Holy crap, if this isn't a reminder that the ultra- religious are a dangerous foe regardless of sect. Nothing can prepare the world for the senseless atrocities that occur in the name of a spiritual leader. History dictates nothing good results from senseless devotion.

All over imaginary friends. What a sad event. :(
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Get ready.
It's coming to a neighborhood near you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No worries here. Cowards do not shoot people what shoot back.

No worries here. Cowards do not shoot people what shoot back.

You're in for a world of disappointment if that's what you believe.

heard the State police practicing
on veterans day or maybe the day before

but....Holy crap! it sounded like a war going ON

Time for a unified world to come together.... waiting for Russia and China to join up with a worldwide coalition to target the leadership and majority of ISIS fighters in theater.... Impossible to be rid of every cell worldwide, but it needs to be a worldwide effort.

The refugee dilemma has now come home to roost as well. Recently saw a map of where Syrian refugees had moved to in the US. Talk about the enemy within.... I'm not saying every Muslim is a terrorist, but it seems every modern terrorist is a Muslim......

Time for a unified world to come together.... waiting for Russia and China to join up with a worldwide coalition to target the leadership and majority of ISIS fighters in theater.... Impossible to be rid of every cell worldwide, but it needs to be a worldwide effort.
I think we're at that point. If they can cut a deal on Assad and Russia's naval base it could happen but there are a lot of competing interests. Reminds me of the Hobbit.

The refugee dilemma has now come home to roost as well. Recently saw a map of where Syrian refugees had moved to in the US. Talk about the enemy within.... I'm not saying every Muslim is a terrorist, but it seems every modern terrorist is a Muslim......
I think that actions like this are meant to provoke a reaction more than anything else. I wouldn't be surprised if they sent the guy through Greece as a refuge precisely to stoke anti-Islamic fear...and hopefully...trigger Islamophobic hate crimes.

I think we're at that point. If they can cut a deal on Assad and Russia's naval base it could happen but there are a lot of competing interests. Reminds me of the Hobbit.

The devil you know...


I think that actions like this are meant to provoke a reaction more than anything else. I wouldn't be surprised if they sent the guy through Greece as a refuge precisely to stoke anti-Islamic fear...and hopefully...trigger Islamophobic hate crimes.

Terrorism is by default to promote terror and instability and fear but these IS folks are reaching to far loftier goals. They are religious fanatics that want to bring the end times prophecies and see their Caliphate as the way to attract the "Crusaders" into the battle to end all battles to the areas of Syria that predate what we call Syria today. Ironically, there now and in surrounding areas on the ground or in the air include: Syria, Russia, Iran, US, Israel, Turkey, France, UK, and plenty of Arab, European, and Asian countries.

I don't believe in those "End-Times" as I am pretty sure you don't either, but we don't need to believe in that. They do. Wo while we are not interested in these prophecies, those that do believe are interested in us.

Does Ben Carson believe in the end times? That's what scares me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Does Ben Carson believe in the end times? That's what scares me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

no doubt he does....but not to worry the more he opens his mouth the further from the wh he gets.

Does Ben Carson believe in the end times? That's what scares me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So, you are worried about what a future President might do, while you have no observations of what OweBlamerLiars failed policy's have done.

Did you graduate high school ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did you graduate high school ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jeepers, a gratuitous personal attack of no redeeming value.

Snappy come back.

Any considerations given to "peace talks" or "friendly discussions" would be a waste of time. When you are dealing with radical religious whack-jobs, there is nothing you can do to deter them from their radical extremes short of a .44 to the head.

Yes, where can we find a modern Unconditional Surrender Grant.

I do not see any grand summit of leaders including the Arab world that will curb this growing violence. Even if you are not interested in it, the violence is interested in you. So while discussions of increasing the educational and economic opportunities to "disaffected" North African and Arab youth and men is nice nice, it is merely a supporting action. Can this be stopped without large scale warfare? Can this be curtailed?

I would hope so but I do not think it is remotely possible. Particularly with the leadership we have today.

Remove all US military from the Middle East. Let them go back to the stone ages where they want to be.
Oh wait. Oil.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Remove all US military from the Middle East. Let them go back to the stone ages where they want to be.
Oh wait. Oil.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Oh darn. Yet another well worn but factually incorrect Democrap talking point.
The US is a wash in oil and gas.

Some interesting food for thought.

The leadership of ISIS is comprised of former Iraqi military and intelligence officers. Saddam Hussein was their former boss.

These aren't religious crazies. Quite the opposite, actually, they are cold, calculating, and absolutely ruthless.

They recruit religious crazies to do their dirty work (violence to achieve a political end).

What has become ISIS has taken advantage of our exit from Iraq. This has allowed them to flourish unimpeded.



http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/11/15/paris-attacks-the-wests-fatal-misunderstanding-of-islamic-state/

...we cannot forget that Islamic State came to the world stage barely over a year ago, when it took Mosul and subsequently one third of Iraq as well as one third of Syria in a matter of weeks. Some of the terror group’s major advances on the ground took mere hours, advances that Obama later said will take years to roll back.



There is no sharply defined border that defines ISIS land. Otherwise we (or France) would have simply nuked it. Which makes the job of mopping them up harder.



http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/11/15/paris-attacks-the-wests-fatal-misunderstanding-of-islamic-state/

“We never thought the West would allow a group like ISIS to expand, but now I know that we have been played. We have been extremely stupid,” one anti-Islamic State rebel told me on condition of anonymity to protect his family. He sounded embittered by what he called a shocking and swift victory for the group, and he spoke to me from his car, which he said he had parked just outside an Internet cafe to piggy-back on the Wi-Fi signal without anyone hearing our conversation. He said Islamic State had setup checkpoints everywhere.

“The only thing that makes sense to us is that the world wants to dump all its trash here,” he said, referring to the Islamic State jihadists, whom he said were mainly non-Syrian, but other Arab nationals, Chechens, and Westerners. “And then the West will come and bomb them all. This must be the strategy because nothing else makes any sense.”



Unless you want to commit genocide, this is going to be very difficult to tackle.

It should be clear to everyone, regardless of political affiliation, that there is a war of values being waged.

This war is fully supported by 20-25% of all muslims who actively believe in violent jihad. The remainder, the so-called moderates, wouldn't mind if the 25% cut your head off.

There is a resurgence in fundamentalist islam which is being pushed by wahabbi scholars. This is attracting young men. The enabling mechanism by which this is being spread is the infinite reach and richness of the internet and social media.

The idea that grinding poverty and injustice as a root cause has been discredited. Remember that the Tsarnaevs were "refugees" who have been extended every possible advantage while living in Boston. The POS that shot up Chattanooga, TN earlier this year was not a disadvantaged youth. You can take the radical out of 3rd world $hitholes, but you can't take the savage out of the radical no matter where you are.

There is something objectively wrong with a religion that promotes the killing and rape of innocents and outright lying.

Islam is an ugly religion with ugly adherents. There is no way around this. F*ck islam.

There is no such thing moderate islam. Just "no islam."

France and even Sweden closed their borders.

It's time we do the same.

This time around, we have animals hiding amongst the wretched refuse that want to blow us up, shoot us and cut our heads off.

Islam doesn't police its own and we can't easily distinguish the crazies from the "moderates."

Not all muslims do bad deeds.

But if there are 1.6 billion muslims, and 1/4 of them believe in violent jihad ... the math screams that the "moderates" are irrelevant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry3NzkAOo3s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_gUkPzx5kE&list=PLpdFJZe85hJmbgeCmUHoSRzJ60Ik7Neql

Isn't that what hitter said about the Jews to justify shipping them all off to the gas chambers ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did the Jews blow up and shoot innocent people?

Does anything in the Torah say kill and rape innocents and lie?

Even if it did ... do Jews do that?

This is the kind of behavior that liberal multiculturalists embrace.

There is nothing redeeming about this type of behavior or belief system.

islam is fundamentally incompatible with western values associated with civility. period. end of story.



World | Tue Sep 10, 2013 12:58pm EDT Related: WORLD, UNITED NATIONS, YEMEN

Child bride in Yemen dies of internal bleeding on wedding night: activist


An eight-year-old Yemeni girl died of internal bleeding on her wedding night after marrying a man five times her age, a social activist and two local residents said, in a case that has caused an outcry in the media and revived debate about child brides.

Arwa Othman, head of Yemen House of Folklore and a leading rights campaigner, said the girl, identified only as Rawan, was married to a 40-year-old man late last week in the town of Meedi in Hajjah province in northwestern Yemen.

"On the wedding night and after intercourse, she suffered from bleeding and uterine rupture which caused her death," Othman told Reuters. "They took her to a clinic but the medics couldn't save her life."

Othman said authorities had not taken any action against the girl's family or her husband.

A local security official in the provincial town of Haradh denied any such incident had taken place. He did not want to be identified because he was not authorized to speak to the press.

But two Meedi residents contacted by Reuters confirmed the incident and said that local tribal chiefs had tried to cover up the incident when news first broke, warning a local journalist against covering the story.

Many poor families in Yemen marry off young daughters to save on the costs of bringing up a child and earn extra money from the dowry given to the girl.

A U.N. report released in January revealed the extent of the country's poverty, saying that 10.5 million of Yemen's 24 million people lacked sufficient food supplies, and 13 million had no access to safe water and basic sanitation.

Human Rights Watch urged Yemen's government in December 2011 to ban marriages of girls under the age of 18, warning it deprived child brides of education and harmed their health.

Quoting United Nations and government data, HRW said nearly 14 percent of Yemeni girls were married before the age of 15 and 52 percent before the age of 18. The group said many Yemeni child brides-to-be are kept from school when they reach puberty.

Discussions on the issue were shelved by political turmoil following protests against President Ali Abdullah Saleh in 2011 that led to his ouster.

(Reporting by Mohammed Ghobari; Writing by Mahmoud Habboush; editing by Mike Collett-White)

What is the world's fastest growing religion?

Take a wild guess.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/02/living/pew-study-religion/

Holy crap, if this isn't a reminder that the ultra- religious are a dangerous foe regardless of sect. Nothing can prepare the world for the senseless atrocities that occur in the name of a spiritual leader. History dictates nothing good results from senseless devotion.

"the ultra- religious are a dangerous foe regardless of sect"

Regardless of sect? No difference in the threat posed by a Muslim radical and an ultra-devout Amish person?

We can't we just say what is obviously true?

Isn't that what hitter said about the Jews to justify shipping them all off to the gas chambers ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


Jesus God Almighty Nebe, were the Jews flying planes into buildings into Berlin?

Yes, that's what Hitler said about the Jews, but he was talking jibberish, because he was insane.

We shouldn't be afraid to say it like we see it.

We should stop trying to be so polite and politically correct. It can literally kill us.

We can rightly criticize the values that this garbage religion professes. Doesn't have to be about race.

islam is fundamentally incompatible with western values associated with civility. period. end of story.

It's time to start having this exact conversation. If there are 2 billion Muslims in the world, and 1% are radicalized, that's 20 million radicals.

I have sympathy for peace-loving Muslims. But if they cannot, or will not, exert any influence on the 1% who are doing these things, then they are forcing our hand.

We shouldn't be afraid to say it like we see it.

We should stop trying to be so polite and politically correct. It can literally kill us.

We can rightly criticize the values that this garbage religion professes. Doesn't have to be about race.

racisthatecrimeintolerantislamophobewaronwomenhomo phobe.

My argument is that NOT ALL Muslims are bad. Weewee said that the only solution to solve this is to consider genocide. Genicide is the wiping out of an entire group of people.

Sure.. Let's nuke em all like a nest of cockroaches. I bet a lot of mouth breathers are thinking that is a good idea.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What keeps me up at night (seriously) is a repeat of the Beslan school massacre. About 400 people (mostly children) were murdered by Chechen islamo jihadists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beslan_school_siege

400.

Can you imagine that on U.S. soil?

But that's the reality we are looking at right now.

Have we forgotten?

The ocean that separates us from the muslim terrorists won't hold them forever.

Take some time to talk to your local police and homeland security agents.

Do you know how this is going to unfold?

Here's a scenario that will give you the chills.

Schoolbuses.

My argument is that NOT ALL Muslims are bad. Weewee said that the only solution to solve this is to consider genocide. Genicide is the wiping out of an entire group of people.

Sure.. Let's nuke em all like a nest of cockroaches. I bet a lot of mouth breathers are thinking that is a good idea.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nebe,

I said logically genocide is the only sure way. I didn't say that's what we should do, lol. Even I'm not that cranky.

Close the borders. Boot some of the f*ckers out. Don't give in to PC.

There is no military solution to this problem. Has any one actually listened to what they want ?? They want western military to leave to area. Seems simple enough, no?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nebe,

I said logically genocide is the only sure way. I didn't say that's what we should do, lol. Even I'm not that cranky.

Close the borders. Boot some of the f*ckers out. Don't give in to PC.

I agree. Closed borders is a good step.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There is no military solution to this problem. Has any one actually listened to what they want ?? They want western military to leave to area. Seems simple enough, no?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't think bombing them does all that much. I'm pretty sure that ISIS was prepared for that when they planned the Paris attacks.

You have to have infantry go in and kill all of them. But it's hard when the rats scurry and melt into the general population.

That's why, from the perspective of prevention, it's important to seal the borders and keep a close eye on them (that means profiling) and booting the rabblerousers out.

Bring back the guillotine, while we're at it.

If ISIS stayed put and kept their crap within a defined area, I think the world could afford to say "not my problem."

But with what happened in Paris on Friday night, well, I don't think that's going to be very realistic.

This is foreign policy f*ckup squarely on Obama and Hilldog. They've owned it for 7 years.

Obama is in charge of protecting France ? You lost me there.
But I'm in agreance with you 90%
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Obama is in charge of protecting France ? You lost me there.
But I'm in agreance with you 90%
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, but by abandoning Iraq he enabled ISIS to form and consolidate in strength.

That then started a cascade of events in Syria, with Obama supporting the anti al-Assad rebels, intensifying the civil war, which gave ISIS an opening to invade Syria, creating a humanitarian refugee crisis, allowing ISIS fanatics to sneak into western Europe.

Really, this is a big f*ckup.

Obama and Hilldog f*cked up Syria so bad that Putin felt he had to step in.

I don't like Putin, but he was justified in scolding Obama.

"Do you know what you did?!!!"

The dems have to realize that the middle east is not solveable by writing a white paper. Mooslims have been killing innocents and each other for thousands of years.

Obama and Hilldog f*cked up Syria so bad that Putin felt he had to step in.

I don't like Putin, but he was justified in scolding Obama.

"Do you know what you did?!!!"

The dems have to realize that the middle east is not solveable by writing a white paper. Mooslims have been killing innocents and each other for thousands of years.

It is also not 'solveable' by committing 100,000's of troops for an indefinite amount of time per the hawks either. This is not solely on Bush, and not solely Obama's fault or either Clinton's.

I don't know what the answer is, most options suck.

Ok. Agreed.
So much energy was focused on Iran and the nuke deal... No doubt this is a cluster #^&#^&#^&#^&. I'd love to see Russia go in there and do some muscle flexing on the ground.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There is no military solution to this problem. Has any one actually listened to what they want ?? They want western military to leave to area. Seems simple enough, no?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you really believe that if the west removed its troops, the jihadists would lay down their arms? They hate everything we stand for, they hate that we let our womed go to school and we don't foirce them to dress like ninjas.

Israel made massive concessions, they turned over parts of Gaza, and they removed Israelis from disputed settlements. Yet the conflict goes on.

Nebe, if I thought a troop withdrawal would end the bloodhshed, I'd support it. There's no reason to suspect it would.

As Rockhound said, all options suck, but some suck less than others.

Ok. Agreed.
So much energy was focused on Iran and the nuke deal... No doubt this is a cluster #^&#^&#^&#^&. I'd love to see Russia go in there and do some muscle flexing on the ground.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Russia will, in retaliation for that downed plane. I suspect ISIS will find out that Putin isn't Eric Holder.

It is also not 'solveable' by committing 100,000's of troops for an indefinite amount of time per the hawks either. This is not solely on Bush, and not solely Obama's fault or either Clinton's.

I don't know what the answer is, most options suck.

The middle east sucks. lol.

Every time we meddle there, however, we f*ck it up just a bit more. Hate to say it, but the region needs strong and brutal leaders to keep order amongst the two mooslim tribes. The Syria situation sits squarely on Obama and Hilldog. If we didn't take sides in the Syrian civil war and draw it out so much, maybe ISIS wouldn't have had the window of opportunity to step in.

It's really funny to say this, but Hillary Clinton really is a warmonger. I wonder if people are picking up on this.

More participation from other nations like Russia may not be a bad thing from the purely selfish perspective of saving American blood and treasure. Syria has been a Soviet/Russian client state for decades anyways. We can deal with the pernicious effects of Rooskie influence in the region later.

war is big business
lotta money in it

with prohibition
it requires Prisons (Clintons built-em)

with country skirmishes (campaigns)
it requires weaponry
that funds technology.... $$$$

bring on the drones
and bots with heat seeking
explosive darts

#^&#^&#^&#^& is about to get real over there I think.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nothing is going to get real over there.....the french used ten planes dropped 20 bombs, very few were killed.....what was the human kill number?.....big news was U S wart hogs destroyed oil tankers.....before strafing and bombing the tankers we dropped leaflets one hour before telling people to get away from their trucks.....my question is Y?....kill them!!!!.....we bomb empty buildings so that there R no civilian casualties....kill them!!!!....they did not care about killing civilians on 9/11

If U read between the lines of your presidents message yesterday he said...." hug an Isis.".....:)...lol

We shall see....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

#^&#^&#^&#^& is about to get real over there I think.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jeepers, in your mind, Kissy abandoning Iraq, Kissy trying to install the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Kissy drawing a red line in Syria and then ignoring his own demands, kisyy giving birth to ISIS, which creating a word wide refugee crisis...

IS NOT REAL??

It is also not 'solveable' by committing 100,000's of troops for an indefinite amount of time per the hawks either. This is not solely on Bush, and not solely Obama's fault or either Clinton's.

I don't know what the answer is, most options suck.

"It is also not 'solveable' by committing 100,000's of troops for an indefinite amount of time "

The "Surge", in Iraq, worked. Obama's removal of those troops, led to ISIS.

No one wants big numbers of troops over there for a long peropd of time. But it' sbetter to fight them there, than here. Better to figh tthem before they take out a city, than after. Correct?

"I don't know what the answer is, most options suck"

At a high level, I think the "what" is obvious and not complex - we have to kill all the jihadists, and everyone helping them. The "how" is going to suck. But it has to be done. Obama has no stomach for this, all he cares about is getting the hell out of office with poll numbers that meet his satisfaction, he's not up for this.

No, but by abandoning Iraq he enabled ISIS to form and consolidate in strength.

That then started a cascade of events in Syria, with Obama supporting the anti al-Assad rebels, intensifying the civil war, which gave ISIS an opening to invade Syria, creating a humanitarian refugee crisis, allowing ISIS fanatics to sneak into western Europe.

Really, this is a big f*ckup.
There's so much wrong here I'm not sure where to begin.

There's so much wrong here I'm not sure where to begin.

Fact - at the height of the Surge, Al Queda in Iraq was decimated. We have th ecommunications intercepts from their leaders, saying it was lost.

Fact - when Obama announced that he wasn't going to seek a SOF agreement, but was going to pull everyone out, many military experts advised him that bad things would happen in th evaccuum our departure would create. Ask the Cambodians if it's a coincidence that Pol Pot waited until we withdreew from Vietnam to start his genocide.

Fact - after we withdrew, ISIS filled that void.

Fact - Obama (who is always wrong, yet somehow never in doubt), called them "the junior varsity".

Fact - hours before the Paris attack, Obama said that ISIS was contained, and that among our successes, has been increased security at international airports. Incredibky, he said that, while the fuselage of the downed Russian plane was probably still smoldering. Did no one on his staff tell him that happened?

We drop leaflets and warn that we will attack oil trucks in 1 hr....we do not kill anyone.....russia attacks oil fields and kills about 600 isis....maybe trump is right,let the russians do it...:)

We drop leaflets and warn that we will attack oil trucks in 1 hr....we do not kill anyone.....russia attacks oil fields and kills about 600 isis....maybe trump is right,let the russians do it...:)

Right.

Fact - at the height of the Surge, Al Queda in Iraq was decimated. We have th ecommunications intercepts from their leaders, saying it was lost.
But it wasn't destroyed. al Qaeda in Iraq was suffering largely because we were PAYING Sunni militants to push back against it. That's not a long term strategy...

Fact - when Obama announced that he wasn't going to seek a SOF agreement, but was going to pull everyone out, many military experts advised him that bad things would happen in th evaccuum our departure would create. Ask the Cambodians if it's a coincidence that Pol Pot waited until we withdreew from Vietnam to start his genocide.
As we've discussed a million times (perhaps you need a million +1) there already was a SOF agreement in place per the Bush administration. The new Iraqi government wanted us out, and the Bush policy of de-Bathification is a key reason we didn't have reasonable options.

I'm not sure what Cambodia has to do with this. Are you suggesting we should have left a small residual force?:rollem:

Fact - after we withdrew, ISIS filled that void.
Not really. The first void that ISIS was able to take advantage of was more a by-product of the Syrian civil war. The second void was created by the Iraqi government using Shiite troops to guard Sunnis in Mosul.
Fact - Obama (who is always wrong, yet somehow never in doubt), called them "the junior varsity".
He did, and at that time they were the JV. I don't think he wanted to give them any more cred than necessary.

Fact - hours before the Paris attack, Obama said that ISIS was contained, and that among our successes, has been increased security at international airports. Incredibky, he said that, while the fuselage of the downed Russian plane was probably still smoldering. Did no one on his staff tell him that happened?
The context for that remark clearly was that ISIS was not capturing new territory and in fact appears to be losing some critical ground. I think the timing of recent terror events are a result of this pressure.

ISIS knows they can't win if the key powers unite to destroy them. They need to stir up a global backlash against Islam. Listening to most of the GOP candidates it sounds like we're starting down that path.

But it wasn't destroyed. al Qaeda in Iraq was suffering largely because we were PAYING Sunni militants to push back against it. That's not a long term strategy...


http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/16/us-military-syrian-isis-fighters

How's that for strategy? $500 million for training and only 4 or 5 have entered the battle
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/16/us-military-syrian-isis-fighters

How's that for strategy? $500 million for training and only 4 or 5 have entered the battle
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Old news...how are the Kurds with US assistance doing now?

There's so much wrong here I'm not sure where to begin.

And Washington D.C. disagrees with you.

This came out before the Paris attacks.



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/2/senators-tell-obama-halt-syrian-rebel-training/

Senators tell Obama to halt Syrian rebel training

By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Friday, October 2, 2015

President Obama’s program to train Syrian rebels is a total failure and needs to be scrapped, a bipartisan group of senators said in a letter to the administration Friday, saying it’s time the national security team acknowledge the disaster and come up with a new strategy.

As the centerpiece of Mr. Obama’s Syrian strategy, along with American airstrikes, the training has backfired — and some of the rebels the U.S. equipped turned around and struck a bargain to give ammunition and trucks to al Qaeda-backed forces in Syria, the senators said.

“The Syria Train and Equip Program goes beyond simply being an inefficient use of taxpayer dollars. As many of us initially warned, it is now aiding the very forces we aim to defeat,” the four senators — three Democrats and one Republican — said in their letter.

Defense officials admitted last month that they were falling far below their promise of thousands of fighters trained this year, and of the several dozen who had been trained, only “four or five” are actually on the battlefield. The others were killed or captured almost immediately upon being deployed.

The Pentagon says it has dozens more fighters in the pipeline, but said it will miss its targets. But officials rejected the need for a rethink, telling the Senate Armed Services Committee that the president and top Pentagon officials think they have the right mix.

One key to that was a decision to allow American warplanes to provide air cover for U.S.-backed rebels. But that could be more difficult now that Russia has committed its forces to the fight in Syria, complicating American military officials’ plans.

The results speak for themselves.

This is an Obama and Hillary policy screwup of huge proportions.

And Washington D.C. disagrees with you.

This came out before the Paris attacks.
When in doubt, quote random story...

... the Bush policy of de-Bathification ...

but but but but Bush

Newflash: ISIS leadership is comprised of Saddam Hussein's Baathist military and intelligence leadership.

Long and juicy article.



http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html

but but but but Bush

Newflash: ISIS leadership is comprised of Saddam Hussein's Baathist military and intelligence leadership.
Sorry if history isn't convenient. It was one of a LONG list of strategic blunders you want to blame Obama for not being able to magically fix.

And yes, ISIS was able to gain strength because the former Baathist military leadership...WAS OUT OF WORK.

When in doubt, quote random story...

Here's another one.



http://www.salon.com/2015/11/20/capitol_hill_buzz_forget_assad_focus_on_is/

Friday, Nov 20, 2015 01:45 PM EST

CAPITOL HILL BUZZ: Forget Assad, focus on IS

Deb Riechmann, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — In an unusual alliance, a House Democrat and Republican have teamed up to urge the Obama administration to stop trying to overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad and focus all its efforts on destroying Islamic State militants.

Reps. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, and Austin Scott, R-Ga., introduced legislation on Friday to end what they called an “illegal war” to overthrow Assad, the leader of Syria accused of killing tens of thousands of Syrian citizens in a more than four-year-old civil war entangled in a battle against IS extremists, also known as ISIS.

“The U.S. is waging two wars in Syria,” Gabbard said. “The first is the war against ISIS and other Islamic extremists, which Congress authorized after the terrorist attack on 9/11. The second war is the illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government of Assad.”

Scott said, “Working to remove Assad at this stage is counter-productive to what I believe our primary mission should be.”

Publicly, the United States has focused its efforts on fighting IS and urging Assad to step down. But beyond thousands of U.S. airstrikes targeting IS in the region, the CIA began a covert operation in 2013 to arm, fund and train a moderate opposition to Assad. The secret CIA program is the only step the U.S. is taking on Assad militarily.

In the Philippines on Thursday for the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, President Barack Obama reiterated America’s demand that Assad must go. “The bottom line is: I do not foresee a situation in which we can end the civil war in Syria while Assad remains in power,” Obama said.

Since 2013, the CIA has trained an estimated 10,000 fighters, although the number still fighting with so-called moderate forces is unclear. CIA-backed rebels in Syria, who had begun to put serious pressure on Assad’s forces, are now under Russian bombardment with little prospect of rescue by their American patrons, U.S. officials say.

For years, the CIA effort had foundered — so much so that over the summer, some in Congress proposed cutting its budget. Some CIA-supported rebels had been captured; others had defected to extremist groups.

Gabbard complained that Congress has never authorized the CIA effort, though covert programs do not require congressional approval, and the program has been briefed to the intelligence committees as required by law, according to congressional aides who are not authorized to be quoted discussing the matter.

Gabbard contends that the effort to overthrow Assad is counter-productive because it is helping IS topple the Syrian leader and take control of all of Syria. If IS were able to seize the Syrian military’s weaponry, infrastructure and hardware, the group would become even more dangerous than it is now and exacerbate the refugee crisis.

Sorry if history isn't convenient. It was one of a LONG list of strategic blunders you want to blame Obama for not being able to magically fix.

And yes, ISIS was able to gain strength because the former Baathist military leadership...WAS OUT OF WORK.

You responded and haven't even read the article.

You responded and haven't even read the article.
Where's the spanking emoji ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You responded and haven't even read the article.
Didn't need to. The involvement of former Iraqi military leadership in ISIS is well known...

Spence only reads the daily talking points...

Didn't need to. The involvement of former Iraqi military leadership in ISIS is well known...

Uh, I dunno if this fact is appreciated by the general public. They seem to have an impression of ISIS being jihadist radicals. Actually, the leadership isn't.

Hilldog was appointed Sec State in 2009.

The withdrawl of U.S. forces from Iraq finished up some time in December 2011.

ISIS didn't claim the Levant until 2013.

After WWII hostilities ceased, General Patton kept some Nazis in place to keep an interim government functioning. He caught a little flack for it but it worked out.

Before Bush left office all the libs here were screaming about how Iraq was a mistake and how Bush screwed it up. I don't know if the de baathification of Iraq was talked here (maybe) but ...

Both Obama and Hillary had plenty of time to fix this before ISIS became an issue. They had every opportunity to make simple fixes.

Hindsight is 20/20 ... but what does this tell you about Hillary's and Obozo's statecraft?

Iraqi Baathist officials were Sunni but largely secular. Wouldn't have been much of a stink to re-instate them.

They made the situation worse by withdrawing and doing nothing else.

Pathetic.

Great article in Mother Jones of all places. Remember we (secretly) started helping the rebels in 2013 to fight Assad. Which drew the civil war out and allowed ISIS to take advantage of the stalemate and vacuum in Syria.

Note the date of this article.

Hillary was secstate until 2013. CIA would not act without State's and WH's approval.

So, I ask again, what does this say of Hillary's statecraft?

If it's all Lurch's fault, what does this say about Obama's statecraft?



http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/08/how-us-helped-isis-grow-monster-iraq-syria-assad

How the US Helped ISIS Grow Into a Monster

In his new book, Patrick Cockburn writes that America's failed strategy will only make ISIS stronger.

—By Patrick Cockburn

Thu Aug. 21, 2014

This story first appeared on the TomDispatch website. This essay is excerpted from the first chapter of Patrick Cockburn's new book, The Jihadis Return: ISIS and the New Sunni Uprising, with special thanks to his publisher, OR Books. The first section is a new introduction written for TomDispatch.

There are extraordinary elements in the present US policy in Iraq and Syria that are attracting surprisingly little attention. In Iraq, the US is carrying out air strikes and sending in advisers and trainers to help beat back the advance of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (better known as ISIS) on the Kurdish capital, Erbil. The US would presumably do the same if ISIS surrounds or attacks Baghdad. But in Syria, Washington's policy is the exact opposite: there the main opponent of ISIS is the Syrian government and the Syrian Kurds in their northern enclaves. Both are under attack from ISIS, which has taken about a third of the country, including most of its oil and gas production facilities.

But US, Western European, Saudi, and Arab Gulf policy is to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad, which happens to be the policy of ISIS and other jihadis in Syria. If Assad goes, then ISIS will be the beneficiary, since it is either defeating or absorbing the rest of the Syrian armed opposition. There is a pretense in Washington and elsewhere that there exists a "moderate" Syrian opposition being helped by the US, Qatar, Turkey, and the Saudis. It is, however, weak and getting more so by the day. Soon the new caliphate may stretch from the Iranian border to the Mediterranean and the only force that can possibly stop this from happening is the Syrian army.

The reality of US policy is to support the government of Iraq, but not Syria, against ISIS. But one reason that group has been able to grow so strong in Iraq is that it can draw on its resources and fighters in Syria. Not everything that went wrong in Iraq was the fault of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, as has now become the political and media consensus in the West. Iraqi politicians have been telling me for the last two years that foreign backing for the Sunni revolt in Syria would inevitably destabilize their country as well. This has now happened.

By continuing these contradictory policies in two countries, the US has ensured that ISIS can reinforce its fighters in Iraq from Syria and vice versa. So far, Washington has been successful in escaping blame for the rise of ISIS by putting all the blame on the Iraqi government. In fact, it has created a situation in which ISIS can survive and may well flourish.

Using the al-Qa'ida Label

The sharp increase in the strength and reach of jihadist organizations in Syria and Iraq has generally been unacknowledged until recently by politicians and media in the West. A primary reason for this is that Western governments and their security forces narrowly define the jihadist threat as those forces directly controlled by al-Qa'ida central or "core" al-Qa'ida. This enables them to present a much more cheerful picture of their successes in the so-called war on terror than the situation on the ground warrants.

In fact, the idea that the only jihadis to be worried about are those with the official blessing of al-Qa'ida is naïve and self-deceiving. It ignores the fact, for instance, that ISIS has been criticized by the al-Qa'ida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri for its excessive violence and sectarianism. After talking to a range of Syrian jihadi rebels not directly affiliated with al-Qa'ida in southeast Turkey earlier this year, a source told me that "without exception they all expressed enthusiasm for the 9/11 attacks and hoped the same thing would happen in Europe as well as the US"

Jihadi groups ideologically close to al-Qa'ida have been relabeled as moderate if their actions are deemed supportive of US policy aims. In Syria, the Americans backed a plan by Saudi Arabia to build up a "Southern Front" based in Jordan that would be hostile to the Assad government in Damascus, and simultaneously hostile to al-Qa'ida-type rebels in the north and east. The powerful but supposedly moderate Yarmouk Brigade, reportedly the planned recipient of anti-aircraft missiles from Saudi Arabia, was intended to be the leading element in this new formation. But numerous videos show that the Yarmouk Brigade has frequently fought in collaboration with JAN, the official al-Qa'ida affiliate. Since it was likely that, in the midst of battle, these two groups would share their munitions, Washington was effectively allowing advanced weaponry to be handed over to its deadliest enemy. Iraqi officials confirm that they have captured sophisticated arms from ISIS fighters in Iraq that were originally supplied by outside powers to forces considered to be anti-al-Qa'ida in Syria.

The name al-Qa'ida has always been applied flexibly when identifying an enemy. In 2003 and 2004 in Iraq, as armed Iraqi opposition to the American and British-led occupation mounted, US officials attributed most attacks to al-Qa'ida, though many were carried out by nationalist and Baathist groups. Propaganda like this helped to persuade nearly 60% of US voters prior to the Iraq invasion that there was a connection between Saddam Hussein and those responsible for 9/11, despite the absence of any evidence for this. In Iraq itself, indeed throughout the entire Muslim world, these accusations have benefited al-Qa'ida by exaggerating its role in the resistance to the US and British occupation.

Precisely the opposite PR tactics were employed by Western governments in 2011 in Libya, where any similarity between al-Qa'ida and the NATO-backed rebels fighting to overthrow the Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, was played down. Only those jihadis who had a direct operational link to the al-Qa'ida "core" of Osama bin Laden were deemed to be dangerous. The falsity of the pretense that the anti-Gaddafi jihadis in Libya were less threatening than those in direct contact with al-Qa'ida was forcefully, if tragically, exposed when US ambassador Chris Stevens was killed by jihadi fighters in Benghazi in September 2012. These were the same fighters lauded by Western governments and media for their role in the anti-Gaddafi uprising.

Imagining al-Qa'ida as the Mafia

Al-Qa'ida is an idea rather than an organization, and this has long been the case. For a five-year period after 1996, it did have cadres, resources, and camps in Afghanistan, but these were eliminated after the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001. Subsequently, al-Qa'ida's name became primarily a rallying cry, a set of Islamic beliefs, centering on the creation of an Islamic state, the imposition of sharia, a return to Islamic customs, the subjugation of women, and the waging of holy war against other Muslims, notably the Shia, who are considered heretics worthy of death. At the center of this doctrine for making war is an emphasis on self-sacrifice and martyrdom as a symbol of religious faith and commitment. This has resulted in using untrained but fanatical believers as suicide bombers, to devastating effect.

It has always been in the interest of the US and other governments that al-Qa'ida be viewed as having a command-and-control structure like a mini-Pentagon, or like the mafia in America. This is a comforting image for the public because organized groups, however demonic, can be tracked down and eliminated through imprisonment or death. More alarming is the reality of a movement whose adherents are self-recruited and can spring up anywhere.

Osama bin Laden's gathering of militants, which he did not call al-Qa'ida until after 9/11, was just one of many jihadi groups 12 years ago. But today its ideas and methods are predominant among jihadis because of the prestige and publicity it gained through the destruction of the Twin Towers, the war in Iraq, and its demonization by Washington as the source of all anti-American evil. These days, there is a narrowing of differences in the beliefs of jihadis, regardless of whether or not they are formally linked to al-Qa'ida central.

Unsurprisingly, governments prefer the fantasy picture of al-Qa'ida because it enables them to claim victories when it succeeds in killing its better known members and allies. Often, those eliminated are given quasi-military ranks, such as "head of operations," to enhance the significance of their demise. The culmination of this heavily publicized but largely irrelevant aspect of the "war on terror" was the killing of bin Laden in Abbottabad in Pakistan in 2011. This enabled President Obama to grandstand before the American public as the man who had presided over the hunting down of al-Qa'ida's leader. In practical terms, however, his death had little impact on al-Qa'ida-type jihadi groups, whose greatest expansion has occurred subsequently.


Ignoring the Roles of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan

The key decisions that enabled al-Qa'ida to survive, and later to expand, were made in the hours immediately after 9/11. Almost every significant element in the project to crash planes into the Twin Towers and other iconic American buildings led back to Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden was a member of the Saudi elite, and his father had been a close associate of the Saudi monarch. Citing a CIA report from 2002, the official 9/11 report says that al-Qa'ida relied for its financing on "a variety of donors and fundraisers, primarily in the Gulf countries and particularly in Saudi Arabia."

The report's investigators repeatedly found their access limited or denied when seeking information in Saudi Arabia. Yet President George W. Bush apparently never even considered holding the Saudis responsible for what happened. An exit of senior Saudis, including bin Laden relatives, from the US was facilitated by the US government in the days after 9/11. Most significant, 28 pages of the 9/11 Commission Report about the relationship between the attackers and Saudi Arabia were cut and never published, despite a promise by President Obama to do so, on the grounds of national security.

In 2009, eight years after 9/11, a cable from the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, revealed by WikiLeaks, complained that donors in Saudi Arabia constituted the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide. But despite this private admission, the US and Western Europeans continued to remain indifferent to Saudi preachers whose message, spread to millions by satellite TV, YouTube, and Twitter, called for the killing of the Shia as heretics. These calls came as al-Qa'ida bombs were slaughtering people in Shia neighborhoods in Iraq. A sub-headline in another State Department cable in the same year reads: "Saudi Arabia: Anti-Shi'ism as Foreign Policy?" Now, five years later, Saudi-supported groups have a record of extreme sectarianism against non-Sunni Muslims.

Pakistan, or rather Pakistani military intelligence in the shape of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), was the other parent of al-Qa'ida, the Taliban, and jihadi movements in general. When the Taliban was disintegrating under the weight of US bombing in 2001, its forces in northern Afghanistan were trapped by anti-Taliban forces. Before they surrendered, hundreds of ISI members, military trainers, and advisers were hastily evacuated by air. Despite the clearest evidence of ISI's sponsorship of the Taliban and jihadis in general, Washington refused to confront Pakistan, and thereby opened the way for the resurgence of the Taliban after 2003, which neither the US nor NATO has been able to reverse.

The "war on terror" has failed because it did not target the jihadi movement as a whole and, above all, was not aimed at Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, the two countries that fostered jihadism as a creed and a movement. The US did not do so because these countries were important American allies whom it did not want to offend. Saudi Arabia is an enormous market for American arms, and the Saudis have cultivated, and on occasion purchased, influential members of the American political establishment. Pakistan is a nuclear power with a population of 180 million and a military with close links to the Pentagon.

The spectacular resurgence of al-Qa'ida and its offshoots has happened despite the huge expansion of American and British intelligence services and their budgets after 9/11. Since then, the US, closely followed by Britain, has fought wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and adopted procedures normally associated with police states, such as imprisonment without trial, rendition, torture, and domestic espionage. Governments wage the "war on terror" claiming that the rights of individual citizens must be sacrificed to secure the safety of all.

In the face of these controversial security measures, the movements against which they are aimed have not been defeated but rather have grown stronger. At the time of 9/11, al-Qa'ida was a small, generally ineffectual organization; by 2014 al-Qa'ida-type groups were numerous and powerful.

In other words, the "war on terror," the waging of which has shaped the political landscape for so much of the world since 2001, has demonstrably failed. Until the fall of Mosul, nobody paid much attention.

Patrick Cockburn is Middle East correspondent for the Independent and worked previously for the Financial Times. He has written three books on Iraq's recent history as well as a memoir, The Broken Boy, and, with his son, a book on schizophrenia, Henry's Demons. He won the Martha Gellhorn Prize in 2005, the James Cameron Prize in 2006, and the Orwell Prize for Journalism in 2009. His forthcoming book, The Jihadis Return: ISIS and the New Sunni Uprising, is now available exclusively from OR Books. This excerpt (with an introductory section written for TomDispatch) is taken from that book. To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com here.

Not up to all the he said/ she did stuff ...can soneone answer why we won,t join the other nations in a joint effort to rid ISIS ????

Not up to all the he said/ she did stuff ...can soneone answer why we won,t join the other nations in a joint effort to rid ISIS ????

Because it doesn't jive with Obamas exit strategy of the Middle East. And he doesn't want to be blamed with creating more of a mess which is probably what will happen if we were to go back in there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not up to all the he said/ she did stuff ...can soneone answer why we won,t join the other nations in a joint effort to rid ISIS ????
Different priorities up until this point. Hopefully recent events will change that.

Because it doesn't jive with Obamas exit strategy of the Middle East. And he doesn't want to be blamed with creating more of a mess which is probably what will happen if we were to go back in there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Kissy? More of a mess? Nuclear Iran? You people are truly delusional!

Uh, I dunno if this fact is appreciated by the general public. They seem to have an impression of ISIS being jihadist radicals. Actually, the leadership isn't.
So we're not at war with jihadists? Somebody had better tell Jim.

Both Obama and Hillary had plenty of time to fix this before ISIS became an issue. They had every opportunity to make simple fixes.

Iraqi Baathist officials were Sunni but largely secular. Wouldn't have been much of a stink to re-instate them.

They made the situation worse by withdrawing and doing nothing else.
Not much of a stink to re-instate Baathist officials? That's beyond idealistic thinking. It's silly actually.

As for those "simple fixes." I assume you mean like unilateral involvement in the Syrian civil war? Letting US troops stay in Iraq governed by Iraqi law?

This is a big and complex issue without any easy fixes. Obama's policy may have been cautious and assumed the Iraqi's would actually use the equipment we gave them. But the flip side quickly puts us into another protracted and messy war largely isolated from the International community.

[QUOTE=Clammer;1086787]Not up to all the he said/ she did stuff ...can soneone answer why we won,t join the other nations in a joint effort to rid ISIS ????[/

The present administration has no balls to do collateral damage(civilian casualties of a military operation.)....U C that from the other day, we send leaflets warning to get away from trucks,we will bomb in an hour also we bomb empty warehouses.....Russia on the other killed 600 in one bombing raid of oil supply depots....other then USA other nations kill people, US wants no part of that....we do not support the Kurds we give them antiquated weapons....we gave trucks, tanks etc: to the iragis who turned and retreated and isis ended up with them...should have given them to the Kurds.

Someone please tell spence this is obamas's war seven years worth...Bush is long gone....:)

So we're not at war with jihadists? Somebody had better tell Jim.


Not much of a stink to re-instate Baathist officials? That's beyond idealistic thinking. It's silly actually.

As for those "simple fixes." I assume you mean like unilateral involvement in the Syrian civil war? Letting US troops stay in Iraq governed by Iraqi law?

This is a big and complex issue without any easy fixes. Obama's policy may have been cautious and assumed the Iraqi's would actually use the equipment we gave them. But the flip side quickly puts us into another protracted and messy war largely isolated from the International community.

"As for those "simple fixes."

Or our d*ckhead-in-chief could have listened to all the military advisors, and there were planty of them, who begged him to get a SOF agreement with Iraq to leave behind a sufficient peacekeeping force to maintain trhe stability which Obama inherited, and then completely squandered. The Surge worked. Al Queda in Iraq, which was the precursor to ISIS, was crushed, defeated, gone.

Obama truly believed he could make these people like us by projecting moral superiority over the previous administration. When it didn't work, he had no other ideas, he was a one trick pony.

Here's how effective Obama is at foreign policy. The doctor who helped us get Bin Laden, is stuck in a goddamn Pakistani prison. Not only have we not demanded his release, we still send aid to these people? Either cut the aid until he is released, or have Seal Team 6 storm the prison. Get this doctor out, bring his family here, and give him the $25 million dollar reward he deserves.

After seeing this guy languish in prison, why the hell would anyone stick their necks out to help us?

How long, O lord?

[QUOTE=Clammer;1086787]Not up to all the he said/ she did stuff ...can soneone answer why we won,t join the other nations in a joint effort to rid ISIS ????[/

The present administration has no balls to do collateral damage(civilian casualties of a military operation.)....U C that from the other day, we send leaflets warning to get away from trucks,we will bomb in an hour also we bomb empty warehouses.....Russia on the other killed 600 in one bombing raid of oil supply depots....other then USA other nations kill people, US wants no part of that....we do not support the Kurds we give them antiquated weapons....we gave trucks, tanks etc: to the iragis who turned and retreated and isis ended up with them...should have given them to the Kurds.

Someone please tell spence this is obamas's war seven years worth...Bush is long gone....:)

"The present administration has no balls to do collateral damage"

Correct. He probably spends half the day polishing the Nobel Peace Prize he was awarded after he had been in office for what, 4 hours? He doesn't want ANYONE to think he doesn't deserve that, he's probably campaigning for another one.

Kissy? More of a mess? Nuclear Iran? You people are truly delusional!

I know you like to post gibberish, and I usually just ignore it, but I have to ask why do you call Obama Kissy? I keep looking for a news story about Henry Kissinger every time I see Kissy

I know you like to post gibberish, and I usually just ignore it, but I have to ask why do you call Obama Kissy? I keep looking for a news story about Henry Kissinger every time I see Kissy
I ran into Henry Kissinger several years ago, literally.

Hopped off a bar stool at DCA and nearly bumped right into him. Security agent threw a nice pick and I changed my vector accordingly...

Or our d*ckhead-in-chief could have listened to all the military advisors,

That is a good one!

Your complementing yourself in another thread by saying something along the lines "my kids will never hear me throw the Fbomb" made me laugh and reinforced my view of what type of person you are.

POS, FCOTUS and now D*ckhead. miserable.

That is a good one!

Your complementing yourself in another thread by saying something along the lines "my kids will never hear me throw the Fbomb" made me laugh and reinforced my view of what type of person you are.

POS, FCOTUS and now D*ckhead. miserable.

Paul, the man referred to people like me as "bitter clingers". He said that conservatives "gotta stop just hatin' all the time". Now, he says that we are all afraid of liberal media and 3 year-old orphans, and "that doesn't sound so tough" to him". Sorry, the man has made it abundantly clear what he thinks about white people who disagree with him, so he deserves no better. He is consistently dishonest, insulting, and hostile towards my ilk. When he treats my views with some minimum amount of respect, that's what he'll get from me.

I didn't use the f-bomb, and my kids don't know about this site. Zero hypocrisy.

The type of person I am, is one who has no inclination to make "fake nice" with people who always throw elbows at others, but cry like a baby when someone elbows back.

I know you like to post gibberish, and I usually just ignore it, but I have to ask why do you call Obama Kissy? I keep looking for a news story about Henry Kissinger every time I see Kissy

You funny Roundeye.

Goggle Butterfly McQueen.

I know EVERTHING bout birthin babies

It is not about him, it is about you.

You funny Roundeye.

Goggle Butterfly McQueen.

I know EVERTHING bout birthin babies

Thanks, very helpful as to why you refer to Obama as Kissy.
She was the black maid in Gone with the Wind, is that part of the reason?

Thanks, very helpful as to why you refer to Obama as Kissy.
She was the black maid in Gone with the Wind, is that part of the reason?

Great, I am glad that I could lead you around by the nose to clarify this for you.

So you are objecting that this movie star WAS Black and OweBlamerLiar is only a Mulatto?

So we're not at war with jihadists?



http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html

In 2010, Bakr and a small group of former Iraqi intelligence officers made Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the emir and later "caliph," the official leader of the Islamic State. They reasoned that Baghdadi, an educated cleric, would give the group a religious face.

Bakr was "a nationalist, not an Islamist," says Iraqi journalist Hisham al-Hashimi, as he recalls the former career officer, who was stationed with Hashimi's cousin at the Habbaniya Air Base. "Colonel Samir," as Hashimi calls him, "was highly intelligent, firm and an excellent logistician."



Our country is at war with adversaries who are decidedly more intelligent and ruthless than the morons currently occupying the white house.

Our enemies are more savvy than the idiots who put said cretins into the white house.

ISIS leadership is not jihadist. They recruit and exploit nutbags who are to do the dirty work.

This is a big and complex issue without any easy fixes. Obama's policy may have been cautious and assumed the Iraqi's would actually use the equipment we gave them. But the flip side quickly puts us into another protracted and messy war largely isolated from the International community.

Look, Obama's and Hilldog's and Lurch's foreign policy in this regard have been an unmitigated disaster.

The results speak for themselves and the Europeans are pissed at us because the problem is spilling over into the continent. Russia feels like they have to step in because of "Obama's cautious policy." It was inept policy formed by inept leadership.

You are just rationalizing. Typical Obama apologist.

Great, I am glad that I could lead you around by the nose to clarify this for you.

So you are objecting that this movie star WAS Black and OweBlamerLiar is only a Mulatto?

I have no idea about that, this finishes your trip to my ignore list. Thanks for posting.

ps... I haven't seen that in a LONG time, but wasnt her name Prissy, not Kissy in the movie?

The Saudis sized up Obozo and saw this coming.

They're not dumb.

http://blog.camera.org/saudi-arabia-great-wall.jpg

I have no idea about that, this finishes your trip to my ignore list. Thanks for posting.

ps... I haven't seen that in a LONG time, but wasnt her name Prissy, not Kissy in the movie?

JEEPERS! I'll now have to check:conf:

Not up to all the he said/ she did stuff ...can soneone answer why we won,t join the other nations in a joint effort to rid ISIS ????

Obozo doesn't like Russia. Partly because of what Putin did in the Ukraine (annexed Crimea).

A coalition will involve Russia.

Putin can't make up his muslim mind about who is the lesser evil to piss off - the sunnis (Saudi Arabia) or the shias (Iran).

the man-child in chief doesn't want to tarnish his legacy with yet even more war mongering that hilldog started.

Obozocare is falling apart (http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2015/11/19/unitedhealth-group-earnings-downgrade-obamacare-affordable-care-act/76040322/) and he will be spending his last year in office bursting veins in his head trying to prevent his centerpiece legislation from getting repealed. No time for foreign policy drama!

she was much smarter then the whitehouse bozo and yes he is a mullato, she is black unless her mother was taken to the hen house by the white slave owner...that woman has a lot of credits, an incredible woman....obama is not worthy of her accomplishments....:)

she was much smarter then the whitehouse bozo and yes he is a mullato, she is black unless her mother was taken to the hen house by the white slave owner...that woman has a lot of credits, an incredible woman....obama is not worthy of her accomplishments....:)

I completely agree about Ms. McQueen. Many white Democrap slave holders raped and fathered the children of their slaves. Further more the white Democrap slave owner would separate children from their mothers, so that the white Democrap slave owner would then be Master over that child.
Fredrick Douglas a slave whom escaped from the white Democraps in the South to the future Republicans in the North. Fredrick Douglas came to Barlows General Store in Treadwell Delaware County New York, the next town over from me, via the Under Ground Rail Road.
Douglas, whom was separated from his mother, remarked that his mother would comfort him at night but she would be gone long before morning came. Douglas also deduced his father was his slave owner.

she was much smarter then the whitehouse bozo and yes he is a mullato, she is black unless her mother was taken to the hen house by the white slave owner...that woman has a lot of credits, an incredible woman....obama is not worthy of her accomplishments....:)

I think I miss read this post. Allow me a do over.

Kissy or Prissy was young girl in the house whom was very excited to help the Lady of the House give birth. All through out the movie she would say "I know EVERYTHING about birthing babies!"
BUT when it came to the actual birth, as soon as the Lady of the House went into labor, Kissy or Prissy started to cry and wailed "I don't know NOTHING 'bout birthing no babies!"
Enter our Magnificent Mulatto, our Affirmative Action pResident.

I have no idea about that, this finishes your trip to my ignore list. Thanks for posting.

ps... I haven't seen that in a LONG time, but wasnt her name Prissy, not Kissy in the movie?

Jumping Jehoshaphat!! You are right which would make me WRONG! Prissy it is! :kewl::kewl:

Hussein, just what the hell are you doing?



http://www.allenbwest.com/2015/11/exposed-you-wont-believe-what-obama-is-forcing-troops-to-do-before-each-syrian-airstrike/

EXPOSED: You won’t believe what Obama is FORCING troops to do before each Syrian airstrike

Written by Michelle Jesse, Associate Editor on November 23, 2015

It’s hard not to wonder whose side President Obama is on in the escalating fight against Islamic jihad. His refusal to name the enemy; his lack of passion and force in taking the fight to them; his insistence on not just allowing but enabling Al-Hijra — the Islamic doctrine of immigration; and his general sympathy for all things Islam are just some examples of our president’s inexplicable stance on this clear and present threat to the nation whose protection is supposed to be job #1 for him.

And when you hear what the Obama administration is doing in conjunction with air strikes directed at ISIS in Syria, it’ll stop you in your tracks.

Via InfoWars:

The Obama White House is giving ISIS a 45 minute warning before bombing their oil tankers by dropping leaflets advising potential jihadists to flee before air strikes in Syria.

“Get out of your trucks now, and run away from them. Warning: air strikes are coming. Oil trucks will be destroyed. Get away from your oil trucks immediately. Do not risk your life,” the leaflet reads.

http://www.allenbwest.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Warning-for-ISIS-630x413.jpg

Let that sink in for a moment. We are giving our enemy ample warning to flee before our airstrikes hit. You know, it kinda reminds me of giving Iran advance warning of nuclear inspections. Gosh, what generous-hearted folks we Americans are. Can’t you see our respect in the world rocketing?

Anyone know how much warning time ISIS gave the victims in the Paris terror attacks?

The leaflet drops are justified under the premise that the oil tanker drivers might be civilians and not ISIS recruits, although it’s an explanation that doesn’t wash with critics.

“It’s not like these drivers are innocent, uninvolved “civilians” like children or sick people,” writes J.E. Dyer. “They’re waging ISIS’s war, just like the other non-uniformed participants who make up 100% of ISIS’s ranks. This is how far the Obama administration is going to avoid “collateral damage” — and who knows, it may be worse.”

May be worse indeed. God only knows.

FrontPageMag’s Daniel Greenfield makes a similar point, commenting, “So after all this time, they came up with a great plan; drop flyers on ISIS trucks so that the drivers, who may or may not be ISIS members, can run away in time. Meanwhile ISIS gets 45 minutes of warning.”

Compare the Obama White House’s approach to fighting ISIS to that of Russia.

While it took the U.S. fifteen months to even begin targeting ISIS’ oil refineries and tankers, air strikes by Moscow destroyed more than 1,000 tankers in a period of just five days.

In comparison, Col. Steve Warren said that the U.S. had taken out only 116 tanker trucks, the “first strike” to target ISIS’ lucrative black market oil business, which funds over 50 per cent of the terror group’s activities.

U.S. air strikes targeting ISIS oil assets are so rare that PBS was caught using footage of Russian fighter jets bombing an oil storage facility in Syria and passing it off as evidence of the U.S. targeting the Islamic State’s oil infrastructure.

U.S. military pilots have also confirmed that they were ordered not to drop 75 per cent of their ordnance on ISIS targets because they could not get clearance from their superiors.

“You went 12 full months while ISIS was on the march without the U.S. using that air power and now as the pilots come back to talk to us they say three-quarters of our ordnance we can’t drop, we can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us,” said House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, R-Calif, while retired four-star U.S. general Jack Keane labeled the policy ” an absurdity from the beginning.”

In the debate over whether President Obama is just a clueless, inexperienced ideologue — or is actually crazy like a fox and methodically working his plan to “fundamentally transform” America and, indeed, the world — the evidence just keeps piling up that this president knows exactly what he’s doing. And it appears, increasingly, that he has an agenda other than the best interests of the republic at heart. With 14 months to go, I shudder to think of how much more damage he can do.

[Note: This article was written by Michelle Jesse, Associate Editor]