• 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: U.S. will be relentless with Islamic State after Beheading.....

Well.....as a community activist. He wasn't about bringing people together. Just sayin.

Once he released those 5 Taliban......he increased the risk of all our people and businesses overseas. That includes any hostages that were in Captivity.

Looking to just use the FBI to track them down.....and get them back home. Seems a Waste to me.

You are right, he has no ability to bring people together, he doesn't like people.

That would be correct trading those Taliban members was a horrible decision, like finding a needle in a haystack. Not to mention what ICE have done with releasing thousands of illegal criminals, with the sad excuse we don't have money to keep them in jail.
Inside and outside our borders :(
 
Dubya created ISIS when he invaded Iraq. When Obama was a senator he said the invasion was wrong. Now that he's president he wants to escalate the conflict. Seems we have learned nothing from past mistakes because we keep making the same ones over and over again. Our government starts its own wars. And its killing Americans for nothing. :roll:
 
Fine. After this conflict, can we all agree that decades of failed policy including support of jihadist groups has caused the fighting we've been involved in, and has created much of the hate for America. No, that won't happen, far too few people are willing to admit this fact. Did you know that 55 years ago Eisenhower commissioned his NST to produce a report on why it is that the people of the Middle East hate America so? And did you know that their report fingered US policies in the region, like the CIA sponsored coup that overthrew the elected government of Iran, installing the Shah? If America doesn't stop ****ing with these people, one of these days they will succeed.

Interestingly enough, it was Eisenhower's doctrine that was a complete disaster. Supporting, or not supporting countries based upon his feeling of whether or not they leaned toward communism rather then on there own merits.

Yeah, bro, I do know & recognize it, but, this isn't the time to be worrying about past transgressions but keeping all attention on what's directly in-front of us. We can have the one-sided debate after we defeat ISIS & survive their worst. I'll be one of the first ones to grab the bullhorn, man.
 
I agree, but that is far easier said than done:

ISIS is basically a bunch of fanatics riding around in Mad Max modified nissan pick up trucks. They can be very hard to find when mixed in urban areas- and ISIS is very aware of drones, cell phone tracing, and laser guided bombs.

We need to be ready & available in a moment's notice to operate, not do the indecisive game like we did with al Qaeda & OBL pre-9/11.
 
But then BO didn't follow up Juniors regime change plans, as you say. Otherwise we would have seen such take place with Libya. There was no end game and that's why Libya is the way it is.

Also you do tend to forget those other allies and what they do to cause US involvement and what happens when they cause a vacuum to take place.

Ok, so you're of the opinion that only democrats foul things in the ME. That would be a typical partisan position. You haven't realized that decades of failed US policy in the ME has caused the trouble we see today. You blame it all on the democrats which makes you both anti-American, and, part of the problem. Jesus dude, stop blaming one party and start being part of the solution. STOP being partisan!
 
Heya ML.
hello2.gif
Well truthfully BO peep has never been one for smack talk. He couldn't handle it on the street so I doubt he can handle it anywhere else. Even in Diplomacy.

Stop being a partisan. Be an American and call out failed US policy in the ME!
 
'President Barack Obama on Wednesday vowed that the United States will not be swayed from airstrikes against Islamic State after the group beheaded an American journalist'

In other words, kiss 'no boots on the ground' good bye.


Btw, Neocons must be, IMO, loving the beheading...just gives America another excuse to butt into the Middle East.
 
Now look at the captured comparison. Obama would rather kill them because detaining them doesn't fit his narrative.

Wow, just wow. What you offer is the no-win scenario. If Obama kills more terrorists with drones than Bush did, you argue he's wrong because he should have captured more. Undoubtably, if he captured more than Bush, he would have erred too, in your view.
 
Btw, Neocons must be, IMO, loving the beheading...just gives America another excuse to butt into the Middle East.

Suggesting that any American thinks that this barbarous beheading is acceptable--much less that it's great--is contemptible.
 
Suggesting that any American thinks that this barbarous beheading is acceptable--much less that it's great--is contemptible.

I never said they thought it was acceptable....I said they must be loving that it happened - at least the powerful ones.

I doubt any powerful Neocons knew this guy and they, IMO, are always looking for an excuse to butt into other countries businesses in the name of American security.
This gave them that excuse.


And please don't be so incredibly naive...do you honestly believe that Washington power brokers are going to give a crap about one freelance journalist getting beheaded?

What is contemptible is how 4,000 American soldiers lost their lives in Iraq and no one in power in Washington seemed to bat an eye...yet one rogue journalist gets killed in a grizzly, public way and those in power start to publicly freak out.

I find that pathetic.



It also goes to show...as long as no one sees it, no one gives a sh!t about most atrocities.

Women can get raped by the hundreds every day...hardly anyone blinks. Genocide, starvation, pain, misery, suffering goes on daily...and people yawn.

But actually show it to them...only then will they care enough to want to actually do something to stop it.

That is contemptible.
 
Last edited:
Heya Jango. :2wave: Well he does have to take a harder stance now.....especially after the Pope and Rome said ISIS needs to be stopped. How would he look if he didn't?

The Pope and Rome, are they two different things?
 
I guess Bush would have climbed into the cockpit of a fighter.

At least Bush would know something what a fighter looks like. Spinelessness is the backbone of American liberalism and you are going to be put to the test. If we don't put boots back on the ground to kill ISIS then it could spell the end of liberalism depending how severe ISIS attacks us in our own country. Once the little liberals see their own homes burned they will see the world in a different light begging the right to protect them.
 
Once the little liberals see their own homes burned they will see the world in a different light begging the right to protect them.

Hyperbolic BS!

I guess I will have to go buy a larger water hose so I can prevent this from happening.

Oh, and I don't need the right-wingers to protect me. I have three good friends, Sig, Sauer and Ruger to help me in time of need.
 
We need to be ready & available in a moment's notice to operate, not do the indecisive game like we did with al Qaeda & OBL pre-9/11.

Maybe hands on methods are needed to supplement the drones. These two historical raids come to mind:

- Norway1943 About 2,000 British commandos suddenly occupy entire town. Their goal is to cause as much destruction as possible, kill or capture as many Germans as possible, encourage pro British Norweigans, and then leave

- Yugoslavia, 1944 German paratrooper raid designed to kill or capture Marshal Tito and as many other Partisans and British military advisors as possible.

So, perhaps....

Navy Seal Pathfinders and 2,000 Rangers suddenly parachute into area where ISIS leadership is suspected of being. A stretch of straight highways siezed for a run way. Light vehicles are flown in for mobility. The Seals and Rangers spend three days killing as many surprised ISIS leaders and followers as possible, then pack up and leave.
 
Whats funny is most of the left don't think these Terrorists are moving Westward. Yet Ansar al Sharia has sprung up from Yemen to Libya. Oh and now BO has put us back into Somalia. Go figure.

Either way.....I still think he should have looked into that camera and told that One Terrorist. With what you did.....Were coming for you. There is no place you can hide.



He, as in Obama, is all about image. Here, where Ukraine is still headined over the Middle east, the notoriously left wing CBC News site has this buried under "World".

James Foley killing: ISIS remains 'long-term threat,' Chuck Hagel says - World - CBC News

Note the comments, virtually NO support for the US. That may be that Canada has had two journalists killed, one in Kandahar in the past five months. Canadians do not see it in the same, hysterical light as the lead of this US written piece with the lead:

The killing of an American reporter is galvanizing international anger at ISIS extremists and fuelling fears about the flow of foreign fighters joining their ranks.

Based on international news reports, and continued coverage across Canada, there is little international anger to be galvanized. Since we first heard of the beheading here, which I don't recall ever as a lead story, and the rather quick to the punch reaction of the White House I have questioned how serious this really is. Taking into consideration the Obama team is failing in numbers, facing its first ever uphill elections fight, I liken this to the "Teeny attack" idea for Syria and the international community that didn't exist, to the sudden and hell bent "The Calvary is coming, hold on" for some kidnapped girls, and wonder just how much the White House is blowing this out of proportion. With so many intelligence disasters from the Berlin Wall to Benghazi's "it was a spontaneous demonstration", one would be an idiot to believe the White House actually has a clue.
 
Sadly, the folks running the show have horrible memories. We treated AQ in the same fashion for decades and that certainly bit us in the butt. This scum needs to be wiped from the face of the planet.


And the track record of the Excited States wiping scum "off the face of the earth" is?

Korea 1949 - 65 years of conflict and they now have missiles, no peace treaty likely. Ever.
Vietnam - 26 years of conflict, the country surrendered to Communism.
The War on Terror - 13 years of warfare across several countries, no end in sight, no progress to record
The war on WMD's - No WMD's, five years of war, billions spent, the country in ruin and civil war.
The Cold War - Re-ignited after 25 years of dormancy because of CIA bungling in Ukrain

Good luck with that wiping off the face of the earth thing....
 
Yeah the wrong one. To Top it off.


The best comment to that is the great Canadian "Yeah eh?"

The Obama left will never miss an opportunity to spin something to their messiah's benefit. Here we have a situation where the White House with Obama's mouth leading the assault on our intelligence promising "justice" in the name of a fallen American, an unarmed civilian who died serving his country; stating repeatedly through an election campaign that the spontaneous demonstrators would be caught and brought to "justice"

Two and a half years later, we get a post suggesting they have indeed been caught, I read it somewhere...seed planted. Then some reality, "only one has been caught". Then truth, it was the wrong one.

One. There were hundreds of armed terrorists who used high powered military grade weaponry to attack US sovereign land and kill Americans. But because it did not suit the White House political agenda of the day, that there were no "terrorists" in Libya, it was relegated to an FBI investigation who now, two and a half years later have produced squat.

And now, because of one free lance journalist, not in the service to his country, Obama is driving an agenda of revenge, with apparently otherwise clear headed Americans demanding ISIS be wiped off the earth.

But everything is just peachy folks, Obama the "reluctant warrior" with a Peace Prize always tells the truth and "justice" is somehow involved somehow, maybe in a "teensy" way.
 
Why is everything based on what the other party does?

@MMC makes a comment which goes undisputed, with the equalizer a version of "they do it too." By that logic, both sides wallow in a sewage filled gutter but its OK because the other guys do it. The moral logic of that is lugubriously still born.

For five and a half years, every criticism of Obama, and there have been many legitimate ones, has at one point been met with a version of Bush [either one], Reagan, or Romney did it too; even Obamacare that The One was so proud of in the debate, became "Romneycare" when things turned ugly and 27 million people lost their plan.

Isn't the aim of progressives to make progress? How can that happen when the base is the worst of what the predecessor got away with?

As a staunch Liberal and libertarian, I support much of what the US non-progressive movement claims to support, but I have to say my respect lies with what Obama has termed his "enemies", the American right. I do not see the same misdirection and blame shifting and while some of the goals they seek are repulsive to me, I at least know where they stand, an impossibility with a movement whose leader is a pathological liar and his supporters best defense is "bush did it too."

The American left is about as "progressive" as a neanderthal's idea of what is good to eat.

You probably miss my point. For pointing out that the right does it too, is not intended as an excuse for failed policy from the left. I'm not a partisan, and as such, I don't run cover for either party. My concern is that partisans on the right made excuses for things Bush did that were wrong, and all the while, partisans on the left were raising hell about it. Now then, we have partisans on the left excusing and justifying things that Obama has done that is wrong, while partisans on the right are raising hell. This is the way it ALWAYS works. Point........... If people were Americans first and a party to the smart ass and dumb elephant second, and as such held ALL presidents accountable, we'd see sound policy. But that will never happen.
 
In other words, they lost.

They whole point of George Bush going in was to shut down the safe haven thing and kill all the terrorists. Now, you confirm there are more terrorists than ever before, and that they now have two countries from which to operate.

I really want to see the Obamaheads put a "win" on this one.

It's not possible. There never has been a win. And bad policy for the last dozen years has facilitated a growth of militant Islamists.
 
True enough. That's because following in Bush's footsteps Obama has practiced and ratcheted up regime change, which directly gives room for jihadists to blossom. And then there's Bush's drone program which Obama energized and is causing more hatred for America with its high ratio of innocent civilian deaths. Why is it American for you to criticize Obama and blame his policies for the rise in terrorist activity in the ME, but anti-American when I point out that both parties are responsible for power vacuums filled by jihadists and hatred for America due to our poor policies for years now???

Well said. The landscape of West Asia and the middle east is the result of decades of US bungling not the least of which was Charlie Wilson's War in the 80's. Bush can only be criticized for giving Amerikans what they wanted: Revenge for what was then being compared to Pearl Harbor. Bush was at the peak of popularity, at one point outstripping Reagan's best when he donned the Hawk code and won a second term by making a decorated war idiot appear to be dove.

I take issue that Obama has adopted and advanced "regime change", he has, but only as a piecemeal applied as per the current domestic situation. Obama's "foreign policy" is a grab bag of neglect left over from the Clinton years, advanced by the other Clinton, neither of which understand what a "foreign" country is.

At best, Obama has stumbled from one nightmare to another, each based on a plan drawn on a napkin, from Arab Spring to Afghanistan to Iraq and the pull out to Benghazi to Ukraine to Syria and now Iraq again, it has been one blunder after another, independent of any apparent plan with a result in mind.

Does anyone know what specific results have come from the drone program? What is the intended result of Afghanistan? What is the result here?
 
Well you don think the Neo Cons will say anything do you? Seems Coburn didn't have any trouble pointing it out.

So one or two. Basically Obama had support from the right in his abuse of the UN resolution to use force to protect the libyan civilians. Russia called it out immediately by pointing out that from the beginning, the targeting was consistent with "regime change" and is the precise reason why they denied the US from pulling the same stunt in Syria! Yes, Obama did follow in Bush's steps in regime change. And everybody keeps dismissing General Clark's declaration that the Pentagon has had plans for regime change in seven ME countries, yet its been accomplished in four and we're working on the fifth. The result has been vacuums that have given rise to terrorists throughout the ME. But you keep up your partisan finger pointing and blaming it all on the democrats and we can be assured more of the same!
 
You probably miss my point. For pointing out that the right does it too, is not intended as an excuse for failed policy from the left. I'm not a partisan, and as such, I don't run cover for either party. My concern is that partisans on the right made excuses for things Bush did that were wrong, and all the while, partisans on the left were raising hell about it. Now then, we have partisans on the left excusing and justifying things that Obama has done that is wrong, while partisans on the right are raising hell. This is the way it ALWAYS works. Point........... If people were Americans first and a party to the smart ass and dumb elephant second, and as such held ALL presidents accountable, we'd see sound policy. But that will never happen.

That "point" has been being made for five and a half years. It is not only antique but irrelevant as neither Bush nor his supporters have any say or control over what happens.

The constant harping on years old issues is divisive and plays into the hands of the most manipulative White House in the history of White Houses. You may not be partisan, but the results are the same.

It is part of the demonizing process, used so effectively in US politics being copied here by the Conservatives who, feeling threatened by a new, young, charming and bright Liberal leader are attacking him over the 1970's policies of his father, Pierre Elliot Trudeau.
 
Back
Top Bottom