BREAKING NEWS: Obama authorizes airstrikes against Iraq militants 'if necessary'

NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
What do you want him to do?
Click to expand...
GOOD QUESTION!!!

First, I want him to act like an executive, not some member of a community. He either authorizes strikes or he doesnt. He doesnt sort authorize strikes if someone else decides that ISIS is being bad. So in regards to that I want him to act less like a politician and more like a leader.

I honestly think that Barak Obama, the intellectual that he is, honestly believed that he could just step into the presidency and talk some sense into the world and everything would change. Well, his policy is sucking wind because it wasnt realistic.

The military told him that he needed to keep 30,000 troops or at least a minimum of 10,000 troops in Iraq as a stabilizing force. They could have taken a big patch of desert and made a training grounds into it and used it for that. However, I dont think he felt either politically, ideologically or both that it was a good idea to do that. So he pulled them all out and 3 years later we are faced with this mess.

To be honest I agree with his policy but disagree that it is realistic. He wants the Iraqi's and the Iraq government to somehow stand up to ISIS and defeat them and become a stable democracy. With ISIS on one side and Iran on the other I cannot see that realistically happening. Obama will not give support to the turks directly and Iraq wont do it so they are getting wiped out by lack of supply. There is genocide and religious genocide going on across the region right now and Christians are the primary target. In fact, I am not sure there is a muslim country where Christians are not under attack right now. It seems like the holy war noone is talking about.

As far as the Christians stuck up in the mountains, that is one hell of a tough call. Yes, of course everyone wants to help them but how? And how do we pick and choose who we help and who we dont?

Do we just drop food and let them die of exposure and ISIS? Do we evacuate them??

I do not believe we should go back into Iraq and go to war with ISIS. And although I agree with the president on that he doesnt do any Americans any good by continually showing his hand to the enemy.
 
ginwilly

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
ginjawarrior said:
i dont know who's arse your head is stuck up atm but for you to compare your government to isil... well words fail me
Click to expand...
ISIS is not possible without our governments involvement in the Middle East over the past 40 years. I can say with confidence that any involvement over there is not based on humanitarian reasons no matter how we frame it.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
ginwilly said:
Why? How does it affect us if ISIS in charge until the next regime change?

Not being facetious here, I really don't know. I know they are bad people in re: to personal freedom, but compare them to our own government. We not only shit on our own, we shit on yours, theirs and those guys over there too. I just don't think we have a dog in that fight other than the dog we put over there over a decade ago. It was a mistake then, we are piling on now.
Click to expand...
They are killing every christian that does not convert to Islam. They are forcibly marrying the Christian women to available Islamic men. They are committing mass beheading and other atrocities. Convert or die...

Yeah, kinda bad people...
 
ginwilly

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
They are killing every christian that does not convert to Islam. They are forcibly marrying the Christian women to available Islamic men. They are committing mass beheading and other atrocities. Convert or die...

Yeah, kinda bad people...
Click to expand...
So should we be involved everywhere this is going on? Or just in the oil rich regions?

Do we drop bombs accepting collateral damage or do we put boots on the ground again which supposedly is the best terrorist recruiting tool out there?

It's a no win for sure. I honestly don't know.
 
ginjawarrior

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
ginwilly said:
ISIS is not possible without our governments involvement in the Middle East over the past 40 years. I can say with confidence that any involvement over there is not based on humanitarian reasons no matter how we frame it.
Click to expand...
i for one do not rate your confidence this is not just an immediate humanitarian matter this is a shitstorm that will keep going for decades if we do not stand against it

fundamentalism like isil isn't something we can sit back nd watch while they take size able proportions of the globe
 
ginwilly

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
ginjawarrior said:
i for one do not rate your confidence this is not just an immediate humanitarian matter this is a shitstorm that will keep going for decades if we do not stand against it

fundamentalism like isil isn't something we can sit back nd watch while they take size able proportions of the globe
Click to expand...
First, has the governments and people over there asked for our help? If so, then my position changes. From everything I'm reading, we are not wanted.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
ginwilly said:
So should we be involved everywhere this is going on? Or just in the oil rich regions?

Do we drop bombs accepting collateral damage or do we put boots on the ground again which supposedly is the best terrorist recruiting tool out there?

It's a no win for sure. I honestly don't know.
Click to expand...
I agree. We are picking and choosing but we have been doing that since the country was founded.

Supposedly we need to have a direct threat to the country to go to war without a vote of congress which seems to have gone by the wayside.
 
ginwilly

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
I agree. We are picking and choosing but we have been doing that since the country was founded.

Supposedly we need to have a direct threat to the country to go to war without a vote of congress which seems to have gone by the wayside.
Click to expand...
The trick is to call it something other than war.

Nut uh, we just dropped a few bombs on another sovereign nation, that's not really an act of war unless we declare it first!
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
ginwilly said:
The trick is to call it something other than war.

Nut uh, we just dropped a few bombs on another sovereign nation, that's not really an act of war unless we declare it first!
Click to expand...
I think it has already been dubbed "Operation Martha Stewart"

Obama thinks if you dont call it something then it didnt happen. Probably doesnt want to reach the top of the Nobel Prize biggest mistakes list...
 
ginwilly

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
ginjawarrior said:
they asked for airstrikes weeks ago
Click to expand...
I've seen that, that's why I hedged, but I've also seen the opposite where we are told we are not wanted. I'm not sure what to believe.

It's cool you think highly of our gov, but lest not forget that our gov made slavery possible here, sanctioned the eradication of an indigenous population, put an entire race in "camps" during WWII, has heavily funded anyone willing to pee on Russia only later to bomb those same people, oh, and we are still the only ones to use atomic bombs.
 
C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
GOOD QUESTION!!!

First, I want him to act like an executive, not some member of a community. He either authorizes strikes or he doesnt. He doesnt sort authorize strikes if someone else decides that ISIS is being bad. So in regards to that I want him to act less like a politician and more like a leader.

He authorized strikes

I honestly think that Barak Obama, the intellectual that he is, honestly believed that he could just step into the presidency and talk some sense into the world and everything would change. Well, his policy is sucking wind because it wasnt realistic.

Oh you really believe that?

The military told him that he needed to keep 30,000 troops or at least a minimum of 10,000 troops in Iraq as a stabilizing force. They could have taken a big patch of desert and made a training grounds into it and used it for that. However, I dont think he felt either politically, ideologically or both that it was a good idea to do that. So he pulled them all out and 3 years later we are faced with this mess.

Iraqi Goverment said no to that. What do you propose? An Occupying force against a sovereign nations wishes?

To be honest I agree with his policy but disagree that it is realistic. He wants the Iraqi's and the Iraq government to somehow stand up to ISIS and defeat them and become a stable democracy. With ISIS on one side and Iran on the other I cannot see that realistically happening. Obama will not give support to the turks directly and Iraq wont do it so they are getting wiped out by lack of supply. There is genocide and religious genocide going on across the region right now and Christians are the primary target. In fact, I am not sure there is a muslim country where Christians are not under attack right now. It seems like the holy war noone is talking about.

Iran is not an Ally of ISIS. We cant arm the Kurds and not piss of the Turks. What do you Propose?

As far as the Christians stuck up in the mountains, that is one hell of a tough call. Yes, of course everyone wants to help them but how? And how do we pick and choose who we help and who we dont?

We are dropping food to them and the Iraqi goverment is trying to fly them out of there with Choppers

Do we just drop food and let them die of exposure and ISIS? Do we evacuate them??

how do you propose we do that?

I do not believe we should go back into Iraq and go to war with ISIS. And although I agree with the president on that he doesnt do any Americans any good by continually showing his hand to the enemy.

Then what are you bitching about?
Click to expand...
Have any answers? Or just criticism?
 
ginjawarrior

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
ginwilly said:
I've seen that, that's why I hedged, but I've also seen the opposite where we are told we are not wanted. I'm not sure what to believe.

It's cool you think highly of our gov, but lest not forget that our gov made slavery possible here, sanctioned the eradication of an indigenous population, put an entire race in "camps" during WWII, has heavily funded anyone willing to pee on Russia only later to bomb those same people, oh, and we are still the only ones to use atomic bombs.
Click to expand...
the only thing i feel strongly about here is to stop fanatical fundamentalists like isil becoming a significant player and giving everyone a bad day
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
Have any answers? Or just criticism?
Click to expand...
He should authorize the Canadian pipeline and put all oil drilling permits on fast track along with all nuclear plant planning and tell the American people that Obamacare was a complete failure and we are just gonna undo it. And he should abolish the EPA, department of Education, IRS, VA... and a dozen other government agencies...

For starters...
 
ginwilly

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
ginjawarrior said:
the only thing i feel strongly about here is to stop fanatical fundamentalists like isil becoming a significant player and giving everyone a bad day
Click to expand...
Me too man, me too, really.

My only problem is they are just one of many. What's been going on in Africa the last few decades is much worse but doesn't get the attention.

But if what you say is true and the local govs are asking for our aid, then I feel better about giving it. I keep hearing the opposite though.
 
earnest_voice

earnest_voice

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
GOOD QUESTION!!!

First, I want him to act like an executive, not some member of a community. He either authorizes strikes or he doesnt. He doesnt sort authorize strikes if someone else decides that ISIS is being bad. So in regards to that I want him to act less like a politician and more like a leader.

I honestly think that Barak Obama, the intellectual that he is, honestly believed that he could just step into the presidency and talk some sense into the world and everything would change. Well, his policy is sucking wind because it wasnt realistic.

The military told him that he needed to keep 30,000 troops or at least a minimum of 10,000 troops in Iraq as a stabilizing force. They could have taken a big patch of desert and made a training grounds into it and used it for that. However, I dont think he felt either politically, ideologically or both that it was a good idea to do that. So he pulled them all out and 3 years later we are faced with this mess.

To be honest I agree with his policy but disagree that it is realistic. He wants the Iraqi's and the Iraq government to somehow stand up to ISIS and defeat them and become a stable democracy. With ISIS on one side and Iran on the other I cannot see that realistically happening. Obama will not give support to the turks directly and Iraq wont do it so they are getting wiped out by lack of supply. There is genocide and religious genocide going on across the region right now and Christians are the primary target. In fact, I am not sure there is a muslim country where Christians are not under attack right now. It seems like the holy war noone is talking about.

As far as the Christians stuck up in the mountains, that is one hell of a tough call. Yes, of course everyone wants to help them but how? And how do we pick and choose who we help and who we dont?

Do we just drop food and let them die of exposure and ISIS? Do we evacuate them??

I do not believe we should go back into Iraq and go to war with ISIS. And although I agree with the president on that he doesnt do any Americans any good by continually showing his hand to the enemy.
Click to expand...
You're a clown. You expect Obama to be upfront about current deployments of "advisors" on the ground?

Would you like a list of the units deployed? Their capabilities and locations? It's early days yet and those targets the planes are hitting don't mark themselves.
 
C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
He should authorize the Canadian pipeline
Why so the Canadians and the KOCK brothers can sell oil and refined gas overseas?
and put all oil drilling permits on fast track
name another time in history that we have drilled more oil in the USA?
along with all nuclear plant planning and tell the American people that Obamacare was a complete failure and we are just gonna undo it. And he should abolish the EPA, department of Education, IRS, VA... and a dozen other government agencies...
Obamacare isnt a failure, and the rest of your drivel will only benefit the extremly wealthy

For starters...
Click to expand...
Yep nothing. Just criticism
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top