Fact Checkers Confirm That What Obama Said About ISIL Being Contained Is True

[BWWzfc]

Some folks are so damn thick headed it is a waste of time engaging..............claptrap minds never change...........one cannot discuss/debate someone who does/will not hear what the other is saying

Are you describing yourself or what?

 

[imyoda]

Are you describing yourself or what?

Of course................Now would you like to comment on the subject rather than wasting all our time with your personal opinion about posters.......

 

[BmanMcfly]

So you do not like the Fact Checker................ and that he/she used facts and actual transcript..............TS Bunkie.............. Feelings don't mean squat......

Lmao... Ya, used the transcript and spun it into something barely recognizable as actual facts.

 

[Saucey]

Taking from the speech that was outlined in the original article:

Now who actually believes that the Obama administration is doing all that? The summit at Turkey is a big deal and they probably prepared that speech very carefully. If you notice when he was asked questions be reporters all he did was talk about his opposition in the USA and want to talk about Repubs "popping off". All he is doing is ordering the military to bomb a few things here and there so that he can say he is "doing something", its something visible, but he will go down in history as lame on the issue, and the Leftist know it.

 

[Owl King]

Republicans are trying to make hay out of a sound bite of President Obama saying ISIL is contained.

When did Diane Feinstein become a Republican?

Feinstein: ISIS 'not contained' | TheHill

And yeah, it's embarrassing our POTUS claims ISIS is contained hours before they commit the deadliest terrorist attack on French soil. I guess "contained" means something entirely different to Obama.

 

[BWWzfc]

Of course................Now would you like to comment on the subject rather than wasting all our time with your personal opinion about posters.......

Already did that. And you responded by (as far as I can tell) wasting all our time with your personal opinion about posters.

Remember?

Some folks are so damn thick headed it is a waste of time engaging..............claptrap minds never change...........one cannot discuss/debate someone who does/will not hear what the other is saying"

http://www.debatepolitics.com/members/imyoda.html

You make yourself look like a perfect hypocrite.

Would you like to respond to the point, now? How did President Obama clearly address the strength of ISIL in response to Stephanopoulos? Just repeating Obama's talking points doesn't answer the question unless you flesh it out by explaining how it puts to rest the idea that ISIL is gaining strength.

 

[Grant]

Fact Checkers Confirm That What President Obama Said About ISIL Being Contained Is True

Fact Checkers Confirm That What President Obama Said About ISIL Being Contained Is True


Republicans are trying to make hay out of a sound bite of President Obama saying ISIL is contained. But as I explained yesterday, the full context of his quote made it quite clear that anyone doing this is being dishonest. He was asked specifically about Iraq and Syria and he was correct in his response. Today I learned that PolitiFact agrees.


Looking back at Obama’s interview where he made this comment, it is quite clear that it’s within a narrowly defined scope: ISIS’s territorial expansion in Iraq and Syria. He did not rule out the potential for a terrorist attack, and he also made it clear that the United States’ anti-ISIS efforts are a work in progress.

References or suggestions that Obama claimed ISIS no longer presents an active threat are incorrect.

Experts agree that the President was correct, though his choice of words wasn’t great, given some people’s inability to understand stateless terrorism.

Perhaps the problem is that the people jumping to conclusions aren’t able to keep up with the President’s nuanced, in-depth understanding of fighting stateless terrorism, and only understand delusional bumper sticker slogans that make them feel better, in spite of not actually addressing the problem at all.

Speaking today at a press conference at the Kaya Palazzo Resort in Antalya, Turkey, President Obama demonstrated a remarkable grasp of how to fight ISIL (aka, ISIS). But it wasn’t just his prepared remarks, it was the agile, nuanced answers he gave to complex questions.

In fact, President Obama’s answers were so long that I can only fit one full response in this post. Read it in full and compare it to every single Republican presidential candidate’s “solution”. For that matter, compare it to each Democratic presidential candidate’s.

For a clear understanding of this one is required to read the entire report to understand what5 the President actually said…………….

Rather than relying upon Faux Noise providing an accurate and unspun report……

This is straightforward idiocy!

This link is to "Politics USA - Real Liberal Politics". You look to them to check the facts?

Their 'analysis' is gibberish.

 

[pbrauer]

This is straightforward idiocy!

This link is to "Politics USA - Real Liberal Politics". You look to them to check the facts?

Their 'analysis' is gibberish.

No it's not gibberish, it contain the following link:

What Barack Obama said about ISIS being contained | PolitiFact

 

[Grant]

No it's not gibberish, it contain the following link:

What Barack Obama said about ISIS being contained | PolitiFact

This was the question. " "And that's the strategy you've been following. But ISIS is gaining strength, aren't they?" They were gaining strength, until the French and Russians stepped in, and his previous comments about cutting off their financing, etc. was rubbish.

At least your link, though clearly sympathetic, wasn't as rich in propaganda as the opening post.

 

[pbrauer]

This was the question. " "And that's the strategy you've been following. But ISIS is gaining strength, aren't they?" They were gaining strength, until the French and Russians stepped in, and his previous comments about cutting off their financing, etc. was rubbish.

At least your link, though clearly sympathetic, wasn't as rich in propaganda as the opening post.

In the Middle East, they are not gaining strength that what Obama was speak about.

 

[Grant]

In the Middle East, they are not gaining strength that what Obama was speak about.

If you act as his interpreter then I'll accept how you feel.. These latest musings of his are not going to make much difference one way or the other. We just shake our collective heads and move on.

 

[ballantine]

I stopped reading after "Fact Checkers Confirm".

The Ministry of Truth. lol

 

[PoS]

Put sanctions on Saudi Arabia until they defeat ISIS completely on their own, which they have the power to do.

Good suggestion but we need to stop our interventions too or else ISIS will be able to get more recruits for their cause.

 

[ballantine]

Good suggestion but we need to stop our interventions too or else ISIS will be able to get more recruits for their cause.

lol... my sarcasm detector is tingling...

No, we need to exterminate ISIS. Let's not mince words around this issue. This is an important issue. Those ISIS f*ckers are much worse than the Nazi's ever were. The Nazi's only hated the Jews, but so far ISIS has gone after Europeans, Americans, Africans, Australians, and even the Chinese. The Nazi's only destroyed priceless historical treasures during artillery attacks (in fact they managed to save most of 'em, from what I hear), but ISIS does that stuff for fun.

Let's not beat around the Bush here. We don't need to "stop" interventions, we need to exterminate ISIS once and for all. That's the single best way to guarantee they never get any new recruits. Get rid of 'em entirely. Wipe 'em off the map, every last man, woman, and child. And if you happen to be hanging around an ISIS stronghold when the bombs drop, oh well. The lesson is: don't be hanging around ISIS strongholds. Because ISIS will die, and so will you. That needs to be the lesson. There's no other way.

No other way that will work, anyway - unless you'd like to institutionalize the Islamic State?

 

[eohrnberger]

In the Middle East, they are not gaining strength that what Obama was speak about.

In that narrow definition, yeah, I can see where some might say that ISIS / Daesh is being contained.

But when ISIS / Daesh strike out internationally, such as they have on multiple occasions in multiple nations recently, it's kinda hard for most people to see it that way.

I'm more inclined to chalk it up to pushing a political agenda, torturing definitions beyond the regular ones while doing so.

 

[PoS]

lol... my sarcasm detector is tingling...

No, we need to exterminate ISIS. Let's not mince words around this issue. This is an important issue. Those ISIS f*ckers are much worse than the Nazi's ever were. The Nazi's only hated the Jews, but so far ISIS has gone after Europeans, Americans, Africans, Australians, and even the Chinese. The Nazi's only destroyed priceless historical treasures during artillery attacks (in fact they managed to save most of 'em, from what I hear), but ISIS does that stuff for fun.

Let's not beat around the Bush here. We don't need to "stop" interventions, we need to exterminate ISIS once and for all. That's the single best way to guarantee they never get any new recruits. Get rid of 'em entirely. Wipe 'em off the map, every last man, woman, and child. And if you happen to be hanging around an ISIS stronghold when the bombs drop, oh well. The lesson is: don't be hanging around ISIS strongholds. Because ISIS will die, and so will you. That needs to be the lesson. There's no other way.

No other way that will work, anyway - unless you'd like to institutionalize the Islamic State?

Exterminate an ideology? I'd sure would like to know what your plan is in going about and doing that, General... and I'm sure people will love your suggestion of killing all women and children as really realistic.

 

[American]

GUARANTEED RESPONSE: the fact checkers are all liberals and, thus, in the tank for Obama.

Fact checkers are the final arbiters of truth now? You got to think about what they are saying.

Looking back at Obama’s interview where he made this comment, it is quite clear that it’s within a narrowly defined scope: ISIS’s territorial expansion in Iraq and Syria. He did not rule out the potential for a terrorist attack, and he also made it clear that the United States’ anti-ISIS efforts are a work in progress.
References or suggestions that Obama claimed ISIS no longer presents an active threat are incorrect.

BFD, the territorial part is irrelevant, it's where they are popping up everywhere that matters. We could send a 100,000 soldiers in and easily take the land. They're spreading out and not being killed.

 

[Visbek]

Fact checkers are the final arbiters of truth now? You got to think about what they are saying.

No one is the "final arbiter of truth." However, in many cases, fact-checking sites are non-partisan and fairly accurate.

In this case, they're accurate. You can read the transcript for yourself, it's pretty obvious that he was NOT saying "ISIS is completely neutralized, completely unable to act, incapable of terrorist actions." He was saying "ISIS can't maneuver like they did in the past." E.g. if they tried to move a column of 1500 soldiers into a large city (like they did with Mosul), they'd get bombed into oblivion. They can raid, but can't hold territory.

I mean, really. All you need is two people with AK-47's or a pressure cooker, and you've got the capability to conduct a terrorist attack. It doesn't require huge sums of cash, or extensive planning, or a "mastermind."

We should also remember that ultimately, terrorism is a tool of the weak. It's cheap, it's fast, it's small scale. But it is also limited in what it can achieve. It can kill, it can scare people and provoke reactions, but you can't use it to control a populace or exert a rule of law. Although it is not good that ISIL can strike remotely, it's a sign of their increasing inability to achieve their primary goal of building a real state in the Middle East.

 

[American]

No one is the "final arbiter of truth." However, in many cases, fact-checking sites are non-partisan and fairly accurate.

In this case, they're accurate. You can read the transcript for yourself, it's pretty obvious that he was NOT saying "ISIS is completely neutralized, completely unable to act, incapable of terrorist actions." He was saying "ISIS can't maneuver like they did in the past." E.g. if they tried to move a column of 1500 soldiers into a large city (like they did with Mosul), they'd get bombed into oblivion. They can raid, but can't hold territory.

I mean, really. All you need is two people with AK-47's or a pressure cooker, and you've got the capability to conduct a terrorist attack. It doesn't require huge sums of cash, or extensive planning, or a "mastermind."

We should also remember that ultimately, terrorism is a tool of the weak. It's cheap, it's fast, it's small scale. But it is also limited in what it can achieve. It can kill, it can scare people and provoke reactions, but you can't use it to control a populace or exert a rule of law. Although it is not good that ISIL can strike remotely, it's a sign of their increasing inability to achieve their primary goal of building a real state in the Middle East.

I don't think 9/11 was small scale.

 

[le bouffon]

Fact checkers are the final arbiters of truth now? You got to think about what they are saying.

Thank you for proving Kobie's point.

 

[zimmer]

GUARANTEED RESPONSE: the fact checkers are all liberals and, thus, in the tank for Obama.

"Contained"?
Have you seen the expanse under their control?

It's almost like saying... They've invaded and taken over the country, have control of the oil fields... but now they're "contained."

Hell... even Feinstein said they're not "contained". According to her appearance this weekend... she thinks Obama's failing.

President Jeremiah Wright had one bale of doobies too many in his Choom Gang days.
His followers... simply "bitter clingers" who don't want to face reality... because it explodes their moronic world view.

 

[zimmer]

"What I want people to understand is that over the course of months, we are going to be able to not just blunt the momentum" of ISIS, Obama said on Meet the Press at the time. "We are going to systematically degrade their capabilities; we're going to shrink the territory that they control; and, ultimately, we're going to defeat them."

More than 14 months later, the strategy has failed in all three elements. The territory held by ISIS has not appreciably declined, and may have expanded. ISIS now threatens Aleppo in Syria, and has seized Palmyra, Hatra, and Nimrud. The Iraqi army still has yet to push ISIS off of any significant territory for long, even with Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias in the lead. And the U.S. effort to train Syrian moderates to fight the tens of thousands of ISIS militants ended up costing $500 million to train just 60 fighters. More than 50 were killed before the White House ended the program in humiliation.

Now, ISIS has shifted its focus from territorial gains and genocide to international terrorism. The crash of a chartered Metrojet aircraft in the Sinai was an ISIS operation conducted by infiltration of Egypt's airport in Sharm el-Sheikh, a popular tourist spot for European travelers. ISIS leadership also took credit for a terrorist attack in Beirut, although Lebanese officials still dispute that account.

Yet last Friday morning, ABC News aired an interview between George Stephanopoulos and President Obama in which the president claimed credit for having "contained" ISIS.

Obama's ISIS failure

How's them facts?

It is simply amazing the amount of feces some people will eat in the face of reality, not only their ability to consume massive amounts of feces, but the intellectual bankruptcy to ignore the obvious.

Then again... if you watch Pravda USSA... read Pravda USSA, and generally have your head in the sand... you're apt to believe any crap flung your way.

 

[Visbek]

I don't think 9/11 was small scale.

It may not seem that way. However, it's a tiny fraction the damage that could be caused by a single strategic bomber, even if loaded with conventional bombs.

Further, 9/11 doesn't seem small because....

• It is the single largest terrorist attack in modern history (i.e. it's a huge exception from the norm)

• We're usually the ones bombing the snot out of people, rather than being directly attacked

• Our military doesn't target huge civilian buildings

• We don't pay attention to the body counts when we do bomb enemy cities, or in many enemy conflicts

(For example: Can you tell me how many people were killed in the first big night of bombing runs in Baghdad? Do you even care?)


The reality is that most terrorist attacks are very small in scale and effect. E.g. in 2012, there were 8500 terrorist attacks, and 15,500 fatalities -- that's an average of less than 2 fatalities per attack.

In comparison, Eritrea and Ethiopia had 2-year a border war in 1998. The total number of fatalities was estimated at anywhere from 70,000 to 300,000 casualties, mostly civilians. They also heavily mined border areas, which caused thousands of casualties after the war, and can still maim or kill people today.

Armies are large, attack on large scales, have heavy weaponry, do not need to operate discretely, are not too worried about detection. States are, obviously, much more powerful, have more resources, more funds, more soldiers, more vehicles, more tanks, and so forth.

All the terrorist attacks in the world don't add up to the damage done by one border war, between two relatively small nations, that don't have particularly potent militaries. And that includes the Taliban, former rulers of a state, which are trying to regain control of Afghanistan.

 

[Kobie]

"Contained"?
Have you seen the expanse under their control?

It's almost like saying... They've invaded and taken over the country, have control of the oil fields... but now they're "contained."

Hell... even Feinstein said they're not "contained". According to her appearance this weekend... she thinks Obama's failing.

President Jeremiah Wright had one bale of doobies too many in his Choom Gang days.
His followers... simply "bitter clingers" who don't want to face reality... because it explodes their moronic world view.

Your map is from the middle of last year.

ISIS will become more deadly as it loses territory.

During the past year, ISIS has lost between 15 to 25 percent of its territory in Syria and Iraq from its peak levels in mid-2014, according to some U.S. estimates. That includes parts of Erbil, Kirkuk, Diyala, Ninawa, Salah ad Din, and Al Anbar provinces in Iraq. It also includes Al Hasakah, Raqqa, and Halab in Syria.

Earlier this month, Kurdish and Yazidi fighters, backed by American air power and special operations forces, conducted a major offensive to retake Sinjar, Iraq. They cut off a crucial ISIS supply route between Raqqa, Syria, the group’s capital, and Mosul, the largest ISIS-controlled city in Iraq. Iraqi forces and Shiite militias, aided by U.S. airstrikes, also retook the Baiji oil refinery from ISIS.
In northern Syria, the United States has deployed special operations forces to work with Kurdish militias and their Arab partners to fight ISIS. The American and Turkish militaries announced a joint plan to remove ISIS militants from a 60-mile strip along the Turkish border. The deal allowed the United States to base A-10s, F-15s, and other warplanes in southern Turkey to carry out airstrikes against ISIS positions.

Russian planes have also bombed Raqqa and other Syrian cities with renewed vigor since the explosion of Russian Metrojet Flight 9268 on Oct. 31, allegedly at the hands of ISIS’s affiliate in Egypt.

 

[Lord of Planar]

You can all say what you want.

ISIS is not contained. I don't see that using the definition for "contained."

Oh... Again, the OP referenced a liberal site.