The fact is that there isn't anything the U.S. and it's allies can do to effectively put an end to ISIS short of an all out invasion of Syria and a reoccupation of Iraq. Even then, like Al Qaeda, it's unlikely they will ever really be defeated. The removal of Saddam Hussein was one of the worst foreign policy/military decisions in this country's history and now we're going to have to pay the price for it. The only question the Obama administration needs to decide is how high that price will be. If there is no strategy yet it's because it hasn't been decided who will share in that burden with us and how.
No one could have predicted that ISIS would gain the traction it has and no one could have predicted that the Iraqi army would hand over vast swaths of their country without a fight. For example, no one foresaw 30,000 heavily armed and American trained Iraqi troops abandoning their posts and weaponry then fleeing from only 500 lightly armed terrorists on the outskirts of Mosul. There is only one possible even remotely effective course of action which I noted above and I'm glad we have a President who is going to think long and hard about it this time around instead of throwing resources and lives away without a plan. What we don't need is more war hawk knee-jerk reactionism.
verb (used with object).
1. to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest.
hate. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. Hate | Define Hate at Dictionary.com (accessed: August 29, 2014).
Yeah Grant.....Seems BO has plans. It still involves getting rid of Assad. As Air Strikes on Syria has obstacles. Still he did come out and say that the US would give the Syrian people a better option than Assad or ISIL.
U.S. air strikes on Syria would face formidable obstacles....
American forces face formidable challenges as President Barack Obama considers an air assault on Islamist fighters in Syria, including intelligence gaps on potential targets, concerns about Syria’s air defenses and fears that the militants may have anti-aircraft weapons, current and former U.S. officials say. The Pentagon began preparing options for an assault on Islamic State fighters after the militants last week posted a gruesome video showing the beheading of American photojournalist James Foley. Deliberations by Obama’s national security team on expanding the campaign against Islamic State from Iraq into neighboring Syria gathered pace in recent days, officials say.
Efforts to hit the right targets in Syria will be more difficult than in Iraq, hindered by a shortage of reliable on-the-ground intelligence, in contrast to northern Iraq where Iraqi and Kurdish forces provided intelligence. U.S.-backed moderate rebels who could provide intelligence in Syria have yet to coalesce into a potent fighting force. It is unclear, for instance, if they can provide forward spotters needed to help guide any air strikes in territory held by Islamic State. Syria’s Russian-built air defense system is another concern. It remains largely intact more than three years into the country’s civil war.....snip~
U.S. air strikes on Syria would face formidable obstacles
QUOTE=Texmex;1063699485]We know what he right-wingers here will do, there're doing it, Criticize Obama regardless of what he does.
I am glad to see someone who thinks before he acts, unlike Dubya.[/QUOTE]
Perhaps, you should think more as to how you bring that up and about when typing out your own words. Just sayin!
Heya Napolean. That's not true. Maliki has been warning BO since Nov of last year.
Daily Beast: Obama Administration Had Warning on ISIS
Dozens of intelligence officers, diplomats, and others say they warned the Obama administration of the threat the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) was posing to Iraq, and the collapse of Mosul wasn't just predictable, but expected. "It's simply not true that nobody saw a disaster like the fall of Mosul coming," Ali Khedery, a senior adviser at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, told The Daily Beast. "I can't speak for anyone else, but I literally predicted this in verbal warnings and in writing in 2010 that Iraq would fall apart."
On Nov. 1, 2013, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki visited the White House and asked Obama to send the military back into his country and help his Air Force develop targets for air strikes. His request came after Maliki celebrated when last troops left Iraq in 2011, but he was concerned about the serious threat ISIS and Sunni insurgents were posing. And just days later, Brett McGurk, a deputy assistant secretary of state and the Obama administration’s senior U.S. official in Baghdad, warned that ISIS was launching up to 40 suicide bombers a month. However, Maliki was rejected and McGurk's warnings were unheeded, as President Barack Obama's policy options were limited. Had he approved Maliki's request, he risked making the controversial leader more powerful. He did agree to sell nearly $11 billion of weapons to Maliki's military, but was unable to get the leader to reverse reforms in which he ousted some of his forces' better leaders in favor of installing his own supporters. And two months after Maliki's visit, Fallujah fell to ISIS and five months after that, Mosul fell. But meanwhile, intelligence analysts from the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency were still issuing warnings that Iraq's military could not stand up to ISIS.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com Daily Beast: Obama Administration Had Warning on ISIS