Obama briefed for over a year on ISIS and still has 'no strategy'

[TexasTiger 12,947]

Well ... then you've just identified a lack of strategic thinking on the Obama administration's part.

And you've missed his point and made his previous point.

[AUloggerhead 2,238]

The CNC ordered the withdrawal from Iraq, correct? Lack of strategic thinking on his and his administration's part.

[Strychnine 1,802]

The CNC ordered the withdrawal from Iraq, correct? Lack of strategic thinking on his and his administration's part.

The withdrawal from Iraq coincided with the previous administration's timetable, and it is what the Iraqi government wanted. The failure in Iraq is a truly bipartisan failure, and it ultimately illustrates the lack of strategic vision in all of the last several administrations.

[homersapien 11,386]

AUUSN......how about we say ditto to Cameron's actions for starters. Throw in some drone strikes and a lot of straffing of logistic vehicles in the open desert. Your turn. What is your suggested strategy?

What are Cameron's actions, specifically?

[TexasTiger 12,947]

AUUSN......how about we say ditto to Cameron's actions for starters. Throw in some drone strikes and a lot of straffing of logistic vehicles in the open desert. Your turn. What is your suggested strategy?

What are Cameron's actions, specifically?

Well, he's not Obama for one thing.

[homersapien 11,386]

AUUSN......how about we say ditto to Cameron's actions for starters. Throw in some drone strikes and a lot of straffing of logistic vehicles in the open desert. Your turn. What is your suggested strategy?

What are Cameron's actions, specifically?

Well, he's not Obama for one thing.

Do you ever get the impression that PT actually knows very little about whatever it is he is so worked-up about? Reminds me of Blue's inability to provide examples of other poster's "sins".

But I suppose if your response and explanation to everything is "Obama" you don't need really need to consider the actual facts.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

TexT ...and as usual you contribute nothing except some negative comment to another poster.

[Strychnine 1,802]

AUUSN......how about we say ditto to Cameron's actions for starters. Throw in some drone strikes and a lot of straffing of logistic vehicles in the open desert. Your turn. What is your suggested strategy?

What are Cameron's actions, specifically?

Well, he's not Obama for one thing.

Do you ever get the impression that PT actually knows very little about whatever it is he is so worked-up about? Reminds me of Blue's inability to provide examples of other poster's "sins".

But I suppose if your response and explanation to everything is "Obama" you don't need really need to consider the actual facts.

I blame Obama for your lack of understanding.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

War Tim......thanks.

[TexasTiger 12,947]

AUUSN......how about we say ditto to Cameron's actions for starters. Throw in some drone strikes and a lot of straffing of logistic vehicles in the open desert. Your turn. What is your suggested strategy?

What are Cameron's actions, specifically?

Well, he's not Obama for one thing.

Do you ever get the impression that PT actually knows very little about whatever it is he is so worked-up about? Reminds me of Blue's inability to provide examples of other poster's "sins".

But I suppose if your response and explanation to everything is "Obama" you don't need really need to consider the actual facts.

I blame Obama for your lack of understanding.

Me, too. He's also the reason my house is messy.

[TexasTiger 12,947]

TexT ...and as usual you contribute nothing except some negative comment to another poster.

I offered more specifics than you did.

[autigeremt 6,642]

AUUSN......how about we say ditto to Cameron's actions for starters. Throw in some drone strikes and a lot of straffing of logistic vehicles in the open desert. Your turn. What is your suggested strategy?

What are Cameron's actions, specifically?

Well, he's not Obama for one thing.

Do you ever get the impression that PT actually knows very little about whatever it is he is so worked-up about? Reminds me of Blue's inability to provide examples of other poster's "sins".

But I suppose if your response and explanation to everything is "Obama" you don't need really need to consider the actual facts.

I blame Obama for your lack of understanding.

Me, too. He's also the reason my house is messy.

Yep! If he had done a better job with the economy someone could be cleaning it for you. Lol!

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

AUUSN....I am clueless why you seem to have trouble with my earlier posts but I agree 100% with what you say. I think maybe you misjudge how many people agree with you. Most people just don't now how to make their voices heard and have just given up. Then you have a great sample of posters here who are the pseudo intellectual types who long ago lost touch with reality and get their jollies writing long verbose posts, often just to be contrarian. Many a just malignant narcissists.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

TexT....I offered several things in an earlier post, #15 above. Show me what you have offered.

[AUUSN 823]

You say you agree with me 100% but you still think it's all Obama's fault. You are so pent up with Obama Derangement Syndrome that you fail to take an in depth look at the needed military strategy. I'll say it again. He is a politician and is doing what he said he would do. The truth of the matter is, a majority of the American public agreed with the decision to pull out of Iraq.

Therein lays the problem. The chasm between those who have served and those who haven't is growing every day. A consequence of that is an American public who is largely ignorant on the application of the Military IOP and let a slick, 24 hour media cycle dictate their thoughts on the matter. The military went to war, America went to the mall. I'm not suggesting that we need a population full of Military operational specialist but we do need a public that understands if you leave Iraq completely, chaos will ensue.

Your rage should be directed at the Pentagon. They treated the Iraq conflict as a nuisance and a "temporary conflict" getting in the way of their grand budget plans. As Secretary Gates wrote in his book: "There never was intentional neglect of the troops and their well-being. There was, however, a toxic mix of flawed assumptions about the wars themselves; a risk-adverse bureaucracy; budgetary decisions made in isolation from the battlefield; Army, Navy and Air Force focus in Washington on the routine budget process and protecting dollars for future programs; a White House unaware of the needs of the troops and disinclined to pay much attention to the handful of members of Congress who pointed to these needs; and a Congress by and large so focused on the politics of the war in Iraq that it was asleep at the switch or simply too pusillanimous when it came to the needs of the troops. A "gotcha" climate in Washington created by investigative committees, multiple inspector general and auditing organizations, and a general thirst for scandal collectively reinforced bureaucratic timidity and leadership caution. All this translated into a ponderous and unresponsive system, the antithesis of the kind of speed, agility, and innovation required to support troops at war."

So just blaming Obama on the rise of ISIS is intellectually lazy. That's what irks me because I know it's not the truth and it detracts from what is needed to fight global terrorism.

[Strychnine 1,802]

Add to all of that the fact that most Americans or politicians (from either party) are not interested in doing what is required to fight terrorism.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

AUUSN.....not sure why your pent up anger with me. Again I agree with almost everything you say, so why the venom. You say I should blame DOD and not Obama. Last time I knew DOD was under Obama, he is the CIC and he appointed Hagel as SECDEF. It's like Harry Truman said about the Oval Office....."the buck stops here."

Speaking of those serving, what do you think about our Marine rotting in a Mexican jail? We get Bergdahl but not him. Where is Ross Perot when we need him?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Stry....you must not have seen the latest polls.

[cooltigger21 0]

You say you agree with me 100% but you still think it's all Obama's fault. You are so pent up with Obama Derangement Syndrome that you fail to take an in depth look at the needed military strategy. I'll say it again. He is a politician and is doing what he said he would do. The truth of the matter is, a majority of the American public agreed with the decision to pull out of Iraq.

Therein lays the problem. The chasm between those who have served and those who haven't is growing every day. A consequence of that is an American public who is largely ignorant on the application of the Military IOP and let a slick, 24 hour media cycle dictate their thoughts on the matter. The military went to war, America went to the mall. I'm not suggesting that we need a population full of Military operational specialist but we do need a public that understands if you leave Iraq completely, chaos will ensue.

Your rage should be directed at the Pentagon. They treated the Iraq conflict as a nuisance and a "temporary conflict" getting in the way of their grand budget plans. As Secretary Gates wrote in his book: "There never was intentional neglect of the troops and their well-being. There was, however, a toxic mix of flawed assumptions about the wars themselves; a risk-adverse bureaucracy; budgetary decisions made in isolation from the battlefield; Army, Navy and Air Force focus in Washington on the routine budget process and protecting dollars for future programs; a White House unaware of the needs of the troops and disinclined to pay much attention to the handful of members of Congress who pointed to these needs; and a Congress by and large so focused on the politics of the war in Iraq that it was asleep at the switch or simply too pusillanimous when it came to the needs of the troops. A "gotcha" climate in Washington created by investigative committees, multiple inspector general and auditing organizations, and a general thirst for scandal collectively reinforced bureaucratic timidity and leadership caution. All this translated into a ponderous and unresponsive system, the antithesis of the kind of speed, agility, and innovation required to support troops at war."

So just blaming Obama on the rise of ISIS is intellectually lazy. That's what irks me because I know it's not the truth and it detracts from what is needed to fight global terrorism.

It's called leadership, something our current CIC lacks. He prefers to lead from behind.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

TexT,,,,,,still waiting for you to back up your claim earlier this thread.

[Strychnine 1,802]

Stry....you must not have seen the latest polls.

Polls told me that more people favored removing Saddam in 1992, more people supported invading Iraq in 2003, and then that more people supported withdrawing from Iraq leading up to and during the actual withdrawal. Polls tell me that more people support bad ideas, probably because they had their opinion given to them by the media as opposed to looking into the situation for themselves.

The reality of fighting terrorism is that you cannot bomb it, or eradicate it with special operations. You can kill terrorists, but they are not really the problem. The problem is the ideology, the cause and effect that leads to it, and any potential solution requires long-term strategic thinking (which most politicians I've seen in my lifetime lack), and a substantial commitment of men, hardware, resources, diplomacy, and joint action. It is expensive, difficult, very drawn out, and it is not politically expedient.

[homersapien 11,386]

AUUSN....I am clueless why you seem to have trouble with my earlier posts but I agree 100% with what you say. I think maybe you misjudge how many people agree with you. Most people just don't now how to make their voices heard and have just given up. Then you have a great sample of posters here who are the pseudo intellectual types who long ago lost touch with reality and get their jollies writing long verbose posts, often just to be contrarian. Many a just malignant narcissists.

Well you got one thing right, you are clueless.

[autigeremt 6,642]

AUUSN....I am clueless why you seem to have trouble with my earlier posts but I agree 100% with what you say. I think maybe you misjudge how many people agree with you. Most people just don't now how to make their voices heard and have just given up. Then you have a great sample of posters here who are the pseudo intellectual types who long ago lost touch with reality and get their jollies writing long verbose posts, often just to be contrarian. Many a just malignant narcissists.

:lmao:/>

Well you got one thing right, you are clueless.

He's not alone. D.C. Is the land of clueless. Their ring leader resides at the peoples house.

[AUUSN 823]

AUUSN.....not sure why your pent up anger with me. Again I agree with almost everything you say, so why the venom. You say I should blame DOD and not Obama. Last time I knew DOD was under Obama, he is the CIC and he appointed Hagel as SECDEF. It's like Harry Truman said about the Oval Office....."the buck stops here."

Speaking of those serving, what do you think about our Marine rotting in a Mexican jail? We get Bergdahl but not him. Where is Ross Perot when we need him?

I don't know you so why would I be angry with you. You suffer from ODS and therefore cannot fully grasp the topic at hand. The mechanics of the Military Industrial Complex outruns every President. It is overly simplistic to just say "well gosh the President is CIC so there."

Using that logic, I'll wait for your list of things to blame President Bush on the multiple military failures that occurred on his watch.

[homersapien 11,386]

You say you agree with me 100% but you still think it's all Obama's fault. You are so pent up with Obama Derangement Syndrome that you fail to take an in depth look at the needed military strategy. I'll say it again. He is a politician and is doing what he said he would do. The truth of the matter is, a majority of the American public agreed with the decision to pull out of Iraq.

Therein lays the problem. The chasm between those who have served and those who haven't is growing every day. A consequence of that is an American public who is largely ignorant on the application of the Military IOP and let a slick, 24 hour media cycle dictate their thoughts on the matter. The military went to war, America went to the mall. I'm not suggesting that we need a population full of Military operational specialist but we do need a public that understands if you leave Iraq completely, chaos will ensue.

Your rage should be directed at the Pentagon. They treated the Iraq conflict as a nuisance and a "temporary conflict" getting in the way of their grand budget plans. As Secretary Gates wrote in his book: "There never was intentional neglect of the troops and their well-being. There was, however, a toxic mix of flawed assumptions about the wars themselves; a risk-adverse bureaucracy; budgetary decisions made in isolation from the battlefield; Army, Navy and Air Force focus in Washington on the routine budget process and protecting dollars for future programs; a White House unaware of the needs of the troops and disinclined to pay much attention to the handful of members of Congress who pointed to these needs; and a Congress by and large so focused on the politics of the war in Iraq that it was asleep at the switch or simply too pusillanimous when it came to the needs of the troops. A "gotcha" climate in Washington created by investigative committees, multiple inspector general and auditing organizations, and a general thirst for scandal collectively reinforced bureaucratic timidity and leadership caution. All this translated into a ponderous and unresponsive system, the antithesis of the kind of speed, agility, and innovation required to support troops at war."

So just blaming Obama on the rise of ISIS is intellectually lazy. That's what irks me because I know it's not the truth and it detracts from what is needed to fight global terrorism.

Well said. I pretty much agree with everything stated.

But regarding the highlighted statement I would add that the original problem is the American public - including our leaders - never appreciated the fact that if we invaded Iraq it would be necessary to stay. Indefinitely.

Regardless that was a very insightful post - even if "long and verbose" by PT's standards.