Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

The US is back in the air over Iraq, bombing ISIS. Is this a mistake?

  1. Yes
  2. No
 
 
 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(96)

Numnudz

Sep-04-14 6:25 AM

Of he may just be stubborn and sticking to his guns.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Numnudz

Sep-04-14 6:24 AM

Or he may have been de-rezzed. *shudder*

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Sep-03-14 5:07 PM

Grant may be banned. But I think either he or a compatriot disagrees a lot.

But I think he called me some slur that was his current equivalent of the Vietnam era "baby killer" when I asked earlier if we should do more in Syria. And when I initially said we Had to make sanctions early that hurt Russia regarding Crimea.

Rand Paul is man enough to say that earlier he was an idiot. Grant, you gonna do the same?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Sep-03-14 5:01 PM

Okay, WHERE IS GRANT??

His hero:

Last week, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, who is widely considered to be mulling a presidential run, wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal stating the policies of so-called "interventionists" such as Hillary Clinton in Syria have "abetted ISIS." In that piece Paul outlined his support for a far more cautious foreign policy:

A more realistic foreign policy would recognize that there are evil people and tyrannical regimes in this world, but also that America cannot police or solve every problem across the globe. [The Wall Street Journal]

Paul is now singing a different tune.

On Friday, Paul told The Associated Press in an email that he was in favor of robust military force when it came to ISIS:

If I were president, I would call a joint session of Congress. I would lay out the reasoning of why ISIS is a threat to our national security and seek congressional authorization to destroy ISIS militarily. [AP]

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-25-14 11:39 AM

Fighters from Islamic State (IS) have taken control of a key Syrian government airbase, activists say.

The Tabqa airbase was the last remaining stronghold of Bashar al-Assad's government in Raqqa province..

State TV confirmed that government forces had "evacuated" the airbase. Days of fighting there have reportedly killed hundreds on both sides.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-25-14 11:36 AM

Syria's foreign minister has offered to help the US fight the Islamic State (IS) militant group, which has seized swathes of land in Iraq and Syria.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-25-14 9:54 AM

Stand by for a new acronym for the ISIS/ISIL/IS terrorist group causing havoc across Syria and Iraq.

Dar al-Iftaa (“the House of Fatwas”) in Cairo, headed by Egyptian grand mufti Shawki Ibrahim Allam, has launched an Internet-based campaign aimed at distancing Islam from the group known variously as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham, or simply Islamic State.

(He's) urging media to drop all names for the group that incorporate the word “Islamic,” in favor of “al-Qaeda separatists in Iraq and Syria” (QSIS).

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-25-14 9:51 AM

Related To Poll Question. New Question: Agree or Disagree with...

For years, Pentagon officials have publicly grumbled that sequestration, combined with the removal of some $600 billion from the defense budget over the next decade, would decimate the military’s ability to confront enemies around the world. Now, with Russia and Ukraine on the verge of war and as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria plunders the Middle East – and presents a bold new challenge to the U.S. in the wake of its brutal murder of American journalist Jim Foley – some in Congress are buying into their argument.

Sen. John McCain revealed that he and Sen. Lindsey Graham would attempt to repeal the defense cuts mandated by sequestration hopefully in September.

For months, DOD brass, including Army Chief of Staff Ray Odierno, have been warning the cuts would make the military unable to deal with global threats.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-25-14 9:44 AM

unrelated, except it goes with the Ben Carson editorial:

The big corporate news of the day is that Burger King is in talks to acquire Canadian coffee and donut chain Tim Hortons.

Besides the possible linking up of two iconic brands, each strongly associated with its home country, the deal is significant because it would be a tax inversion for Burger King. If the deal is consummated, Burger King would become a Canadian company and pay a lower tax rate.

Meanwhile, the news gives Democrats another talking point. The potential departure of an iconic American company because of "corporate greed" will be trotted out on the campaign trail.

(Carson's article said the Sec Treas says paying The highest corp taxes is patriotic)

(BK has sign: Welcome Pres Obama. Stimulate Us. Try a Whopper.)

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rpmwwe

Aug-25-14 2:57 AM

I wish they would get a little faster with posting poll questions about significant events since we can't post on the articles. Nothing more frustrating than a fast-paced news week and getting just a few re-run questions about the weather and favorite sports teams.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-24-14 10:02 PM

Unrelated, but just read the paper's editorial by Ben Carson, Not in the business of supporting the government. Wish we could comment.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Kozy62

Aug-24-14 8:54 PM

A mess that can only be resolved by destroying ISIS/ISIL but there is not the will by the people or the courage of the President.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-23-14 1:35 PM

Better that the upheaval in a country to which we committed so much blood and treasure remain the fault of George W. Bush.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-23-14 1:35 PM

Interesting:

Most news organizations have not referred to ISIL until President Obama began using the term, which stands for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. But when Obama used the term 5 times on June13, and 16 times in his commencement speech at West Point on June 19th.

Most continue to use the widely accepted acronym ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, but both describe the same murderous organization. The difference is that the Levant describes a territory far greater than simply Iraq and Syria. It’s defined as this: The Levant today consists of the island of Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, and part of southern Turkey.

Why would Obama prefer ISIL? An “army” of that territorial magnitude takes the focus off the two countries that many believe define Obama’s continued failure in the Middle East. Most likely, he would rather eliminate the connection between the chaos in Iraq with his inaction in Syria. Better that the upheaval in a coun

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Numnudz

Aug-23-14 4:54 AM

"And no, I don't want to go in to war with them. Just wouldn't mind a barrage raining down on them-- like a big shoe stepping on a poisonous insect. "

That's what it will take, like the finger of God.

America, in its current form, doesn't have the will to fight.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Numnudz

Aug-23-14 4:53 AM

"Maybe a poll question should be: Do you think we'll see peace in our lifetime? "

Considering radical Islam has been at war since the 7th century with everyone is not Islamic, no, no peace.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-22-14 8:48 PM

And no, I don't want to go in to war with them. Just wouldn't mind a barrage raining down on them-- like a big shoe stepping on a poisonous insect.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-22-14 8:33 PM

Maybe a poll question should be: Do you think we'll see peace in our lifetime?

I see no redeeming value in ISIS, or IS--I guess they've rebranded themselves. They're not a country, but just a bunch of terrorists. While I don't really like to admit it, they are a group that I would be okay with wiping out. I think a "holy war" on the part of the rest of us against them could be justified.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Numnudz

Aug-22-14 7:45 PM

Eighty-nine missions so far as of yesterday. Looks like we're back at war in Iraq.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-12-14 4:01 PM

and back to Ukraine:

Russian bombers have penetrated US airspace 16 times in the last TEN days. At the same time, Russia's Navy says it chased a submarine out of its 'boundary waters' in the Barents Sea, near the home of its powerful Northern Fleet.

This is a huge spike in the number of such events – which have already increased greatly since Russia invaded Crimea last February.

The sheer number of Russian bombers and surveillance aircraft operating near American territory is clearly a sign of a new strategy being executed by Putin's more aggressive Russia. Whether these missions are being conducted to lure America into a false sense of familiarity with such operations, or they are being executed as a form of pure power projection, bordering on harassment, remains unclear.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-12-14 3:55 PM

cont

“There are tens of thousands of defectors from the Syrian military, many of whom fled to neighboring countries (some were put into a refugee camp in Turkey), while others stayed to fight as part of the overall FSA,” Tabler said. “There was also the Supreme Military Council, the armed affiliate of the Syrian National Coalition, which also included a number of defected commanders. I met a lot of them in southern Turkey over the last few years."

The real problem, Tabler says, was that "as assistance didn't arrive, the defectors became disheartened so not sure where they all are at the moment.”

And ISIS took full advantage of that vacuum, as stated by journalist Michael Weiss and Nada Bakos, a former CIA targeting officer in Iraq:

ISIS was savvy. They let FSA-aligned groups take the lead on anti-regime victories; they started state building and resources

"Had the requisite assistance started flowing two years ago, both Syria and Iraq would be in better places now,

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-12-14 3:51 PM

cont:

the president's characterization ignores "decades of universal conscription and mandatory military service in Syria" by characterizing the armed opposition to the regime of Bashar al-Assad "as a hopeless collection of former butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers."

Hof notes that the recommendation to arm to the moderate opposition was offered in some form not only by Clinton, "but by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, CIA Director David Petraeus, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Martin Dempsey."

When Obama made a similar "farmers" argument in June, Hof highlighted that the commander in chief "fails to mention the tens of thousands of Syrian Army officers and soldiers who abandoned the Assad regime rather than participate in that regime’s campaign of mass homicide."

And here's how Andrew Tabler of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy detailed issues with Obama's statement, speaking to The Washington Post:

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

questioner

Aug-12-14 3:46 PM

For the past two years, the main criticism of the Obama administration's policy toward Syria has been that the U.S., "rather than read the signals early on and arm the Syrian opposition when it was making substantial gains, allowed a vacuum to form and then fretted when that vacuum was filled by jihadists."

Obama considers that to be "horsesh*t," saying the notion that arming the rebels would have made a difference has “always been a fantasy" because the opposition of "former doctors, farmers, pharmacists, and so forth" was fighting "a well-armed state backed by Russia, backed by Iran, [and] a battle-hardened Hezbollah."

A former administration official has subsequently dismantled the president's argument.

Fred Hof, a former special adviser for transition in Syria under then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, writes in Politico that the president's characterization ignores "decades of universal conscription and mandatory military s

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Kozy62

Aug-11-14 9:40 AM

You see, in calling the withdrawal a “moment of success,” in 2011, at least the president had the decency to note the contribution of America’s military forces in Iraq, even if he was about to render “all the fighting and all the dying” moot with his premature withdrawal.

In retrospect, America should have seen this coming when Obama said, “We are ending a war not with a final battle but with a final march toward home,” because there’s a term for that particular military maneuver.

It’s called “retreat,” and successful armies don’t often employ it.

A mistake...more like a failure!

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Kozy62

Aug-11-14 9:12 AM

Ok, I know that some of you don't want to see or hear the truth from we conservatives...but what s your anointed one saying:

Well, former secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton, isn’t buying it. In an interview earlier this week, she used her sharpest language yet to describe the " Obama failure" that resulted from the decision to keep the U.S. on the sidelines during the first phase of the Syrian uprising.

“The failure to help build up a credible fighting force of the people who were the originators of the protests against Assad—there were Islamists, there were secularists, there was everything in the middle—the failure to do that left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled,” Clinton said.

Now watch how either Bush or I will be called a name...and will a single pro Obama poster agree?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 96 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web