• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US hostage Kassig 'killed by IS'


Kobie, I have repeatedly linked to citations where Al Maliki and others said they not only wanted us to stay, but would grant the protections desired-the PROBLEM, was getting approval in the Iraqi parliament. But that said-there were ways around that that Obama COULD HAVE TAKEN BUT DID NOT, despite being advised of the consequences of a withdrawal. And then Obama had the gall to say "mission accomplished" anyway-for votes.

2013 iraq revealed this folly, and by early 2014 ISIS had major Iraqi cities. This is entirely Obama's 2nd term baby.
 

Your hypothetical describes reality through the lefts eyes. No idea of reality.
 

Kobie, in your first "question" you reveal your willingness to fight wars for politics over all else. Shame on you.
Then you seek an out by blaming Bush. Shame on you.
Finally you present a strawman and ignore the facts of the issue. Shame on you.

Nothing in Utica can correct your flawed logic.
 
How has our President been weak in terms of handling ISIS, and what does it mean to get serious?

His bombing campaign has been ineffective in stopping the group.
 
His bombing campaign has been ineffective in stopping the group.

How air bombings and drone strikes weak and how is something like that not serious?
 

1. I don't live in Utica, kid. I used to. I'm not sure why you continue to mention it ... you must see some relevance in it.
2-4. I see no denial of facts, which means you must accept them, yet still continue your blatant shilling.
 
Why do your good ideas only involve supplication and surrender?

Why do you continue to display your blatant ignorance of how the world actually functions? Do you think killing Maliki (as was suggested) would have been a good idea?
 
How air bombings and drone strikes weak and how is something like that not serious?

I said they are ineffective, is that not clear enough? Listen to the news, it's common knowledge.
 
The only people who can clean up that neighborhood are the people who live in it. If they don't want to do it, we're wasting our time and money trying to help them. :roll:

That is why we can help them, but not shoulder the responsibility. We must, however, protect ourselves and national interests.
 
You need the whole list or just the fop few?

So what is your solution to this problem? And please don't give the idiotic response (replace Obama). Give a detailed summary of what actions you think are needed NOW. The problem with most Cons is they are too busy bitching, but they rarely come up with anything better as a solution. Remember, conservatives say we cannot afford anymore spending, so you need to go off that point as well.
 

Should have left a residual force. Should not have lied about the rise if ISIS. Should call them ISIS, not ISL. Should have met them head on with a quick strike force. Those are just for a start.
 
Should have left a residual force. Should not have lied about the rise if ISIS. Should call them ISIS, not ISL. Should have met them head on with a quick strike force. Those are just for a start.

Lots of "should of" there, I asked what we need to do NOW. Remember, we cannot afford any extra spending according to conservatives. This is turning out like I thought, not constructive in the least and is simply a bitch session by cons. They have no ideas on what to do NOW, they can only bitch about "should of".
 
I am surprised that no one on this board is familiar with negotiations. The Iraqis had an excellent bargaining chip. They failed to realize that Obama was not a leader. He was an empty suit best suited to lying to his own stupid supporters that securing a lasting peace in Iraq.

Obama's chickens are coming home to roost.
 
Its either one of two things. Go back and retake all lands from ISIS or turn our backs and never look back.
 
We have plenty of money if we simply eliminate every program that lacks a Constitutional basis. That is most of the current federal spending.
 
Its either one of two things. Go back and retake all lands from ISIS or turn our backs and never look back.

But according to cons we can't afford the spending. So, are you saying we CAN afford it, thus back peddling from the con rhetoric, or are you still sticking to your guns we can't afford the spending? What are you saying here then?
 

Ah, so now the Iraqis wouldn't let that go because it was Obama in the first place. The man's very existence led them to that stance.

Well, that's a new one. While I do enjoy watching you guys twist yourselves into rhetorical pretzels to blame all of our problems on Obama, it's kinda getting boring.
 
We have plenty of money if we simply eliminate every program that lacks a Constitutional basis. That is most of the current federal spending.

Your opinion noted, but the reality is the GOP supports many of that federal spending.
 
But according to cons we can't afford the spending. So, are you saying we CAN afford it, thus back peddling from the con rhetoric, or are you still sticking to your guns we can't afford the spending? What are you saying here then?

We can afford it. "I" never said we couldn't.
 
We can afford it. "I" never said we couldn't.

So then the conservative rhetoric from the tea party about we can't afford the spending is BS then. Thank you for your confirmation.
 
If it were my decision alone. I would drop it and leave. We trained and supplied them for 10 years. They cut and ran when faced with a determined force. Sucks to be them.
 
So then the conservative rhetoric from the tea party about we can't afford the spending is BS then. Thank you for your confirmation.

Sorry if you thought I was in lock step with any politician on every issue.
 
"I am surprised that no one on this board is familiar with negotiations. The Iraqis had an excellent bargaining chip. They failed to realize that Obama was not a leader. He was an empty suit best suited to lying to his own stupid supporters that securing a lasting peace in Iraq.

Obama's chickens are coming home to roost."
I am not surprised that you missed the point.

Had Obama been a leader he could have negotiated a reasonable arrangement to secure peace in Iraq. But Obama has never been a leader. He is an agitator and propagandist.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…