I nominate the King Of Jordan to replace Obama fo rthe next 2 years

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

ISIS doesn't kill everyone. Certainly where they can they'll kill those who they consider infidels but they've left majority Sunni areas as is but subjected to their rule.

The Crusades were started by Christians in an It wasn't defensive at all and in sieges like for Jerusalem they certainly did massacre most Muslims and Jews. The Crusaders were also known for a lot of debauchery and land grabbing along the way.

Granted, the history of that area is very complex but I don't think you can claim any moral high ground with the behavior of European Christians over Muslims during those times.
families there. It's quite likely tr supply lines are stretched, their fighters weakened, the civilian population ready to revolt, and Iraqi military regrouped and an enraged Jordan perfectly positioned to divide the Syrian and Iraqi ISIS militants.

And how did the Muslims take over the lands that the Christians were trying to reclaim? Did they win those lands in a poker claim, or were hey awarded those lands in a lawsuit? Or did the conquer to get the lands?

Maybe "defensive" is the wrong word, but it wasn't done out of aggression, either. It was a reaction to someone else's aggression, very very similar to what we were doing at Normandy Beach in 1944, right?

In any event, for Obama to mention that as a pretext to talking about ISIS, at a National Prayer breakfast of all places, is beyond insane.

You make a lot of baseless military assumptions, and I'm shocked, yes shocked, that all of you speculation paints Obama as wildly successful in the war on terror, despite the fact that he denies that it exists.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

And how did the Muslims take over the lands that the Christians were trying to reclaim? Did they win those lands in a poker claim, or were hey awarded those lands in a lawsuit? Or did the conquer to get the lands?

Maybe "defensive" is the wrong word, but it wasn't done out of aggression, either. It was a reaction to someone else's aggression, very very similar to what we were doing at Normandy Beach in 1944, right?

No, not at all.

In any event, for Obama to mention that as a pretext to talking about ISIS, at a National Prayer breakfast of all places, is beyond insane.

Have you read his full remarks?

You make a lot of baseless military assumptions, and I'm shocked, yes shocked, that all of you speculation paints Obama as wildly successful in the war on terror, despite the fact that he denies that it exists.

Please name one.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

No, not at all.


Have you read his full remarks?


Please name one.

Here's one. I'm paraphrasing, our idiot in chief said something to the effect of...lest anyone think they can claim the religious moral high ground, lets not forget about those bloodthirsty Christians, blah, blah, blah. His reference was hundreds of years old, and historically inaccurate. The crusaders, like the allies at Normandy, set out to liberate lands from the savages that conquered them. Go ahead and make that wrong, I dare you. Obama would be a laughingstock, if he wasn't doing so much damage.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device