Obama making a stand against ISIS.

[blaxshep]

Washington (CNN)—President Barack Obama asked Congress on Wednesday to formally authorize the use of military force in the war against ISIS, the first time a U.S. President has asked for such authorization in 13 years.

Lawmakers on Wednesday morning received a draft Authorization for the Use of Military Force, a resolution that would formally authorize a six-month U.S. military effort against the militant group. Shortly after the request was sent to the Hill, the White House announced Obama would speak to the public on the issue Wednesday afternoon.

In a letter to Congress, Obama explained that the draft resolution would give him the authority to authorize "ground combat operations in limited circumstances," including rescue operations and special forces operations to "take military action against ISIL leadership."

"The so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) poses a threat to the people and stability of Iraq, Syria, and the broader Middle East, and to U.S. national security," Obama writes. "It threatens American personnel and facilities located in the region and is responsible for the deaths of U.S. citizens"

As in the draft resolution, Obama goes on to name the Americans killed in ISIS captivity, "including James Foley, Steven Sotloff, Abdul-Rahman Peter Kassig, and Kayla Mueller."

There is broad support in Congress for a formal AUMF, though lawmakers disagree on the scope of the military powers that should be handed to the President.

Obama urged Congress during his State of the Union address to formally authorize the military campaign to "show the world that we are united in this mission."

As he has said in the past, Obama noted in his letter to Congress Wednesday that he already has the authority to fight ISIS, "I have repeatedly expressed my commitment to working with the Congress to pass a bipartisan authorization for the use of military force" against ISIS.

Obama ISIS fight request sent to Congress - CNN.com

 

[MMC]

Washington (CNN)—President Barack Obama asked Congress on Wednesday to formally authorize the use of military force in the war against ISIS, the first time a U.S. President has asked for such authorization in 13 years.

Lawmakers on Wednesday morning received a draft Authorization for the Use of Military Force, a resolution that would formally authorize a six-month U.S. military effort against the militant group. Shortly after the request was sent to the Hill, the White House announced Obama would speak to the public on the issue Wednesday afternoon.

In a letter to Congress, Obama explained that the draft resolution would give him the authority to authorize "ground combat operations in limited circumstances," including rescue operations and special forces operations to "take military action against ISIL leadership."

"The so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) poses a threat to the people and stability of Iraq, Syria, and the broader Middle East, and to U.S. national security," Obama writes. "It threatens American personnel and facilities located in the region and is responsible for the deaths of U.S. citizens"

As in the draft resolution, Obama goes on to name the Americans killed in ISIS captivity, "including James Foley, Steven Sotloff, Abdul-Rahman Peter Kassig, and Kayla Mueller."

There is broad support in Congress for a formal AUMF, though lawmakers disagree on the scope of the military powers that should be handed to the President.

Obama urged Congress during his State of the Union address to formally authorize the military campaign to "show the world that we are united in this mission."

As he has said in the past, Obama noted in his letter to Congress Wednesday that he already has the authority to fight ISIS, "I have repeatedly expressed my commitment to working with the Congress to pass a bipartisan authorization for the use of military force" against ISIS.

Obama ISIS fight request sent to Congress - CNN.com

Heya Blaxshep :2wave: Doesn't that come with a 3 year deadline.

 

[blaxshep]

Heya Blaxshep :2wave: Doesn't that come with a 3 year deadline.

This is a short term commitment yes.

 

[MMC]

This is a short term commitment yes.

Well, at least now he is admitting that ISIS is a threat to us and our people.

 

[blaxshep]

This is likely a very cynical comment, but after hearing conservatives/Republicans complain for the longest time about how Obama isn't/wasn't doing enough to stop ISIS in their opinion, I fully expect conservatives/Republicans to criticize Obama for asking Congress to use military force against ISIS.

I hope I'm wrong, but I would be surprised if I am.

You might be right but for me I think Obama is finally making a move in the right direction on this.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Well, at least now he is admitting that ISIS is a threat to us and our people.

He's always admitted they were a threat and always admitted they were evil bastards. He hasn't taken us to an all out war because the American people overwhelmingly don't want another all out war.

 

[blaxshep]

He's always admitted they were a threat and always admitted they were evil bastards. He hasn't taken us to an all out war because the American people overwhelmingly don't want another all out war.

You are right but at the same time we have not had any "all out wars" Iraq, for example, was more of a police action than a war.

 

[MMC]

He's always admitted they were a threat and always admitted they were evil bastards. He hasn't taken us to an all out war because the American people overwhelmingly don't want another all out war.

Do you have something on that he has Admitted that ISIS was a threat to our National Security Interests. As I didn't see that.....I did hear him say they were a threat to our people.

 

[Dittohead not!]

You are right but at the same time we have not had any "all out wars" Iraq, for example, was more of a police action than a war.

Actually more of a "war is peace" sort of action.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Washington (CNN)—President Barack Obama asked Congress on Wednesday to formally authorize the use of military force in the war against ISIS, the first time a U.S. President has asked for such authorization in 13 years.

Lawmakers on Wednesday morning received a draft Authorization for the Use of Military Force, a resolution that would formally authorize a six-month U.S. military effort against the militant group. Shortly after the request was sent to the Hill, the White House announced Obama would speak to the public on the issue Wednesday afternoon.

In a letter to Congress, Obama explained that the draft resolution would give him the authority to authorize "ground combat operations in limited circumstances," including rescue operations and special forces operations to "take military action against ISIL leadership."

"The so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) poses a threat to the people and stability of Iraq, Syria, and the broader Middle East, and to U.S. national security," Obama writes. "It threatens American personnel and facilities located in the region and is responsible for the deaths of U.S. citizens"

As in the draft resolution, Obama goes on to name the Americans killed in ISIS captivity, "including James Foley, Steven Sotloff, Abdul-Rahman Peter Kassig, and Kayla Mueller."

There is broad support in Congress for a formal AUMF, though lawmakers disagree on the scope of the military powers that should be handed to the President.

Obama urged Congress during his State of the Union address to formally authorize the military campaign to "show the world that we are united in this mission."

As he has said in the past, Obama noted in his letter to Congress Wednesday that he already has the authority to fight ISIS, "I have repeatedly expressed my commitment to working with the Congress to pass a bipartisan authorization for the use of military force" against ISIS.

Obama ISIS fight request sent to Congress - CNN.com

So the leading Republicans are on the horns of a dilemma:
they have to either vote for the use of ground force against ISIS, which they have criticized the president for failing to do, or...

Actually vote to support the president.

What to do, what to do....

 

[MMC]

So the leading Republicans are on the horns of a dilemma:
they have to either vote for the use of ground force against ISIS, which they have criticized the president for failing to do, or...

Actually vote to support the president.

What to do, what to do....

Heya DH. :2wave: You make it sound like they wouldn't go for what the Generals and others were saying needs to be done. Are you saying the Repubs wont vote for it. Again how is this a dilemma? You do recall they did criticize BO for telegraphing the line of what we wont do, Right?

That's despite BO not wanting to put any major ground forces in Syria or Iraq. You know going with the Micro-managing and all that.

 

[US Conservative]

Washington (CNN)—President Barack Obama asked Congress on Wednesday to formally authorize the use of military force in the war against ISIS, the first time a U.S. President has asked for such authorization in 13 years.

Lawmakers on Wednesday morning received a draft Authorization for the Use of Military Force, a resolution that would formally authorize a six-month U.S. military effort against the militant group. Shortly after the request was sent to the Hill, the White House announced Obama would speak to the public on the issue Wednesday afternoon.

In a letter to Congress, Obama explained that the draft resolution would give him the authority to authorize "ground combat operations in limited circumstances," including rescue operations and special forces operations to "take military action against ISIL leadership."

"The so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) poses a threat to the people and stability of Iraq, Syria, and the broader Middle East, and to U.S. national security," Obama writes. "It threatens American personnel and facilities located in the region and is responsible for the deaths of U.S. citizens"

As in the draft resolution, Obama goes on to name the Americans killed in ISIS captivity, "including James Foley, Steven Sotloff, Abdul-Rahman Peter Kassig, and Kayla Mueller."

There is broad support in Congress for a formal AUMF, though lawmakers disagree on the scope of the military powers that should be handed to the President.

Obama urged Congress during his State of the Union address to formally authorize the military campaign to "show the world that we are united in this mission."

As he has said in the past, Obama noted in his letter to Congress Wednesday that he already has the authority to fight ISIS, "I have repeatedly expressed my commitment to working with the Congress to pass a bipartisan authorization for the use of military force" against ISIS.

Obama ISIS fight request sent to Congress - CNN.com

Obama isn't making a stand, if he was he would say the words "radical islam", and address the nation explaining that they must be destroyed, and why. Of course to do so would also be admitting he was wrong to withdraw from Iraq, and that he was wrong to present it as stable. It also wouldn't explain why attacking them despite "creating more terrorists" in doing so is somehow now ok.

He wants this quiet and as low profile as it can be, until he runs out his term.

 

[MMC]

Obama isn't making a stand, if he was he would say the words "radical islam", and address the nation explaining that they must be destroyed, and why. Of course to do so would also be admitting he was wrong to withdraw from Iraq, and that he was wrong to present it as stable. It also wouldn't explain why attacking them despite "creating more terrorists" in doing so is somehow now ok.

He wants this quiet and as low profile as it can be, until he runs out his term.

Heya USC. :2wave: Well it still doesn't explain him not wanting to Admit that AQ isn't on the run nor are they a Shadow of their former selves. Nor how his strategy of containment didn't work.

At least now he can talk about how they work together while still competing with one another.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Washington (CNN)—President Barack Obama asked Congress on Wednesday to formally authorize the use of military force in the war against ISIS, the first time a U.S. President has asked for such authorization in 13 years.

Lawmakers on Wednesday morning received a draft Authorization for the Use of Military Force, a resolution that would formally authorize a six-month U.S. military effort against the militant group. Shortly after the request was sent to the Hill, the White House announced Obama would speak to the public on the issue Wednesday afternoon.

In a letter to Congress, Obama explained that the draft resolution would give him the authority to authorize "ground combat operations in limited circumstances," including rescue operations and special forces operations to "take military action against ISIL leadership."

"The so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) poses a threat to the people and stability of Iraq, Syria, and the broader Middle East, and to U.S. national security," Obama writes. "It threatens American personnel and facilities located in the region and is responsible for the deaths of U.S. citizens"

As in the draft resolution, Obama goes on to name the Americans killed in ISIS captivity, "including James Foley, Steven Sotloff, Abdul-Rahman Peter Kassig, and Kayla Mueller."

There is broad support in Congress for a formal AUMF, though lawmakers disagree on the scope of the military powers that should be handed to the President.

Obama urged Congress during his State of the Union address to formally authorize the military campaign to "show the world that we are united in this mission."

As he has said in the past, Obama noted in his letter to Congress Wednesday that he already has the authority to fight ISIS, "I have repeatedly expressed my commitment to working with the Congress to pass a bipartisan authorization for the use of military force" against ISIS.

Obama ISIS fight request sent to Congress - CNN.com

Now, as we begin year seven of Barrack Hussein Obama's seventh year in office, he finally does it the way a president of the United States should. Confer and seek "advice and consent" from congress.

However, as my awe at the opportunity to put naysayers in their place and compliment Obama on his mellowing, I am saddened to read later that we have yet more Republican bating bull**** from a president who insists America's enemy is the Republican party. Sly and cunning as ever he baits them with:

"In a letter to Congress, Obama explained that the draft resolution would give him the authority to authorize "ground combat operations in limited circumstances," including rescue operations and special forces operations to "take military action against ISIL leadership."

The resolution would also sunset the 2002 AUMF that spawned the Iraq War. Obama withdrew American troops from Iraq in 2011, but the military authorization remains in effect."

Playing all sides he offers them a real war, with "boots on the ground" with their hands tied to "ground combat operations in limited circumstances," including rescue operations and special forces operations to "take military action against ISIL leadership."

He is still not ready to admit this is Islamic terrorism, unwilling to make a full commitment and sending advance tactical information, in detail, to the enemy. At the same time he makes a mockery of his own request in deliberately sun setting the authorization for a full scale invasion.

Talk about ploy

I don not believe this is about defeating ISIS, but designed as more "they won't let me"......

 

[blaxshep]

Playing all sides he offers them a real war, with "boots on the ground" with their hands tied to "ground combat operations in limited circumstances," including rescue operations and special forces operations to "take military action against ISIL leadership."

He is still not ready to admit this is Islamic terrorism, unwilling to make a full commitment and sending advance tactical information, in detail, to the enemy. At the same time he makes a mockery of his own request in deliberately sun setting the authorization for a full scale invasion.

You never quite get anything from Obama without some kind of deception included. You are right, now I see it since you posted it.

 

[Fearandloathing]

You never quite get anything from Obama without some kind of deception included. You are right, now I see it since you posted it.

Has Obama ever failed to deceive?

Look, it's like this, the man spent two years flogging a piece of **** legislation that will ham string the US for the next 50 years based on two years of outright lies he knew were lies, has never even admitted he was "overzealous" and has hidden from it for three years. Since then he has lied about Benghazi, the "vengeance" you say you crave for American lives lost, his role in everything and continues to play politics with everything from illegals to pot to war to America's oil security by making war with Canada over ****ing pipelines he personally has bragged on as job creators.

When and if Obama does not attempt to deceive, when and if he ever does not cover up, excuse, blame on others I will be the first to shout it from every ****ing roof top I can find.

I have made that my personal promise since the egotistical incompetent said he had been to "57 or 58 states" and never bothered to correct it..or any other of his pronoucements.

 

[US Conservative]

Now, as we begin year seven of Barrack Hussein Obama's seventh year in office, he finally does it the way a president of the United States should. Confer and seek "advice and consent" from congress.

However, as my awe at the opportunity to put naysayers in their place and compliment Obama on his mellowing, I am saddened to read later that we have yet more Republican bating bull**** from a president who insists America's enemy is the Republican party. Sly and cunning as ever he baits them with:

"In a letter to Congress, Obama explained that the draft resolution would give him the authority to authorize "ground combat operations in limited circumstances," including rescue operations and special forces operations to "take military action against ISIL leadership."

The resolution would also sunset the 2002 AUMF that spawned the Iraq War. Obama withdrew American troops from Iraq in 2011, but the military authorization remains in effect."

Playing all sides he offers them a real war, with "boots on the ground" with their hands tied to "ground combat operations in limited circumstances," including rescue operations and special forces operations to "take military action against ISIL leadership."

He is still not ready to admit this is Islamic terrorism, unwilling to make a full commitment and sending advance tactical information, in detail, to the enemy. At the same time he makes a mockery of his own request in deliberately sun setting the authorization for a full scale invasion.

Talk about ploy

I don not believe this is about defeating ISIS, but designed as more "they won't let me"......

Amazing. So he's just introducing this so he can say it ties his hands. :doh Never trust a snake.

 

[iguanaman]

You are right but at the same time we have not had any "all out wars" Iraq, for example, was more of a police action than a war.

Because in your "all out war" we just kill everyone we can, civilians, women and children alike. Right?

 

[US Conservative]

Because in your "all out war" we just kill everyone we can, civilians, women and children alike. Right?

No, we just dont fight with one hand tied behind our back.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Heya DH. :2wave: You make it sound like they wouldn't go for what the Generals and others were saying needs to be done. Are you saying the Repubs wont vote for it. Again how is this a dilemma? You do recall they did criticize BO for telegraphing the line of what we wont do, Right?

That's despite BO not wanting to put any major ground forces in Syria or Iraq. You know going with the Micro-managing and all that.

Oh, they might go for what the generals are saying. They'll have to pretend that it was their idea, and that Obama had to be coerced, of course.

 

[iguanaman]

No, we just dont fight with one hand tied behind our back.

So we still would need to "minimize civilian casualties" like we do now? You do realize our mission in Iraq was to "win the hearts and minds" of the Iraqi's. Would your "total war" scenario be compatible with winning hearts and minds or is this just a macho Rambo type fantasy of yours?

 

[US Conservative]

So we still would need to "minimize civilian casualties" like we do now? You do realize our mission in Iraq was to "win the hearts and minds" of the Iraqi's. Would your "total war" scenario be compatible with winning hearts and minds or is this just a macho Rambo type fantasy of yours?

We need to fight to win firstly-or we shouldn't be fighting. We still wouldnt do it like the russians and just shell a city, though maybe thats the smartest way to do it.

And in total war (not what I described in a prior post) all bets would be off.

 

[Dittohead not!]

So we still would need to "minimize civilian casualties" like we do now? You do realize our mission in Iraq was to "win the hearts and minds" of the Iraqi's. Would your "total war" scenario be compatible with winning hearts and minds or is this just a macho Rambo type fantasy of yours?

Winning hearts and minds, yes, that was the goal, just like it was in Vietnam.

How you win hearts and minds by shelling and bombing somehow escaped me then and now.

 

[MMC]

Winning hearts and minds, yes, that was the goal, just like it was in Vietnam.

How you win hearts and minds by shelling and bombing somehow escaped me then and now.

Mornin DH. :2wave: Well you know the shelling and bombing came after the part about.....winning hearts and minds.

Tell me how would you think of their hearts and minds. After you walk into a village and see a bunch of arms all cut off from lil kids. Who had been inoculated.

You know about all that condescending Preaching we heard Right? Tell me whats like to watch someone kill a bunch of little kids and knowing you can't get there to stop the **** from happening.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Mornin DH. :2wave: Well you know the shelling and bombing came after the part about.....winning hearts and minds.

Tell me how would you think of their hearts and minds. After you walk into a village and see a bunch of arms all cut off from lil kids. Who had been inoculated.

You know about all that condescending Preaching we heard Right? Tell me whats like to watch someone kill a bunch of little kids and knowing you can't get there to stop the **** from happening.

I'm not sure just what you're saying there. Are we sending soldiers to stop people from killing little kids and cutting their arms off? Is that what our soldiers were doing in Vietnam and Iraq?