Bush Doctrine: “I can hear you, the rest of the world can hear you and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon.”
Obama Doctrine: You’ll get used to it.
Bush Doctrine: “I can hear you, the rest of the world can hear you and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon.”
Obama Doctrine: You’ll get used to it.
Empty Hair at the G20
“I pointed out that although Canada has shifted its approach on a broad range of multilateral and international issues, we remain committed to the fact that Russia’s interference in Ukraine must cease; that we stand with the Ukrainian people and expect the president to engage fully in the Minsk peace process,”
The Wonder Boy didn’t think this through. Russian interference bad, Canadian, US, EU and German interference good?
Obama is a liar.
He is not on the side of the USA.
He is trying to weaken the USA, by allowing this group of muslims into the country.
Muslims are at war with everyone, and so, we are at war with the muslims.
Enough already;
Pam Geller for President.
ISIS emerged & flourished for three main reasons:
– the Obama administration underestimated their reach and power, calling them the JV team, not understanding they were an even more violent offshoot of AQ, whom they dishonestly claimed to the American people were a spent force. Nothing could be further from the truth.
– the Obama administration, in its zeal to withdraw US forces from Iraq, reneged on an agreement to keep troops there unless and until the Iraqi military could prove it had the necessary capability to defend their country, and the Iraqi leadership gave ironclad agreement they would not go after Sunni and other minorities. Both assumptions turned out to be fatally and precisely wrong, instead putting out the welcome mat to ISIS to invade Iraq.
– the Obama administration failed to act on their “red line” ultimatum for Assad or other actors in Syria over the use of WMDs, thus showing fatal weakness in the face of those who declare us as their targeted enemy; those who only understand brute force.
This, of course, is notwithstanding his weakness in the face of Islamist aggression, his ridiculously weak showing against the spectre of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, deploying them &/or sharing them with terrorists, and the Obama administration’s overall refusal to link up Islamist attacks into a common theme of waging war on infidels/enemies everywhere. Add to that the refusal to recognize though a people may be peaceful, their leadership &/or Islamist elements want nothing of the sort and continue to play this weak administration.
The gong show he and Hillary put together over the Benghazi attacks didn’t help either.
There and here, woe betide any leader who advocates fast tracking refugees if even one of them is involved in a future attack. Like the parole board who lets out a murderer despite expert advise not to do so, these politicians must understand their political necks are on the line here if they don’t listen to prudent advice. That level of accountability doesn’t exist right now, but will soon should these refugee plans backfire as many experts fear.
I just heard some prof say ISIS using refugees to export fighters isn’t their “preferred method.” Try telling that to Parisians. On what basis does he make this claim? Nobody bothers to ask these folks. Instead we have leaders gathering to discuss a non-existent problem rather than a real problem. A simple use of common sense rather than political correctness will reveal what the real “problems” are.
Focusing on the taxation excuse/mirage of fighting climate change while ignoring the need to fight the problem of Islamist world insurgency will double down on their culpability before the jury of public opinion.
Their incompetent, biased and bigoted friends in the mediocracy won’t be able to save them from the assured result of their policy negligence imho.
With all due respect to Bush he should have sent the Air Force. As soon as possible after 9-11. And for as long as necessary to convince the …. Ummm … Muslims that attacking us was a bad idea.
Excellent analysis, Shamrock. Well done!
Justine is already used to it.
Spread the word and tell your friends (and not so friendly friends) that this is real and will eventually ‘migrate’ here to Canada. I’m off to write a note to my MP and the new PM. We’re in deep, deep shit.
Serious question: What do people here think about putting boots on the ground? Bombing runs obviously aren’t cutting it, so should the US, Canada, and other Western countries send in ground troops to Syria and Iraq (again) to take on ISIS? What other options are there? I’m curious what y’all think.
“ISIS emerged & flourished for three main reasons…”
But before all that, ISIS emerged because the US invaded Iraq under false pretenses. After all, ISIS was masterminded, and is still being run, mostly by former Hussein-era Iraqi military and intelligence officers.
Thanks, American conservatives and military hawks. As we sow, so shall we reap.
In 2011 Obama characterized Iraq as stable and secure. I do not believe Bush has been president since then. This is either Obama’s policy or the failure of his policy. Which is it?
The left lies about absolutely everything. A while back they went into a frenzy because Bobby Jindal suggested that cities in Europe had “no-go” zones where Muslims ran the show and cops weren’t welcome. We were assured this just wasn’t the case. Jindal has been vindicated:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/16/bobby-jindal-vindicated-on-no-go-zones-after-paris-attacks/
Kt (kluts tool), read up about Germany, post WW2, read up about Japan, post WW2, read up about S Korea, post Korean war. When done reading, sit down and try to figure out what Obungles should maybe have done different
The French have waited too long and have too many Islamsicks within their borders.
But never thought they could make Bambi look like a Wussie.
–
‘Please give me a hamburger with some Obama fries.’
I agree 100%.
“…as long as necessary to convince the …. Ummm … Muslims that attacking us was a bad idea.”
Yes, dealing with Muslims is pretty simple. For them every thing is as Allah wills, so if they try it on you kill enough of them that they start to get the idea that Allah doesn’t will it right now and they should leave it alone for a while.
Thanks, American conservatives and military hawks. As we sow, so shall we reap.
–
STFU you bleeding heart liberal,
this is Just a short list of Islamsick attacks since 1976,
Two of the 241 marines killed were friends of mine.
Google the attacks you Fuc$ing dumb ass..
United States and France October 23: Marine Barracks Bombing occurs. A suicide car bomber in a truck carrying 2500 pounds of explosives crashed through the gates of a US Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon killing 241 American servicemen and wounding 81. 58 French troops from the multinational force are also killed in a separate attack.
• Israel, West Germany, September 5: Black September kidnaps and kills eleven Israeli Olympic athletes and one German policeman in the Munich Massacre.
•
United Kingdom, , September 19: The group Black September post a letter bomb to the Israeli embassy in London killing an Israeli diplomat.[3]
• Israel, May 15: Ma’alot massacre at the Ma’alot High School in Northern Israel by Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine members: 26 of the hostages were killed, 66 wounded.
• United States, September 8: TWA Flight 841: Bomb kills 88 on jetliner. Attributed to Abu Nidal and his terrorist organization.
Israel, March 5: In the Savoy Operation, Palestine Liberation Organization gunmen from Lebanon take dozens of hostages at the Tel Aviv Savoy Hotel, eventually killing eight hostages and three IDF soldiers, and wounding eleven hostages
Lebanon, August 13: A bomb destroys an office building in West Beirut housing the headquarters of the Palestine Liberation Front, killing more than 175 people and injuring another 80. The bombing was allegedly carried out by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command.
I hope they put 2,000 Islamic terrorists in your community..
You will get to see what a real ‘Baby Boomer’ looks like..
This link explains why appeasement will not work with this group. It is long and detailed. The basic message is the fact that the Islamic state does not recognize borders and that you can never negotiate with them. They will not stop until they are destroyed or they have taken over the world. The good news is they will let non muslims live if they agree to pay and tax and be their slaves.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
Kt unless you’ve got a time machine your point is irrelevant. Obama was dealt those cards, yes, but didn’t play them well at all. So both events, Bush’s Iraq War then Obama’s handling of the file brings us here. I’d like a time machine in which US troops stayed in Iraq, as they should have under the conditions of their withdrawal agreement. Maybe ISIS could have been defeated there and then, but that’s not what happened. Oh right, no time machine.
The point is where do we go from here? Containment cannot defeat ISIS, the local powers don’t and their conscript armies don’t have the stomach for this fight. What about ground troops as Mark asked? Hmm, maybe the Europeans could get off their military asses first and take care of a problem which is in their back yard. So a qualified yes to “boots on the ground,” as the only way to root out ISIS.
BTW Canada can make lots of contributions besides combat forces. Field hospitals for instance. Another idea is a multinational “aid convoy,” taking a page out of Putin’s book. There’s lots of things the CF can do to help here.
“The point is where do we go from here?”
Indeed. Where does one go when one is already so far astray?
You said earlier that Obama should have kept troops in Iraq “unless and until the Iraqi military could prove it had the necessary capability to defend their country.” But what if that criterion means that the timeframe for withdrawal is “never”? As long as US troops occupied Iraq, insurgents would have lain in wait, because time is the one area for which they have the strategic advantage. And so the Americans would continue to occupy the land, because the jihadists are lying in wait. And the jihadists would continue to lie in wait, because the Americans are occupying their land…
Have we forgotten already how war-weary the American public was in 2011, after nearly 9 years of occupying Iraq? Is a potential 20-year presence in Syria and Iraq really something you support? 30 years? 50 years? The US has had troops stationed in S. Korea for more than 60. Here is what Obama had to say yesterday about ramping up ground troops to take on ISIS:
“It is not just my view, but the view of my closest military and civilian advisers, that that would be a mistake. Not because our military could not march into Mosul or Raqqa or Ramadi and temporarily clear out ISIL, but because we would see a repetition of what we’ve seen before, which is [that the extremists will] resurface unless we’re prepared to have a permanent occupation of these countries…This is not an abstraction. When we send troops in, those troops get injured, they get killed, they’re away from their families. Our country spends hundreds of billions of dollars.”
Tell me: is he wrong?
As an aside, it seems worth noting that you are the first and only person to respond to Mark’s question, above, about whether anyone here supports sending ground troops back to the ME. It’s plenty easy to sit back and criticize Obama for whatever he does or doesn’t do; much harder to think up and defend credible alternatives. It appears few here are up to that task.
I disagree with putting boots on the ground until such time as we decide we want to win. For the entire prosecution of Iraq and Afghanistan, there has been political reins on the western military forces. Play nice they say. Wrong, we are projecting western values upon the ME peoples. They respect and understand dominance and power. You play nice over there only if you are in a weak position and bidding time.
Until such time, unleash the air war, civilian casualties be damned. Sounds mean, but is best in the long view.
KT, Americans were tired of the constant pecking the baddies were doing, with no visible improvement. The Americans figured out how to beat and insurgence in Vietnam and the forgot everything.