Obama Fail : What is his policy in Iraq?

Well, the problem is, we just are not going to go in there with that mindset. Not going to happen, and I don't care who is president. Clinton let OBL get away because he didn't want to hurt women and kids in the terrorist camp. Seriously. He also never retaliated for the african embassy bombings.

Our supposed military geniuses like Patreus, McChrystal and John McCain all strutted around espousing this COIN, counterinsurgency BS, nonsense. Supposedly if we were nice to them, theywould appreciate it and not try to kill us the minute we turned our backs. We are seeing how that worked out. It turns out the taliban understands how to deal with them better than we do.

What some of you don't understand is that it's not like we have a choice between ISIS and some version of Switzerland in Iraq. The shia-dominated government takes its orders from iran, which just happens to be the world's number one sponsor of terrorism. It all just underlines how stupid our policy was to overthrow Saddam, who at least kept them both under his boot heel. He knew how to deal with them and was prepared to do what was necessary. We delude ourselves so that we can rationalize our refusal to do what is necessary.

What rational policy involves releasing from custody a guy like this ISIS dude? Seriously. Perhaps it is the same mindset that released the five top taliban guys for Bergdahl?

 

If it is the same mindset, it crosses party lines.

Former Bush Official Blasts GOP On Bergdahl: Bush Would Have Done The Same Thing
By Igor Volsky June 3, 2014 at 12:40 pm Updated: June 3, 2014 at 12:45 pm

"A former Bush administration official broke with Republicans on Tuesday to defend President Obama’s prisoner exchange, arguing that since “the war in Afghanistan is winding down,” the United States would be required to return prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay back to Afghanistan.

“I don’t see how these particular Taliban officials could ever have been tried in the southern district of New York,” John Bellinger, who served as an adviser to President George W. Bush explained during an appearance on Fox News Tuesday. “They’re certainly some Al Qaeda detainees who committed actual terrorist acts against Americans who perhaps could have been tried in a federal court because they committed federal crimes, but these particular Taliban detainees I think could never have been tried in federal court.” Although some of the released prisoners posed a danger to the United States when they were captured in 2002, especially toward soldiers serving in Afghanistan, several of the detainees did not commit crimes against Americans.

"Republicans — including former Vice President Dick Cheney — have blasted the administration for swapping five Taliban-linked prisoners to secure U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s freedom. They argue that the trade endangers Americans stationed overseas by sending top Taliban officials back into the battlefield and could inspire other terrorist groups to capture American service members in order to extract concessions from the United States. GOP lawmakers also claim that the administration circumvented a law requiring Congress to be notified 30 days before prisoners are transferred from Guantanamo Bay.

"Asked about reports that Bergdahl deserted his unit, Bellinger added that the former hostage “will have to face justice, military justice.” “We don’t leave soldiers on the battlefield under any circumstance unless they have actually joined the enemy army,” he said. “He was a young 20-year-old. Young 20-year-olds make stupid decisions. I don’t think we’ll say if you make a stupid decision we’ll leave you in the hands of the Taliban.”

"Though Cheney told Fox News on Monday that he would not have agreed to the deal, Bellinger stressed that the Bush administration “returned something like 500 detainees from Guantanamo.” Statistics from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence show that only 6 percent (5 in total) of Guantanamo detainees released during the Obama administration have potentially engaged in militant activities. That compares with a rate of nearly 30 percent under the Bush administration.

“I’m not saying this is clearly an easy choice but frankly I think a Republican, a president of either party, Republican or Democratic confronted with this opportunity to get back Sgt. Bergdahl, who is apparently in failing health, would have taken this opportunity to do this,” he added. “I think we would have made the same decision in the Bush administration.”

"President Obama defended trade in similar terms Tuesday. “The United States has always had a pretty sacred rule, and that is: we don’t leave our men or women in uniform behind,” Obama said in Warsaw, Poland. “Regardless of the circumstances, we still get an American soldier back if he’s held in captivity. Period. Full stop.”

 

ISIS loading up on US weaponry.

 

ricter are you paid... to support Obama?
cause just about everyone else is sick or concerned about his administrations competence and integrity.

 

You mean just about everyone else here.

Edit: once again, though, I'm not supporting Obama but attacking specious, or merely political, arguments.

 

If ever anyone was full of shit that would be you, rectum.

 

<img src='http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/06/17/article-0-1ED7921000000578-688_964x854.jpg'>

Baghdad, Iraq (CNN) -- As Islamic militants continue their murderous advance across Iraq, they have a new target in their sights: the city of Baquba, less than 40 miles north of Baghdad. Gunbattles erupted in the city, only a 45-minute drive from the capital, on Tuesday as fighters and Iraqi government forces clashed. Civilians are fleeing violence there and elsewhere in Iraq even as the United States bolsters its manpower in the region while it mulls what action to take.

According to a Baquba police official and an official in the Baquba governor's office, militants from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, have "made a great advance on Baquba" and are pushing very hard to take it, but the city has not fallen.

At the same time, a statement from al-Maliki's office accused Saudi Arabia of appeasing terrorists and providing radical groups with material and moral support.
"The Saudi government must bear responsibility of the serious crimes committed by these groups," the statement reads. Saudi Arabia provided "monetary and moral support to the terrorist groups," the statement reads, according to a translation from Arabic.

Separately, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki fired four top military officers who "deserted and did not fulfill their professional and national duty," according to a statement read on state TV.
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/17/world/meast/iraq-crisis/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

So is Baghdad going to fall? I guess the Iraqi government can always fall back to Basra.

 

Well, one thing we can all agree on is that we're not going in full force, or anything close to it. The hand wringing will continue. I'm afraid we'll all live to see that indecision to blow up in our face, literally, and probably sooner than later. No way this just works itself out with nothing but diplomatic efforts. That requires a sane and rational people to negotiate with. People who chop off heads for the hell of it and set others ablaze in the street don't fall into that category.

 

lol. I saw some footage earlier of isis allegedly approaching the outskirts of baghdad. nice, wide open terrain in the middle of a desert.. perfect time to rain fire and send them to allah (then send iraq the bill).

allahu snackbarrrr!!!