gopher.createaforum.com/1/forums/thewiforum/p/1237

DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
The Forum
HTML https://thewiforum.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Worldwide topics
*****************************************************
#Post#: 16281--------------------------------------------------
Bombing ISIL in Syria
By: Notso Date: September 23, 2014, 6:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I understand it was only 122 targets but I sure wish Obama had
asked congress for a new authorization.
#Post#: 16282--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bombing ISIL in Syria
By: trollslayer Date: September 23, 2014, 7:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Notso link=topic=1237.msg16281#msg16281
date=1411473488]
I understand it was only 122 targets but I sure wish Obama had
asked congress for a new authorization.
[/quote]
I was just going to start a thread.
I agree. This would have sent a clear message. He even had the
backing for it. But I guess the outcome whatever it may be will
be all on him. Taking bets on how long it'll be before more
boots hit the ground?
#Post#: 16287--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bombing ISIL in Syria
By: rapids_60 Date: September 23, 2014, 10:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Meh. Congress is perfectly happy to let Obama take the
political risk. They're leaving themselves the freedom to frame
this however works best for them, depending on the outcome.
Might be for it, Might be against. They'll decide after they
see if it's successful or not.
Chickenshits.
#Post#: 16289--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bombing ISIL in Syria
By: trollslayer Date: September 24, 2014, 6:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=rapids_60 link=topic=1237.msg16287#msg16287
date=1411528703]
Meh. Congress is perfectly happy to let Obama take the
political risk. They're leaving themselves the freedom to frame
this however works best for them, depending on the outcome.
Might be for it, Might be against. They'll decide after they
see if it's successful or not.
Chicken****s.
[/quote]
Under the current circumstances, I can't see how it can be
successful. Hoping to bomb them into defeat without having
ground troops. Eventually you're going to run out of things to
drop bombs on.
#Post#: 16293--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bombing ISIL in Syria
By: rapids_60 Date: September 24, 2014, 1:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Weren't the Syrian rebels and the remnants of the Iraqi army
supposed to be the ground troops?
#Post#: 16298--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bombing ISIL in Syria
By: trollslayer Date: September 24, 2014, 4:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=rapids_60 link=topic=1237.msg16293#msg16293
date=1411583304]
Weren't the Syrian rebels and the remnants of the Iraqi army
supposed to be the ground troops?
[/quote]
Right the Syrian rebels who Obama called Dentists Doctors and
farmers and has refused to arm the last three years. Yes also
the Iraqi army you know the ones who dropped their weapons and
ran when they initially were confronted by ISIS. Sound like a
solid plan to you?
Funny last year at this time while Obama was at the UN he was
touting how he ended the decade long war in Iraq and Oh yeah did
he mention (again) that the US had Al Qaeda on the run? What a
difference a year makes.
Meanwhile our so called Commander in Chief can't even give our
troops the kind of salute they deserve.
HTML http://blogs.marketwatch.com/themargin/2014/09/24/president-obama-and-the-latte-salute-heard-around-the-world/
#Post#: 16303--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bombing ISIL in Syria
By: udontnojack Date: September 24, 2014, 6:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Unless some Middle East countries are willing to step up and
REALLY support this move it will be more time money and American
lives wasted. Sorry to see the Democrats are as willing to use
our forces in wasted fodder as the Republicans. Not a lot of
difference.
#Post#: 16312--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bombing ISIL in Syria
By: rapids_60 Date: September 24, 2014, 7:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=trollslayer link=topic=1237.msg16298#msg16298
date=1411594775]
Sound like a solid plan to you?
[/quote]
No, but nothing we've done in that part of the world has been
'solid'.
Now I see this headline on the fringe sites:
[quote]
Former CIA contractor Steven Kelley says that the ISIL terrorist
group is a completely fabricated enemy created and funded by the
United States[/quote]
ie: we trained them to destabilize the Syrian government, until
they got other ideas.
Now they are fighting us with weapons we provided? Do you
suppose there is more than a grain of truth in that?
I'm sure arming the Syrian rebels will turn out much better.
Much much better. We need to pack our crap and leave, find a
way to stop purchasing oil entirely and let the middle east
collapse.
#Post#: 16313--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bombing ISIL in Syria
By: trollslayer Date: September 24, 2014, 9:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=rapids_60 link=topic=1237.msg16312#msg16312
date=1411605805]
find a way to stop purchasing oil entirely and let the middle
east collapse.
[/quote]We already found a way. It's called fracking. Our
liberal politicians are fighting that, and new drilling tooth
and nail.
#Post#: 16314--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bombing ISIL in Syria
By: rapids_60 Date: September 24, 2014, 11:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=trollslayer link=topic=1237.msg16313#msg16313
date=1411613741]
We already found a way. It's called fracking. Our liberal
politicians are fighting that, and new drilling tooth and nail.
[/quote]
I'm not a fan of more drilling either if we're just going to
sell it on the open market, which is exactly where it's going.
What's the point of that?
If we were to drill enough to flood the market with oil, OPEC
would just cut their production to keep prices up and wait us
out. I'd change my mind if US oil stayed in the US.
N. Gas OTOH produced here stays here because it's tough to
transport overseas, thus the price is at record lows. Oil does
not.
Why not put together a moon shot program to develop some form
of replacement energy that does not rely on fossil fuels at all?
Or are we not capable of doing R&D here anymore?
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page