Can We Finally Admit US Foreign Policy is a Disaster?

[Gary M]

complete farce of a speech, starting around 1:45 talks about conditions which gave rise to ISIS:

 

1. Sectarian strife in Iraq

2. Syria's civil war

 

Yet he fails to mention the obvious that it was our intervention in both places that made those conditions possible, as he tries to justify further intervention!

 

http://youtu.be/LWCNdWpmW6o

 

 

I blame the failure of the Crusades in 1291.

[GG]

Any strategy without a ground component is not a good one. This is not the kind of campaign you win with whiz-bang technology from miles away.

 

What if you unleash rainbow farting unicorns with HARMs?

[4merper4mer]

What if you unleash rainbow farting unicorns with HARMs?

 

Unicorns' domain is on the ground so it seems good.

 

 

Why does he call them ISIL when everyone else calls them ISIS?

[GG]

Why does he call them ISIL when everyone else calls them ISIS?

 

He can't get over his childhood crush on Joanna Cameron?

[B-Man]

President Obama’s Real Promise—It’s Not to Destroy ISIS

 

At least President Obama didn’t mention “managing” the Islamic State. At least he said, “We will degrade, and ultimately destroy” the Islamic State.

 

But let’s be clear. That’s not his real promise.

 

His real promise was not to use ground troops. He was very clear about that:

 

As I have said before, these American forces will not have a combat mission — we will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq.

 

And again:

But I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil.

 

The job of the commander-in-chief is to defend our nation, not to promise the most expedient tactics. And while I hope and pray that we can, in fact, “destroy” the Islamic State without “American combat troops fighting on foreign soil,” it is premature to make such a promise. What happens if our allies on the ground can’t advance into the Sunni Triangle? What if the Islamic State, despite repeated air attacks, proves every bit as resilient as Hamas — which has weathered years of air strikes yet still maintains its iron grip on Gaza? Then which promise controls? The pledge to destroy or the pledge not to engage in ground combat?

 

When I heard the president speak of a long air campaign, what I heard was a pledge to kick the can down the road, to “do something” until his successor relieves him of the burden of fighting jihad. In so doing, he’s taking an enormous gamble with the safety and security of the American people

 

 

More at the link:

 

 

.

[B-Man]

The President’s Delusional Speech

 

Even leaving aside the military and strategic infirmities in Obama’s speech pointed out by Bing West, Fred Kagan, General Jack Keane, and others, there remain an impressive array of false, misleading, and delusional statements. A few random examples:

 

“I can announce that America will lead a broad coalition to roll back this terrorist threat.” The “broad coalition” currently consists of a grand total of 9 countries, 29 fewer than the coalition formed by George W. Bush, who was repeatedly maligned by Obama’s friends on the left and in the mainstream media for “going it alone ” in Iraq.

 

“This is a core principle of my presidency: if you threaten America, you will find no safe haven.” . . . unless I swap you and four other world-class terrorists for Bowe Bergdahl.

 

“As commander-in-chief, my highest priority is the security of the American people.” That’s why, in the face of multiple threats exploding around the globe, I’m in the process of slashing the defense budget 10 percent, reducing the Army to 420,000 personnel — the smallest level in 90 years – shrinking the strategic bomber force by 35 percent, cutting ballistic missiles to the lowest level since before the Cuban missile crisis, refusing to build the border fence mandated by the Secure Fence Act of 2006, and advertising to the world that our southern border is open to one and all.

 

“For all the work that remains, our businesses are in the longest uninterrupted stretch of job creation in our history.” That’s why 7 million people have left the workforce since I took office, the labor-force-participation rate is near an historic low, 11 million more people are in poverty than when I became president, median household income has fallen a mere $2,300, one in six men in their working prime isn’t working , and 8 million more are on food stamps.

 

Cocooned by a sycophantic press corps for six years, the president has succumbed to the Taranto Principle: He utters transparent inanities completely oblivious to how ludicrous he now sounds to a public no longer impressed with teleprompter wizardry. An unserious leader for a serious time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Obama: The Islamic State is neither Islamic nor a state.............. Discuss.

 

 

 

.

Edited September 11, 2014 by B-Man

[truth on hold]

Obama picking tax payers pockets clean for another $500 million to arm a group that just weeks ago he mocked as serious fighters as they were only "former doctors, farmers, pharmacists and so forth".

 

Obama asks for $500 million to train, equip Syrian rebels

 

Edited September 13, 2014 by Joe_the_6_pack

[/dev/null]

Obama picking tax payers pockets clean for another $500 million to arm a group that just weeks ago he mocked as serious fighters as they were only "former doctors, farmers, pharmacists and so forth".

 

Obama asks for $500 million to train, equip Syrian rebels

 

 

 

The Federal Reserve has been pumping $85 Billion a month into the economy for the last 6 years and you're worried about $500 Million

 

*Edit I agree that we shouldn't be funding it. But dude, seriously. You got one piss poor argument.

Edited September 13, 2014 by /dev/null

[Nanker]

Unicorns' domain is on the ground so it seems good.

 

 

Why does he call them ISIL when everyone else calls them ISIS?

It refers to Levant instead of Syria. This is just another example of an over-educated doofus showing off in public a-la JFK saying, "I am a doughnut" in German and the media cooing and awing at his brilliance.

 

Levant actually refers to an archaic area and if the idiots were going to use that term they should use the archaic term for Iraq - Babylon. Then they'd be saying ISBL - except that it's "not Islamic, and not a state" according to their brain trust. If they were truly honest in their beliefs, they'd just refer to them as BL. But they feckless and pandering in all manner of discourse. They're incapable of honesty and that starts at the very top and oozes downstream in their food chain.

Edited September 13, 2014 by Nanker

[B-Man]

 

LOL.......................its ALWAYS about him................

 

 

 

.

[DC Tom]

It refers to Levant instead of Syria. This is just another example of an over-educated doofus showing off in public a-la JFK saying, "I am a doughnut" in German and the media cooing and awing at his brilliance.

 

Levant actually refers to an archaic area and if the idiots were going to use that term they should use the archaic term for Iraq - Babylon. Then they'd be saying ISBL - except that it's "not Islamic, and not a state" according to their brain trust. If they were truly honest in their beliefs, they'd just refer to them as BL. But they feckless and pandering in all manner of discourse. They're incapable of honesty and that starts at the very top and oozes downstream in their food chain.

 

"Levant" refers to the Eastern Med, basically - Israel. Syria. Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, sometimes Turkey. I prefer "ISIL", because it more accurately reflects their own objectives than "ISIS" does. I consider Obama's usage of "ISIL" to be entirely proper on that grounds alone - in fact, I wish he'd stress that, since this "operation other than war" will almost certainly spill over into Jordan at some point, and likely Lebanon as well.

 

It's also not that archaic...it was still in use in World War I (e.g. Lawrence of Arabia refers to it); it only fell out of disuse after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, when the French and British partitioned the Levant into the French and British Mandates. One of the reasons ISIL themselves prefer "ISIL" - it carries the implication of the days of pre-Western influence and imperialism. You'd think they'd choose to refer to "Iraq" as "Mesopotamia" as well (not "Bablylon," by the way...Babylon and Iraq overlap, but are not concurrent, and Babylon has no Islamic history), but "Iraq" predates World War I as well (again, refer to Lawrence of Arabia).

 

Basically, "ISIL" is a far more accurate description than "ISIS," and ISIL uses it preferentially for a reason. So does Obama. Anyone using "ISIS" doesn't understand the problem they've become.

[FireChan]

"Levant" refers to the Eastern Med, basically - Israel. Syria. Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, sometimes Turkey. I prefer "ISIL", because it more accurately reflects their own objectives than "ISIS" does. I consider Obama's usage of "ISIL" to be entirely proper on that grounds alone - in fact, I wish he'd stress that, since this "operation other than war" will almost certainly spill over into Jordan at some point, and likely Lebanon as well.

 

It's also not that archaic...it was still in use in World War I (e.g. Lawrence of Arabia refers to it); it only fell out of disuse after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, when the French and British partitioned the Levant into the French and British Mandates. One of the reasons ISIL themselves prefer "ISIL" - it carries the implication of the days of pre-Western influence and imperialism. You'd think they'd choose to refer to "Iraq" as "Mesopotamia" as well (not "Bablylon," by the way...Babylon and Iraq overlap, but are not concurrent, and Babylon has no Islamic history), but "Iraq" predates World War I as well (again, refer to Lawrence of Arabia).

 

Basically, "ISIL" is a far more accurate description than "ISIS," and ISIL uses it preferentially for a reason. So does Obama. Anyone using "ISIS" doesn't understand the problem they've become.

 

Is Syria a name derived from the Assyrians? My fertile crescent history is a little shaky.

[DC Tom]

Is Syria a name derived from the Assyrians? My fertile crescent history is a little shaky.

 

Probably. Although the Assyrians were farther north (central Turkey, roughly), and I think both names derive from from "Assur" (kingdom in roughly modern Kurdish Iraq).

[/dev/null]

Probably. Although the Assyrians were farther north (central Turkey, roughly), and I think both names derive from from "Assur" (kingdom in roughly modern Kurdish Iraq).

 

Who approacheth the Bridge of Death must answer me these questions three, ere the other side he see.

What is your name?

What is your quest?

 

 

What is the capital of Levant?

[truth on hold]

Buchanan rips Obama a new one here ....

 

The Forever War

 

by Patrick J. Buchanan, September 12, 2014

 

 

The United States spent seven years building an army to hold Iraq together. Yet when a few thousand ISIL fighters stormed in from Syria, that army broke and fled all the way to Baghdad. Even the Kurdish peshmerga broke and ran.

 

What makes us think we can succeed in Syria where we failed in Iraq.

 

http://buchanan.org/...orever-war-6958

Edited September 14, 2014 by Joe_the_6_pack

[Azalin]

Probably. Although the Assyrians were farther north (central Turkey, roughly), and I think both names derive from from "Assur" (kingdom in roughly modern Kurdish Iraq).

 

I don't know why he chose to use the names, but as I understand it emperor Hadrian renamed the region Syria Palestina after driving out the Jews. I could be wrong though.

[DC Tom]

I don't know why he chose to use the names, but as I understand it emperor Hadrian renamed the region Syria Palestina after driving out the Jews. I could be wrong though.

 

Herodotus referred to the region as "Palestine." Probably got it from "Philistine," which probably came from the Phonecians or Egyptians.

[B-Man]

Interpreting the Islamic State’s jihadi logic

by Dr.Charles Krauthammer

 

What was the Islamic State thinking? We know it is sophisticated in its use of modern media. But what was the logic of propagating to the world videos of its beheadings of two Americans (and subsequently a Briton) — sure to inflame public opinion?

 

There are two possible explanations. One is that these terrorists are more depraved and less savvy than we think. They so glory in blood that they could not resist making an international spectacle of their savagery — after all, they proudly broadcast their massacre of Shiite prisoners — and did not quite fathom how such a brazen, contemptuous slaughter of Americans would radically alter public opinionand risk bringing down upon them the furies of the U.S. Air Force.

 

The second theory is that they were fully aware of the inevitable consequence of their broadcast beheadings — and they intended the outcome. It was an easily sprung trap to provoke America into entering the Mesopotamian war.

 

Why?

 

Because they’re sure we will lose. Not immediately and not militarily. They know we always win the battles but they are convinced that, as war drags on, we lose heart and go home.

 

 

They count on Barack Obama quitting the Iraq/Syria campaign just as he quit Iraqand Libya in 2011 and is in the process of leavingAfghanistan now. And this goes beyond Obama. They see a post-9/11 pattern: America experiences shock and outrage and demands action. Then, seeing no quick resolution, it tires and seeks out leaders who will order the retreat. In Obama, they found the quintessential such leader.

 

As for the short run, the Islamic State knows it will be pounded from the air. But it deems that price worth paying, given its gains in propaganda and prestige — translated into renown and recruiting — from these public executions.

 

Understanding this requires an adjustment to our thinking. A common mantra is that American cruelty — Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, “torture,” the Iraq war itself — is the great jihadist recruiting tool. But leaving Iraq, closing Abu Ghraib and prohibiting “enhanced interrogation” had zero effect on recruiting. In fact, jihadi cadres from Mali to Mosul have only swelled during Obama’s outstretched-hand presidency.

 

Turns out the Islamic State’s best recruiting tool is indeed savagery — its own. Deliberate, defiant, triumphant. The beheadings are not just a magnet for psychopaths around the world. They are choreographed demonstrations of its unbounded determination and of American helplessness. In Osama bin Laden’s famous formulation, who is the “strong horse” now?

 

 

More at the link

 

http://www.washingto...95f0_story.html

[/dev/null]

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russian-nuclear-bombers-buzz-northern-europe/

[Deranged Rhino]

http://freebeacon.co...orthern-europe/

 

Canada is in a pissing match with Russia over territory in Arctic, with melting ice caps exposing new and strategically important territory which both Russia and Canada are claiming as their own.

 

When the Canadians are sabre rattling, you know the world is really about to end.

Edited September 20, 2014 by GreggyT