• 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!

Obama considers special forces to help in iraq

:roll: ya know there was a time when I could envision having a beer with you and having a fun face to face debate. now, not so much :(

That's your issue j. But on the issue, what I said was true. I've watch for a few years now completely misread what is written, and blame others for it. But I harbor no hard feelings.
 
I doubt any of these men were volunteers or that they will expect help if they come under attack, even if they do have 100 men ready to help from 'a neighboring country'.

Then I would urge you to learn more about the U.S. military. All of them were volunteers, and these guys probably came from one of the MEU's, meaning that they do indeed have organic reachback capability. :)
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063417933 said:
If I was one of them I'd be concerned that help, if needed, was only a day or two away.

Help, in one of those situations, is the flight time off the deck of the nearest U.S. carrier in the gulf away. A company + of Marines on the walls of an Embassy make it a very uninviting target.
 
Obama not sending troops to Iraq. OBAMA BAD!
Obama sending troops to Iraq. OBAMA BAD!

This is a position held by nobody.
 
Can we please step away from the third-grade level insults and actually address the point? Or is this too much to ask?

I sense a strong negative emotional response from a perceived personal insult. My, my, my, I must have hit a nerve.

So I guess this is a more mature and sophisticated approach to expressing one's self?

Obama not sending troops to Iraq. OBAMA BAD!
Obama sending troops to Iraq. OBAMA BAD!
 
Help, in one of those situations, is the flight time off the deck of the nearest U.S. carrier in the gulf away. A company + of Marines on the walls of an Embassy make it a very uninviting target.

Maybe you'll want to pass that message along to the State Department. Make sure you leave out the words, "Benghazi," and "stand down."
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063420969 said:
I sense a strong negative emotional response from a perceived personal insult. My, my, my, I must have hit a nerve.

So I guess this is a more mature and sophisticated approach to expressing one's self?

That first sentence sounds REALLY cool when imagined in a Darth Vader voice. :D
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063420992 said:
Maybe you'll want to pass that message along to the State Department. Make sure you leave out the words, "Benghazi," and "stand down."

After Benghazi we stood up the Special Purpose Marine Air Ground Task Force of about this size, to be stationed in Rota, Spain, explicitly to offer a rapid-reaction force for Embassies. This might also be those guys in Iraq.
 
When your active duty who is commander in chief means little. Most soldiers are non-political or apolitical which ever word applies. We do what we are told and do it well. I served under LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter and Reagan, as far as my duties go it made no difference.

I agree....but not this president. He's not only incompetent, but seemingly indifferent to the military altogether.
 
Statement will be made at 12:30 ET after Obama meets with national security team.
 
I agree....but not this president. He's not only incompetent, but seemingly indifferent to the military altogether.

I don't know about that. I worked at Ft. McPherson as a DA civilian and once Ft. Mac closed down, I went with FORSCOM to Ft. Bragg. The active duty seemed pretty happy with the president in both places. Now a lot of the retirees came down hard on him, but not the active duty. I also noticed all Michelle and Jill Biden were doing for the military soldier and their families.

I think what most military want right now is the VA fixed.
 
The US will turn Iraq into another battle field. Let Arabs fight Arabs. Decades ago, it was Saddam's Iraq vs. Iran. Now it will be Sunni's Iraq, Saudi, Qarda vs. Shiiti Iraq, Iran.

That's a strategy it used to use. Like they manipulate Democrats and Repblicans in domestic politics.


How the US is Arming Both Sides of the Iraqi Conflict

By Tyler Durden

Global Research, June 13, 2014

How the US is Arming Both Sides of the Iraqi Conflict | Global Research
 
'WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House is considering sending a small number of American special forces soldiers to Iraq in an urgent attempt to help the government in Baghdad slow the nation's rampant Sunni insurgency, U.S. officials said Monday.

While President Barack Obama has explicitly ruled out putting U.S. troops into direct combat in Iraq, the plan under consideration suggests he would be willing to send Americans into a collapsing security situation for training and other purposes.

Three U.S. officials familiar with ongoing discussions said the potential of sending special forces to Iraq is high on a list of military options that are being considered.'

Obama considers special forces to help in Iraq


So...first no troops to Iraq...and now some troops to Iraq.

So much for Obama's word.

But I am quite sure liberals will make excuses for him...again.


(Once again, I am neither Dem nor Rep)


and are carrots involved?
 
and are carrots involved?

Mornin' Nick :2wave: .....BO basically told Maliki he has to step down. Plus BO says he will check with Congress on his every move. Oh and he is Sending Kerry to Iraq.


Although I wouldn't consider that as a carrot. More like a turnip. :lol:
 
I read yesterday that Obama is sending 300 special forces troops to Iraq to help with training, etc.

Does anyone think that 300 men will be able to do in Iraq what thousands of men obviously weren't able to do in 11 years?

I don't.
 
Mornin' Nick :2wave: .....BO basically told Maliki he has to step down. Plus BO says he will check with Congress on his every move. Oh and he is Sending Kerry to Iraq.


Although I wouldn't consider that as a carrot. More like a turnip. :lol:

Obama couldn't take a **** with elite help...

**** him....
 
Mornin' Nick :2wave: .....BO basically told Maliki he has to step down. Plus BO says he will check with Congress on his every move. Oh and he is Sending Kerry to Iraq.


Although I wouldn't consider that as a carrot. More like a turnip. :lol:

Hmm. Imperial Presidency. Dictating to a sovereign nation's elected leader that he has to step down.

Where are all the cries about interfering in another's country now?
 
The best skill is to Fly.
 
I read yesterday that Obama is sending 300 special forces troops to Iraq to help with training, etc.

Does anyone think that 300 men will be able to do in Iraq what thousands of men obviously weren't able to do in 11 years?

I don't.


Mornin' SN. :2wave: I heard they will split into 12 Men units and will be needed to target any Air Strikes we make. The Majority will be going North towards Mosul. Hold down some major Assets.

Either way we going back in.....despite BO sayin no Boots on the ground. Also despite him not wanting to deal with Iraq and walk away from it without putting in much effort. Then his usual about War.

th
 
Obama not sending troops to Iraq. OBAMA BAD!
Obama sending troops to Iraq. OBAMA BAD!

Nope, sending them bad. Period. I would have much more respect for him if his just called it what it is in Iraq and turned his focus on the US for a change.
 
answer

why this text always remove in all servers?

"WHO IS GUILTY OF FALLING INTO THE SECOND WORLD WAR? Political policies of Prime-minister of Great Britain Sir Winston Churchill and US President’s authorized representative William Bullitt in 1933 – 1940 have to undergo the International tribunal evaluation.

On the 8th of May many celebrated the 69th anniversary of victory of so called freedom-loving nations over the Nazi Germany. Adolf Hitler, whose name is associated with the bloodiest events of humankind history, remains to be the main person responsible for initiating this international conflict. There is no doubt that Hitler played a big role in this tragedy, however his famous ideology of the superiority of German nation played a low-down trick with himself.
Taking this idea as a basis for political structure of a new Germany, Hitler fell into a crafty political trap, set by leaders of United States and Great Britain. They accused him of incitement of world conflict, and gained laurels for fighting the anti-human totalitarian regime.
The actual cause of military moves were the territorial disputes between Poland and Germany.
The truth is that such country as Poland appeared on world map after the First World War, as a result of The Versailles Treaty. The western strategists thought Poland would become a great counterbalance for just defeated German Empire. And what’s more many originally German lands were given to Poland – Poznan (Posen in German), Eastern Pomerania, part of Prussia.
Until Germany remained weak there were no territorial claims. But when Nazi gained power, they promised to end the unfairness of The Versailles Treaty, and the question of the lost territories became burning again.
The stumbling point was so-called Polish Corridor, Baltic Polish lands, which chopped Germany off its territory in Eastern Prussia. The problem worsened because these lands were mostly inhabited by Germans, including port Danzig.
Facts indicate that Hitler wanted to negotiate with Poland friendly way.
In October 1938 German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop suggested to poles the following scenario of solving the conflict. Danzig, which was under a joint Polish-German control, should be recovered by Germany: the citizens themselves were looking forward to it. But Poland would be granted new privileged rights for Poles living there, concerning shipping, stationing military units, trading business… More than that Germany undertook the construction of a naval base in Gdynia, next to Danzig. And also Germany firmly promised not to claim any other lands from Poland and offered to confirm the inviolability of Polish borders with a new Treaty.
At first Poland agreed on these conditions. The intensive consultations and mutual visits of highest executives had begun. The conference on which the new Treaty, which would solve all territorial conflicts, was to be signed, was going to be held in Spring 1939.
However in April 1939 Poles suddenly and unilaterally cut off the negotiation process and pointedly started to prepare to war. Germans correspondingly started tit-for-tat actions. Well military and technically developed German finished the preparations earlier and was first to strike the blow. The cliché that the 2nd World War started on 1st September 1939 is incorrect. That day the German-Poland war began, and it was so for three days! Ambiguous Britain politics allowed Hitler to think that this war would remain so. However after unrealizable ultimatum Britain declared war to Germany. It was September 3rd and that was the day when the World War II had begun!
So why did Poles make such a suicidal move? The formal reason were the warlike statements of old Polish allies – France and Britain, who loud and clear promised poles a military support in case of a German invasion.
But the weirdest thing is that, if France nominally had a strong army, they were actually not prepared for war. Their industry hadn’t even begun to remodel for military use. And their military
force status is estimated by experts in military units’ construction as even worse than it used to be before the 1st World War. That’s why they couldn’t help Poland in any case.
But British and Americans… This is a bit complicated. What stand out a mile? The major part of aircraft-carriers sort of “Essex” (11 out of 14) which took part in war had been installed before United States entered World War II! So, the history largest number of huge high-powered combat ships were prepared by a non-belligerent country. Besides American congress in 1937-1940 sanctioned construction of 12 new battle-ships in addition to 15 already possessed, quite modern, well armed and armored. Which means that we can state a fact that the back bone of the navy power according to the sea doctrine of that years, battle ships, were constructed and prepared before US joined allies in war.
For comparison the “bloodthirsty aggressors” (Germans and Japanese) hardly put into operation 4 battle-ships against 15 belonging to Britain and United States. Both of these countries prepared these ships way before the beginning of the war. So the question is – who planned on starting it?
However British and Americans increasing their overwhelming superiority on sea didn’t assume a possibility to military support Poland. The fact that US before the war had 400 tanks was not a real problem. Its industry “warmed up” by the earlier armament drive began to product tanks fast as if they were saucepans, by numerous series.
But then who pushed Poles and French into war? Who warmed their martial mood?
The Answer became vivid when the Poland was defeated, Autumn 1939. Studying captured Poland Foreign Ministry documents, Germans found reports of Polish ambassadors from Paris and Washington.
In different time periods the ambassadors had meetings with one very important American person. We speak of a US President Franklin Roosevelt authorized representative for Europian affairs William Bullitt.
The talks took place in autumn and winter 1938. Bullitt then promised Poles, that war between west democracy countries and Nazi Germany is inevitable – USA would never acknowledge Hitler’s regime. When Polish ambassador Jerzy Potocki asked if west democracy Europe would fight Hitler, Bullitt answered: “France and Britain have to put an end to any politics of compromise with totalitarian countries. United States possess different, extremely effective means of enforcement Britain and France… In case of War we will not take part in it from the very beginning, but are going to end it”.
These documents were proved by real events. Already on 2nd September 1939 Germans with the help of their Italian ally Benito Mussolini suggested East to renew the peaceful negotiations. What’s more Mussolini urged to stop combat operations and quickly summon the international conference for settling all the questions. Germany and France immediately agreed. But a threatening message from Washington prevented Western Europe from it.
…After the end of the 2nd World War, in late 40s, ex-ambassador of USA in London John Kennedy while talking with an American Minister of War Forrestal frankly confessed: “France couldn’t make Poland the reason of war, unless a constant intention of London and Washington to be so. Lord Chamberlain more than once told me that was Washington who made Western Europe countries enter the war”.
 
Mornin' SN. :2wave: I heard they will split into 12 Men units and will be needed to target any Air Strikes we make. The Majority will be going North towards Mosul. Hold down some major Assets.

Either way we going back in.....despite BO sayin no Boots on the ground. Also despite him not wanting to deal with Iraq and walk away from it without putting in much effort. Then his usual about War.

th

No boots on the ground, except for the boots on the ground. Can Obama ever say anything believable in foreign policy? Just wait until one of ours gets hit.
 
Re: answer

Thereby responsibility for starting that war lies upon international policy of Great Britain and United States intrigues. So why Hitler was so much hated by US? Was it because of his views and beliefs? Weird, but many American concerns and banks, for example Henry Ford structure or Wall-street financiers, actively sponsored Hitler’s party just before him gaining power. Because in Hitler American capitalists saw the main counterbalance of communist regime in Russia. But when Hitler came to power, the situation suddenly changed. From that moment Nazi became deadly enemies for
America. How come?
There is a great amount of reasons. After coming to power, Hitler began implementing large social and economic reforms, directed to protect the interests of simple Germans. First of all, Hitler brought under industries and other branches of the country’s economy, at the same time avoiding nationalization.
Government revenue distribution changed also. Its largest part was accumulated for improvement of life conditions of simple people. That’s what American economist Hans Schmidt wrote about it: “The accomplishments of those who are called Nazi are amazing! Starting with almost no moneyand having 6 million unemployed (third of its labor power), they created a net of highway roads, (modern autobahns), running through the whole country for less than 6 years… They became first to get right the production of a cheap whole family car (“Volkswagen”). Besides, they began to build houses for underprovided families, even such villages appeared.”
Schmidt names other social achievements. Germany was the very first country with paid holidays for employees, with doubling non-working days, with big payments to large families. And the pension system invented by Hitler co-parties works in Germany nowadays. We should also add government support of peasant farms, which insured against freak weather seasons and world market fluctuation.
Plus government protection of debtors from forced debt collection by intory of property and selling – the government took the costs of such debts upon itself.
Ending his thought, Schmidt marks: “Just after 2 years of national socialists coming to power living conditions improved so much, that there are no poor and unemployed in Germany. Germany faced an economic boom, when Britain, France and USA suffered the violent depression.
Obviously, the new social rights introduced in Germany became known by workers from other countries. They demanded the same working conditions. But the biggest problem was Hitler’s trying to make German economy independent from the international financial oligarchy, whose main representatives sit in offices of Wall-street. Fuhrer banned to use Deutsche Mark in any stock-speculations (that’s how the German currency strengthened, without numerous fake international market fluctuations). Bank capital was under serious control. Their Role then was just to serve interests of industries, businessmen and simple citizens.
So the financial oligarchy lost a chance to control Germany, a country which had one of the most developed economy system in the world. That was not something they could forgive Hitler for.
First US through its newspapers and mass media of Western Europe started the propaganda war against Germany. The democracy papers lied that “Germans were not born for Democracy”, that Hitler was just about to attack America, that chaos spread over Germany, more like hell and so forth. And then the most cruel instrument of the oligarchy was implemented – war.
It’s notable that organizing the war process itself was William Bullitt, who was an authorized representative of not just the President Roosevelt but also a number of influential Bank Houses of Wall-Street."
 
Re: answer

Thereby responsibility for starting that war lies upon international policy of Great Britain and United States intrigues. So why Hitler was so much hated by US? Was it because of his views and beliefs? Weird, but many American concerns and banks, for example Henry Ford structure or Wall-street financiers, actively sponsored Hitler’s party just before him gaining power. Because in Hitler American capitalists saw the main counterbalance of communist regime in Russia. But when Hitler came to power, the situation suddenly changed. From that moment Nazi became deadly enemies for
America. How come?
There is a great amount of reasons. After coming to power, Hitler began implementing large social and economic reforms, directed to protect the interests of simple Germans. First of all, Hitler brought under industries and other branches of the country’s economy, at the same time avoiding nationalization.
Government revenue distribution changed also. Its largest part was accumulated for improvement of life conditions of simple people. That’s what American economist Hans Schmidt wrote about it: “The accomplishments of those who are called Nazi are amazing! Starting with almost no moneyand having 6 million unemployed (third of its labor power), they created a net of highway roads, (modern autobahns), running through the whole country for less than 6 years… They became first to get right the production of a cheap whole family car (“Volkswagen”). Besides, they began to build houses for underprovided families, even such villages appeared.”
Schmidt names other social achievements. Germany was the very first country with paid holidays for employees, with doubling non-working days, with big payments to large families. And the pension system invented by Hitler co-parties works in Germany nowadays. We should also add government support of peasant farms, which insured against freak weather seasons and world market fluctuation.
Plus government protection of debtors from forced debt collection by intory of property and selling – the government took the costs of such debts upon itself.
Ending his thought, Schmidt marks: “Just after 2 years of national socialists coming to power living conditions improved so much, that there are no poor and unemployed in Germany. Germany faced an economic boom, when Britain, France and USA suffered the violent depression.
Obviously, the new social rights introduced in Germany became known by workers from other countries. They demanded the same working conditions. But the biggest problem was Hitler’s trying to make German economy independent from the international financial oligarchy, whose main representatives sit in offices of Wall-street. Fuhrer banned to use Deutsche Mark in any stock-speculations (that’s how the German currency strengthened, without numerous fake international market fluctuations). Bank capital was under serious control. Their Role then was just to serve interests of industries, businessmen and simple citizens.
So the financial oligarchy lost a chance to control Germany, a country which had one of the most developed economy system in the world. That was not something they could forgive Hitler for.
First US through its newspapers and mass media of Western Europe started the propaganda war against Germany. The democracy papers lied that “Germans were not born for Democracy”, that Hitler was just about to attack America, that chaos spread over Germany, more like hell and so forth. And then the most cruel instrument of the oligarchy was implemented – war.
It’s notable that organizing the war process itself was William Bullitt, who was an authorized representative of not just the President Roosevelt but also a number of influential Bank Houses of Wall-Street."

the "front" was a massive danger to "Mr. Polio" that he refused to fly generally.... Roosevelt and Kennedy hated to fly....

Petty Ironic considering it was FDR who dropped the BOMBS over Japan, then Kennedy did a slew of aircraft missions including one dead over Cuba.

Kennedy was a man of not logic but insanity. RFK was probably the logical one sending U2's over Cuba.
 
Re: answer

didn't get your thoughts anyway...:2razz:
 
Back
Top Bottom