Whose sons and daugters, mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters are you willing to send to fight the war you advocate.
We've had enough of this Cheney/Rumsfeld loss of treasure and lives.
And the residuals left over from Iraq that were NEVER planned for .
Fact--Obama followed Bush's timeline and Maliki disengranchised the Sunnis who now fight for ISIL.
Sorry you won't face the real truth let alone address my previous facts .
Whose sons and daugters, mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters are you willing to send to fight the war you advocate.
We've had enough of this Cheney/Rumsfeld loss of treasure and lives.
And the residuals left over from Iraq that were NEVER planned for .
While you continue to rewrite history in a dishonest way .
Meh...there is a larger umbrella. They arent individual terrorist groups...they are all Muslim Fundamentalists, driven by the same core belief system. This is nothing new.The truth most people here don't know is ISIS is Hammas and Hammas is ISIS.
Obama prefers to call them names other than Al Qaeda because he already 'decimated' them.Meh...there is a larger umbrella. They arent individual terrorist groups...they are all Muslim Fundamentalists, driven by the same core belief system. This is nothing new.
What you say is fact. Nimby doesn't know the history at all. Obama never intended to sign a SOFA agreement and always intended to pull the troops from Iraq. This is all on his head.Fact-Obama pulled out of Iraq for politics in an election season. Fact-Obama's generals, as well as the Iraqi's warned him what could happen if he left. Fact-Obama knew about ISIS 2 years ago, and did nothing as they expanded and grew.Sorry if the truth stings.
What you say is fact. Nimby doesn't know the history at all. Obama never intended to sign a SOFA agreement and always intended to pull the troops from Iraq. This is all on his head.
ISIS is correct, airstrikes (in how we are doing them) won't destroy them or even degrade them. They are entrenched now. We can destroy them with airstrikes, but not in the way we have been doing it.
They're hiding, likely underground. Bunker busters FTW!
Here is an ISIS fighter boasting that the air strikes are not militarily effective.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/29/world/meast/isis-fighter-and-defector-interviews/index.
Sadly, he is probably right. ISIS is an army of militiamen operating is relatively small groups whose main armoured vehicles are pick up trucks turned into Mad Max style "technicals". Most supplies- and they dont need alot, are requisitioned from the locals (voluntarily, forcibly or coerced) and transported in individual civilian trucks. Likewise, there are not alot of easily demarcated front lines in the fighting.
As the similarily orgainized Serbs demonstrated in Kosovo, these types of forces mix in with civilians and can be very difficult to identify and stop. Then factor in that ISIS includes members who are veterans of both Iraq and Afghan conflicts who probably have a long list produced list of "dos and donts" produced by Darwinism when it comes to avoiding precision airstrikes.
In short, my guess is that effective air strikes need US spotters on the ground.
They are hiding under civilians.
Whom will become frightened of blue skies, unfortunately, in due time.
The press interview was rather comical.Obama prefers to call them names other than Al Qaeda because he already 'decimated' them.
BBC News - Fifth RAF Iraq mission ends with 'no reports' of bombing
I can understand what ISIS is saying, since Obama's Non-Coalition isn't working.
BBC News - Fifth RAF Iraq mission ends with 'no reports' of bombing
I can understand what ISIS is saying, since Obama's Non-Coalition isn't working.
Please tell us how your President's Arab/European Coalition isn't working .
How about for starters no troops on the ground when the only way to defeat ISIS is...boots on the ground?
Americans don't want boots on the ground.
A majority of Americans -- 60 percent -- told a poll conducted for CNN they don’t want ground troops to be part of the combat operation against ISIS while 38 percent said they favor ground troops and 2 percent had no opinion.
US Ground Troops ISIS Poll: Americans Don't Want Boots On The Ground, Unless Military Does
Of course we know that boots will eventually be on the ground, and we'll likely have another long conflict costly in blood and treasure, ending with a declaration of "decimation" and the only real beneficiaries will be the defense contractors big business.
Public opinion (polls) and definitive solutions are two different things here.
Oh I see , you prefer something other than a representative government. Well you're not alone.
Thats quite an assumption there.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?