is involved.  Both sides in Syria now participating.  Egypt.  Jordan.  Sounds like a true coalition may be emerging in the mid-east for the first time since about 1967.  They argue over nonsense about as bad as we do.  Turkey is still holding back to let the Kurds get killed as much as possible, but they will eventually come into it - probably near the end, so they can claim bragging rights and maybe get the Kurds kicked out of Turkey.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_intervention_against_the_Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant

Not good.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-31502863
Jihadist militants from Islamic State (IS) have burned to death 45 people in the western Iraqi town of al-Baghdadi, the local police chief says.

Exactly who these people were and why they were killed is not clear, but Col Qasim al-Obeidi said he believed some were members of the security forces.

IS fighters captured much of the town, near Ain al-Asad air base, last week.

Col Obeidi said a compound that houses the families of security personnel and local officials was now under attack.

He pleaded for help from the government and the international community.

Wait, the head Cheerleader says we can solve the ISIS problem by giving them jobs.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/watch-msnbcs-matthews-just-destroyed-state-dept-flak-says-terrorists-simply-need-jobs/#0Xbi6Mmq0u4hhPdA.97 (http://www.westernjournalism.com/watch-msnbcs-matthews-just-destroyed-state-dept-flak-says-terrorists-simply-need-jobs/#0Xbi6Mmq0u4hhPdA.97)



http://thefederalist.com/2015/02/17/marie-harfs-ideas-for-destroying-isis-are-not-so-fetch/ (http://thefederalist.com/2015/02/17/marie-harfs-ideas-for-destroying-isis-are-not-so-fetch/)

Hooters and Bowling alleys would solve alot of it.....And some Casinos.....

(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/2f/2f2518d41c406b7d055c9cce3e7049cd6c02f8a8a754750617b031f4decd8136.jpg)

Our Marines have a few openings they can fill.
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-EHWaVCAAEOQhp.jpg)

The muppet is actually correct. These poor ISIS folks have a hard time finding jobs that fit their particular skill-set.
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-E7eFICcAAjHkd.png:large)

Opener for resume at the upcoming White House ISIS job fair:
I am looking for something part time, I'm good with a knife, I like to get a head, excellent people skills..

(http://i.imgur.com/5dMMgsCl.jpg)

. . .and now this may be the most hilarious thing to ever happen in the history of ever.  We have a new White House rush chair.

(AP) — White House officials say State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki will become President Barack Obama's new communications director.
(http://www.rotten-core.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/jen_psaki.jpg)

She's just mad because she doesn't have blonde hair, glasses that make he look smart, and she can't tell Chris Mathews and Wolf Blitzer that they don't understand the nuances and the subtleties of the administrations comments on how they are going to handle the radical version of Jim Jones and Guyana.

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/79/5d/ec/795decd24bccf7a8df0c2a5b187040db.jpg)

I like the way someone put it on CNN just a moment ago.  "We are living in the age of faculty lounge foreign policy."   I think that's a perfect analogy.

Apparently, the president gave a speech earlier today on the results of his "violent extremism" summit, and basically focused on opportunities for women in terrorist countries.  He seems to be stuck in this community organizer role.

I think that's great.  There should be opportunities for women and young men everywhere, but I think perhaps we should focus on killing the terrorists first.  I think if we stop all of the folks who are killing, raping, and mutilating other people because of their religion or sex, we would have a better chance of providing education and jobs for those being targeted.  Just a thought.

100% of president Obama's effort (off the golf course) is being spent attempting not to acknowledge, in any way, the ideology behind the threat.  He wants to fight the 'idea' of extremism, but to fight an idea, it is necessary to identify the idea. 

Yes, it is very sad that young people (men & women) do not have much opportunity for jobs in Iraq and Syria, but that is not what is making them into terrorists. Yes, we should encourage and even fund opportunities and ideologies in foreign countries that promote liberty, freedom, and opportunity, but first, we need to address the problem at hand, that is now sweeping across the Middle East, and African continent, and will eventually arrive at our doorstep if unchecked.

I think the new Jobs for Jihadists program is just dandy, but lets talk about it later after we address the immediate problem.

Obama Calls The Idea That The West Is At War With Islam 'An Ugly Lie'

http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/obama-calls-idea-west-war-islam-ugly-lie (http://publicradiotulsa.org/post/obama-calls-idea-west-war-islam-ugly-lie)

Typical RWRE doublespeak gobble-dee-goop.  If ya don't start to address the root causes AT the same time, there will always be a new crop of terrorists to kill.  There will always be the "immediate problem", which is great for us and all the other big arms merchants in the world, but not so much for the people.  There will be terrorists for a long time, but somewhere along the line, something different has to be done to actually have a change.  You would have thought anyone with a brain would start to figure that one out just by watching what has gone on in Israel for the last 60 years or so.  Guess not, so far....

Even Ireland and the UK finally, after 400 years, figured it out...  Since we are only half that age, and the reactionary fervor that is still so strong in this country, I wouldn't be surprised if it takes us another 200 years.

Not to even touch on the effects of our meddling in other countries and the reactions we get from that....

You either have to kill everyone - OR start to work with them at some level.

(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-O3FqiIAAAmuMF.jpg)

Walmart is raising their wages by a $1.00 an hour and say it will enhance the shopping experience at their stores. Maybe all these disenfranchised death cult members can find happiness there.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/20/business/walmart-q4-earnings.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/20/business/walmart-q4-earnings.html?_r=0)

Great opportunity for the unions to get some new blood (no pun).
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-OKGhUCcAAqX7P.png)

If you kill little girls, I'm not sure what that translates into at a job fair.
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-KlfXECcAAnGnx.jpg)

Nah, that's an auctioneer trying to get more than $160.00 for her.

If they want really good pay and benefits, the Pacific Maritime Association may be looking for workers. Pay is $26 to $41 an hour, and free health care for life.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ports-labor-20150218-story.html#page=1 (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ports-labor-20150218-story.html#page=1)

All beef....???

I couldn't get the article. My browser is not the latest and greatest.

Do they want to hire ISIS folks to keep the cost of health insurance low?

I still say "stay out of it".  What is our interest there? It's not lives lost because that mantle would go to a lot of other African country conflicts. Why aren't the Chinese in there spending millions to launch drones and rockets? The Russians, the Europeans (it's right on their border and they could be taking the lead if they wanted), or heck leave it to those in the direct neighborhood.  Why do we seem to be more concerned about it than the rest?

Whenever we meddle in those affairs it gives them the excuse to hate us.  The election in Egypt that seemed by most observers to duly elect a new president, well we didn't like who he was so put pressure on things to throw him out and get someone else in.  I thought that was one of the most terrible foreign policy mistakes in the last decade.  The best, biggest signal we could have sent would have been to have said, though we may not like the guy who got elected, we honor the election.  But instead we brought back "shades of the Shah" memories by working to oust the guy. Things very likely would have gone awry anyway, but it wouldn't look like we keep a double standard. Sure we want elections, but oops, only if it results in someone we like.  

Also, we should not be friends with the Saudis and should not be doing business with them.

What we should be doing is being a good example in the world.  Work more closely with those share more of our values.  Help people in need whenever we can.  Be a "light unto the world" of good.  

Wouldn't it be nice if those people over there could look at us and think, "wow, thats a great country I want to have something like that here". Not "I hate it that they are propping up a regime that I don't like and can't possibly now change because the US is giving them so much power." or " I hate it that they keep trying to topple my government, though I don't like them, my government can parlay the meddling into just enough nationalist fever to keep themselves in power and call me a collaborating traitor if I try to make changes."  

It can seem as though we are "keeping stability here" or preventing some deaths there. But the meddling just makes things worse in the end.  Save 500 lives this time, then next 5,000 are lost, then go in and save 5,000 the next time to later have 50,000 lost.  No matter how bad it may look or that you may be doing the right thing, unless you go all in, and I mean aaaaall in, and we are not going to do that, those societies are so different, the cultural differences so deep and pervasive, your not going to make things better, it will only be worse.... and they will hate you.

  

Just like Iran.  Panama.  Venezuela.  Afghanistan.  Phillipines.  Viet Nam.  Attempted China. 

Fresh from the State Dept, I give you the result from the White House Summit (AKA Obama Speech NO. 2,467).  A brand new meme, and set of Twitter accounts and hashtags.

(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-i246BCYAAlTwK.jpg)

We can now close this combat terrorism Violent Extremism task and move on to addressing global warming again.

Has anyone else picked up on the psychological aspect of how the Obama administration tackles every issue?  Extra credit if you've figured it out.

FIFY on the first part, and for the bonus points, Spin Cycle?

I'm with you... we got no business putting our kids into this mess!



What is pretty amazing to me is how half the people in this country listen to the flat-out lies and distortions spewed by the powers that be and sit on the sidelines and snipe about what is going on with NO input on to what should go on.

Just the fact that we have not rushed in all "gung-ho" John Wayne has not only made it possible, but has forced others with a vested interest to stand up and do something - THEY are putting 'boots on the ground'.  Whether intentional or not - I don't care - it has resulted in a brilliant way to respond.   Several entities are now involved who previously would have just sat on their thumbs (sounds like O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity, doesn't it?) - actually doing the fighting required to attempt to save their situation.  Jordan, Syria - both sides...govt and rebels, Egypt, Kurds, and even Iran!

Couple of big missing components to this are Saudi - no surprise, since it is their power structure that is funding/fomenting all this. 

And Turkey - regardless of their issues with the Kurds, they should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for not getting into this in a bigger way, even if it is another area besides northern Iraq.  I understand that they want to let the Kurds wear themselves down against ISIS - they would be thrilled if all Kurds were killed in the process.  We, too should be ashamed for not helping those guys more - bigger/better/more arms - but that would affect our relationship with Turkey, and we might lose base access for making war in the area.  Kurds have been the most effective ground force against ISIS so far with not much more than AK's for weapons.   It is a dilemma...


Another area the Perpetual Whiner's Society (PWS) is going on about is Ukraine.  What a stinking mess that is...the recent Ukrainian govts are corrupt, putrid, boils on the butt of the region, while Russia is even worse.  It would be good if Ukraine could be brought into western European society, but it is so bad, they can't even mobilize their own defense.  If Russia is successful, there is another piece of the USSR stitched back together.  We are tweaking them kinda like we did in Afghanistan using different tools - sanctions and the price of oil.  Another good idea, no matter whether intentional or not.


The biggest disappointment to our response, in my opinion is how half this country can't see 7" beyond it's collective nose to understand that this approach is actually working fairly well.  And we are NOT on track to kill another 5,000 of our kids with misbegotten imperialistic voyeurism like in Iraq!  Almost half of this country has the attention span and ability to learn from history of a large bowl of bread dough!!

The entire Middle East, as well as most of Eastern Europe are simply pretend countries, propped up through US, Chinese, or Russian intervention.  None would exist without assistance and they will crumble without it.

As a Libertarian I'm torn on this.

If we continue our policies of intervention, we continue to build deeper dependencies that ultimately lead to the need for more intervention.  We also find ourselves propping-up a growing number of economies, and artificially distorting markets.

If we pull back, and only intervene when the national security of the United States is at risk, we guarantee the destruction and murder of millions, and foster the growth of organizations, economies, and ideologies that seek to destroy us, not through natural competition, but through more primitive forces for which we ultimately must protect ourselves.

Either way, guns and bombs will be involved. In the former, we will have a multitude of allies, fake governments, and pretend economies to play with.  In the latter we defend ourselves alone after all others have been reduced to grave and rubble by the more powerful and terrible.

I don't know what the answer looks like, but running out the clock is simply not an option.  No one understands this concept of making an appointment to carry out military action against a known enemy. Victory only comes through surrender or destruction.  Since the time of Sun Tzu, we've known that the greatest military strength against an enemy is knowing when and where he will attack. And for the attacker, the element of surprise is invaluable. 

If we attack ISIS exactly when and where president Obama said we will, there will be no reason for the enemy to be present, and our efforts will be mostly political.  However, if we attack from a different vector, I will be duly impressed with our president. 
Make a sound in the east, then strike in the west.--Sun Tzu

You mean something like what was done with Africa and Asia after WWII. That worked out pretty well don't ya think? (sarcasm on the last part)

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/asia-and-africa (https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/asia-and-africa)

This has really gotta hurt the RWRE psycho-fanatics who want us sending in troops....  Granted it's early days, but when you have all the countries in the neighborhood starting to step up and fight these guys, it may be just the approach that may solve the problem.  And we should support that as aggressively as possible....lots of bullets, rpg's, vehicles, maybe some air strikes - oh, that's right - we have made over 16,000 air strikes between Aug 2014 and mid Jan 2015 in support of this effort.

Almost like someone was actually thinking and planning to support the development of local resistance to IS.  Huh, wonder how that could happen?  Oh, yeah...a measured response the doesn't immediately knee-jerk us into another stupid involvement where we have no business going....

Hopefully, they can continue to succeed.  With our and Iran's ongoing help, I bet they can.

http://news.yahoo.com/militants-launch-attack-syrian-kurdish-border-town-094841204.html

And who would have thought that it would be Iran to take the first direct military action against these gangsters....
And isn't it just wonderful the way Donald Rumsfeld's training and equipping 450,000 man Iraqi army has paid off so well.... oh, wait....

30,000 man force was cobbled together in spite of Rumsfeld's training results who are standing up to fight.  Trained by an Iranian general who is directing their operations.  If this doesn't illustrate the abject failure of Baby Bush/Rumsfeld on the whole Iraqi war topic, then the observer is blind.  Or blinded by the right....

As reference, here is a synopsis of what has been going on - as opposed to the lies and distortions Rupert's Minions would have you believe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_intervention_against_the_Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant

[youtube]J_nxouSJq9c[/youtube]

That would be racist, but no one cares anymore.  Go Hillary!