• 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!

Under Trump, Gains Against ISIS Have ‘Dramatically Accelerated'

Trump is making good on his campaign promise to defeat Isis, which I'm glad about. The sooner this plague is removed from earth, the better.

Agreed. Allowing ISIS to take and hold entire cities was a monumental mistake that Obama never adequately addressed. Thankfully, we have a president and leadership at the DoD that knows how to WIN!
 
The die was cast in June 2014 when ISIS forces seriously threatened Baghdad. That event marked the beginning of the end for Islamic State.
 
Can you at least give him credit for something? Even WaPo gave it up, and 99% of their coverage is strictly 'anti Drumf' rhetoric.

Why should I give him credit for something that was already happening, and was always going to happen? It's like giving him credit for the sun rising in the morning.
 
Bullcrap. You're confused. You make it sound like the US doesn't even consider the civilians. That would be ISIS, not the US military. If the US didn't consider it at all, there would be no ISIS.

No I am not confused. At the moment, the US is not considering civilians and that is the point.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/06/us-syria-iraq-isis-islamic-state-strikes-death-toll

with nearly 60% of the officially acknowledged deaths from the three-year war being reported in the first three months of the Trump administration.

THAT says it all.
 
Hyberbole about "unleashing hell" aside, we were already launching airstrikes against ISIS and AQ long before Trump was president.

You got to get past the headline. The article talks about more than just airstrikes.
 
You got to get past the headline. The article talks about more than just airstrikes.

The article seems to think we weren't launching commando raids via special forces either before Trump was elected. I guess Operation Neptune Spear doesn't count?
 
The article seems to think we weren't launching commando raids via special forces either before Trump was elected. I guess Operation Neptune Spear doesn't count?

The article didn't say anything about not launching anything before Trump...it talks about INCREASED action since Trump.

You really should stop trying to raise strawmen, you know.
 
I'm not reading anything in that article that is representative of an "escalation."

Perhaps you should read it again, eh?

Here...this might help:

A new report out today has revealed that President Trump has stepped up attacks on both ISIS and al-Qaeda in the Middle East and Africa. The combination of airstrikes and drone attacks are now being supported by commandos on the ground in terrorist hotspots.

The new campaign against terrorist strongholds is the first indication President Trump is ramping up military efforts against terrorists.
 
Perhaps you should read it again, eh?

Here...this might help:

Again, I'm not seeing anything there that constitutes an escalation. Air strikes, drone strikes, and special ops are nothing new and the article has no specifics to indicate that any of those things have escalated. Just a comment from an unnamed person about what "the boys really think" will happen.
 
Again, I'm not seeing anything there that constitutes an escalation. Air strikes, drone strikes, and special ops are nothing new and the article has no specifics to indicate that any of those things have escalated. Just a comment from an unnamed person about what "the boys really think" will happen.

Escalation does not equal new. It equal more.

es·ca·late (ĕs′kə-lāt′)
v. es·ca·lat·ed, es·ca·lat·ing, es·ca·lates
v.intr.
To increase in intensity, extent, or amount: tensions that escalated into violence.
v.tr.
1. To increase, enlarge, or intensify: escalated the hostilities in the Persian Gulf.

Escalation - definition of escalation by The Free Dictionary

If you want something more "specific", find it yourself. The article I presented talks about the US stepping up efforts. That's what you asked about, right?
 
Escalation does not equal new. It equal more.



If you want something more "specific", find it yourself. The article I presented talks about the US stepping up efforts. That's what you asked about, right?

What I asked for were specifics. The article didn't provide them.
 
What I asked for were specifics. The article didn't provide them.

shrug...

I supported my contention. As I said...if you want more, find it yourself.
 
shrug...

I supported my contention. As I said...if you want more, find it yourself.

You found an article that merely repeated your claim based on what "the boys really think." Evidence supporting that claim has not been provided.
 
You found an article that merely repeated your claim based on what "the boys really think." Evidence supporting that claim has not been provided.

Actually, that article I presented got their information from ABC. Did you even follow up on that link in the article?

Quit being lazy and quit using your laziness as an excuse to dismiss reality. You aren't doing yourself any favors.
 
The article didn't say anything about not launching anything before Trump...it talks about INCREASED action since Trump.

You really should stop trying to raise strawmen, you know.

Well, after hearing "liberals" this and "liberals" that for years, I'd say your "side" as a collective doesn't have room to try and claim anyone else is using "strawmen".

The article explicitly stated that they thought AQAP was "being ignored".
 
Actually, that article I presented got their information from ABC. Did you even follow up on that link in the article?

Quit being lazy and quit using your laziness as an excuse to dismiss reality. You aren't doing yourself any favors.

I did even though it's not my responsibility to support your claim for you. The only thing specifically mentioned was 1 raid in Yemen. What was not mentioned is that it ultimately resulted in a ban on US ground operations in that country. So again, lack of evidence to support the claim beyond what "the boys really think."
 
Well, after hearing "liberals" this and "liberals" that for years, I'd say your "side" as a collective doesn't have room to try and claim anyone else is using "strawmen".

The article explicitly stated that they thought AQAP was "being ignored".

Take your stereotyping and shove it. I'm not on any "side". I speak for myself.

Quit raising strawmen.

Who is ignoring AQAP?
 
I did even though it's not my responsibility to support your claim for you. The only thing specifically mentioned was 1 raid in Yemen. What was not mentioned is that it ultimately resulted in a ban on US ground operations in that country. So again, lack of evidence to support the claim beyond what "the boys really think."

I'm not asking you to support my claim. I expect you to consider what I say...if you disagree, then say so. What I don't expect...or accept...from you is a blanket dismissal of my claim simply because what I present isn't "specific" enough for you.

Take it or leave it.
 
Thankfully, we have a president and leadership at the DoD that knows how to WIN!

The joint Iraq/US/UK military operation (Operation Conquest/Operation Fatah) to retake Mosul, Iraq (March 2016) and the US/YPG operation (Operation Wrath of Euphrates) to retake Raqqa, Syria (October 2016) began under President Barack Obama.

Trump never did advance any special strategy to defeat ISIS in 30 days as he boasted.
 
Back
Top Bottom