White House official: The Islamic State is the next administration’s problem

posted at 10:01 am on September 4, 2014 by Noah Rothman

The word of the day is “deliberate.”

On Thursday morning, White House Deputy National Security Advisor Tony Blinken said that the Obama administration is seeking to combat the Islamic State threat, as it executes one “terrorist attack” after another against the United States, in a “deliberate” fashion. That’s a far more generous way of confessing to near paralytic dithering.

Last week, President Barack Obama admitted that his administration does not “have a strategy yet” for attacking the Islamic State in its Syrian stronghold. On Wednesday, noting in the same speech that his administration would seek to “destroy” ISIS and/or “shrink” it into a “manageable problem,” he revealed that he does not really even have a single objective in mind for how to deal with the Islamic State.

The White House has begun to push back on an increasingly panicked press, the members of which appear to have come to the reluctant conclusion that there is no hand on the tiller, noting that both can be true: You can “shrink,” “degrade,” make “manageable,” and eventually “destroy” ISIS. While this may be true, the words of the president and his subordinates leave the listener with the impression that this is a policy being crafted on the fly.

Blinken told MSNBC’s Morning Joe that the United States is stalling on responding forcefully to crimes against humanity and the United States committed by ISIS because they are attempting to build a robust international coalition. “We’ve got to look before we leap,” he said. “We tried the opposite a decade ago, and that didn’t help us very much in the Middle East.”

Nearly six years after George W. Bush left the White House, the Obama White House has been completely unable to even approach his ability to craft an international coalition. They ruthlessly mocked the size of the 48-member strong force that engaged in combat and nation building in Iraq in 2003 because it did not include France and Canada, but defend the execution of perfectly unilateral military action in Iraq today and demand you consider it consistency.

But this is not the only language of the Bush years Blinken appropriated this week. Appearing on CNN on Wednesday, the deputy national security advisor told Wolf Blitzer that the fight against ISIS may be – like the once-defunct War on Terror – a generational struggle. Except he did not say that. Blinken said that throttling the nascent Islamic State in the crib is a project for the next occupant of the Oval Office.

“This, as the President has said, is going to have to be a sustained effort,” Blinken said. “It’s going to take time, and it will probably go beyond even this administration to get to the point of defeat.”

You see, not only does the White House need there to be an international coalition assembled before ISIS is engaged (a process which the president may be engaged in as we speak at a NATO summit in Wales), but he needs the consent of Congress as well. And that is a process which the White House is most assuredly not pursuing at all.

Members of Congress, Democrats in particular, are racing to strike a more hawkish posture on ISIS than Obama. Some are demanding that the White House call Congress back from vacation and hold a joint session to clarify precisely how the administration plans to address this threat. And yet, there is no obvious sense of urgency from this administration. A “deliberate” approach to this crisis would include both calling Congress back and coalition building, as well as the refusal to rule out unilateral military action to avenge what the White House considers “terrorist” attacks on the United States. This is not what is happening.

Even this many years later, the administration remains consumed with behaving in ways they believe will be seen as antithetical to those of the former president. In that process, they have subordinated being viewed as competent to just being viewed as dissimilar to Bush.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Schadenfreude on September 4, 2014 at 1:04 PM

Hold off on that for a bit.

Putting a lot of emphasis there would be like a joana from the other direction.

cozmo on September 4, 2014 at 1:14 PM

Joanna,

If ISIS were to attack the USA in a 9/11 style terror attack, would you support going to war with them? Wherever they may be?

Jack_Burton on September 4, 2014 at 1:16 PM

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:08 PM

Seek medical attention immediately. Head injuries can be tricky.

BTW, who will you be voting for in Nov 2016 Rand Paul or Pocahontas Warren?

smitty41 on September 4, 2014 at 1:16 PM

Nice diplomatic response right here. Well done Zeus!

ToddPA on September 4, 2014 at 1:04 PM

Well, I wasn’t appointed as the Deputy Assistant to the Associate Ambassador to Nophukistan just based on my good looks, doncha know!

I’ve got an official certified diploma in diplomacy.

ZeusGoose on September 4, 2014 at 1:16 PM

I must appologize first that my post can’t be written with Crayola, so you might not understand. ISIS is not a military threat. ISIS is a terrorist threat, and they are VERY well organized. Terrorist threats are dealt with by way of counterterrorism methods. Plain and simple, for simpletons like yourself.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Anyone who believes IS is or will become a military threat to the US needs to pick up their phone immediately and schedule a mental checkup. I’m honestly more worried with Canada.

Islamic terrorism is and has been a threat but IS didn’t change anything in that regards – at least I still have to see any sort of convincing explanation that it did (or even an unconvincing one). Terrorist is fought with counter-terrorism, not with military actions against non-military threats.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 11:03 AM

I mean, I have to ask again: can you read? Are you a mentally sick person? Because you’re repeating what I wrote almost ad verbatim – while shouting in irate tones how wrong I am.

Seriously, check a doctor, I have never seen anything quite like this, even in the internet. That’s simply very abnormal behaviour.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:17 PM

joana on September 4, 2014 at 12:57 PM

You really do tend to miss the point. But, I’m done.

GWB on September 4, 2014 at 1:18 PM

That’s simply very abnormal behaviour.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:17 PM

I agree. Though when dealing with such an idiot as yourself, some people have to step it up to nearly your level. Which, for most people is abnormal. For you, its just Thursday.

cozmo on September 4, 2014 at 1:20 PM

“It’s going to take time, and it will probably go beyond even this administration to get to the point of defeat.”

In other words, we ain’t gonna do s**t. But hey, I’m the first black president, huh? That’s awesome, right? Huh?

Gearbox on September 4, 2014 at 1:23 PM

ZeusGoose, she’ll report you to Salem :)

Schadenfreude on September 4, 2014 at 1:08 PM

Let her try!

I’m more a Marlboro guy myself, anyway. At any rate, Salem gave up witch burning a long time ago, otherwise we wouldn’t have to suffer with the likes of joana.

ZeusGoose on September 4, 2014 at 1:23 PM

not for Paul or Warren? joana must be a Rick Perry fan.

smitty41 on September 4, 2014 at 1:23 PM

Joanna,

If ISIS were to attack the USA in a 9/11 style terror attack, would you support going to war with them? Wherever they may be?

Jack_Burton on September 4, 2014 at 1:16 PM

Probably, but that scenario is…. too simplistic. What does going to war with the ISIS mean? Occupying Iraq and Syria? I supported the war in Afghanistan because it made sense: we knew who had responsibility, there was a well-defined regime in Afghanistan and they refused to hand over those who were responsible when we asked. A war against ISIS sounds much more vague, so it’d depend.

The problem with all this stuff, and I’ve already explained this multiple times, is that people get obsessed over names. ISIS will probably go the way of Jama’at al-Tawhid wa-al-Jihad and the Al-Qaeda in Iraq and the Mujahideen Shura Council and be called something else in a couple of years. People making distinctions between the Al-Nusra Front and the IS, or even between the FSA and the IS… it’s all immaterial. It’s always the same people, the Sunni Mujaihdeens in that area. There’s no point in trying to see the situation as it is a videogame or a film because it isn’t.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:24 PM

smitty41 on September 4, 2014 at 1:23 PM

Meh, she probably still has her Romney love potions.

cozmo on September 4, 2014 at 1:25 PM

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:24 PM

so why are you against bombing ISIS into extinction and if the vacuum is filled with extremist simple rinse and repeat until the moderates step up?

In other words why wait until they come here or evolve here and attack before taking action?

Now that should be as straight forward and easy to understand even you should get it.

smitty41 on September 4, 2014 at 1:29 PM

Near 200 airstrikes and counting now, with a new crushing loss for ISIS every day.

And you guys let Obama troll you with his “what, poor little me have a strategy?” routine.

Awesome.

everdiso on September 4, 2014 at 1:29 PM

I’ve never lost a debate here.

everdiso on June 13, 2014 at 2:27 PM

ROFLMAO….yeah your win/loss record was so awesome you had to change your username from lester to everdiso. Oh wait, you were banned. Prolly cause you were winning so many debates.

HumpBot Salvation on June 13, 2014 at 2:39 PM

Schadenfreude on September 4, 2014 at 1:32 PM

Did we find those missing airliners yet?

Did we find the ISIS members within our own borders yet?

Did we find those 6000 missing “students?”

Were we able to return the muslim prayer rugs found near the Rio Grande to their rightful owners?

CurtZHP on September 4, 2014 at 1:36 PM

I mean, I have to ask again: can you read? Are you a mentally sick person? Because you’re repeating what I wrote almost ad verbatim ……

Seriously, check a doctor, I have never seen anything quite like this, even in the internet. That’s simply very abnormal behaviour.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:17 PM

Ahh, I see. Facts can be a real b*tch when they don’t go your way, eh? When presented with facts, you find it difficult to stick to the discussion and go out of your way to change the subject. I guess it is easier for you to make sh*t up than argue fact. Although, I do find it rather amusing how everyone on here has shot holes through each and every one of your arguements, and you still don’t get it.

while shouting in irate tones how wrong I am.

I think I have been quite rational. I fail to see where I have shouted and used irate tones. Wave from the back of the short bus, joana.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:36 PM

OT,

but be sure to head to Chick-fil-A during the fast-food min wage walkouts, as they are fully staffed.

smitty41 on September 4, 2014 at 1:37 PM

Apparently a paper cut is a crushing loss for everanidiot.

cozmo on September 4, 2014 at 1:38 PM

For you, its just Thursday.

cozmo on September 4, 2014 at 1:20 PM

…. and Friday, …. and Saturday, ….. and Sunday ……

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:38 PM

proof that todays liberalism is a mental disease

[John] Kerry Says It Is Our Biblical ‘Duty’ To Protect Muslim Countries Against Climate Change

smitty41 on September 4, 2014 at 1:41 PM

so why are you against bombing ISIS into extinction and if the vacuum is filled with extremist simple rinse and repeat until the moderates step up?

In other words why wait until they come here or evolve here and attack before taking action?

Now that should be as straight forward and easy to understand even you should get it.

smitty41 on September 4, 2014 at 1:29 PM

We’ve already bombed ISIS into extinction a few times – quite a few if you count their different emanations under other names. Don’t you understand this? See what just happened in Mosul where they basically vanished after air strikes began. In a way, you “bombed them into extinction” – except for the fact they’ll quickly return to the militia live once the military pressure lessens.

“Bombing ISIS” means nothing. There’s nothing there. It’s not even a palliative. You can provide air support to help Shia militia or the Kurds or Assad to drive their leaders out of the cities and oilfields they occupy now, but they’ll just go underground and resurge afterwards. The problem isn’t ISIS or Al-Qaeda in Iraq or the Mujahideen Shura Council or the Jama’at al-Tawhid wa-al-Jihad or the Al-Nusra Front or whatever they’re going to be called next.

Unless you really want to carpet bomb all the zones in Iraq and Syria where Sunni extremism has become popular throughout the last decade (a GREAT job from American war hawks, btw, the same people who, for some odd reason, we are still supposed to take advice from), but that’s why I asked what did you mean with “Bomb them”?

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:42 PM

Apparently a paper cut is a crushing loss for everanidiot.

cozmo on September 4, 2014 at 1:38 PM

C’mon man. Do you realize how hard it will be for the caliph to find someone else to give him a reach-around?

Hey, wait a second… Lester?

CurtZHP on September 4, 2014 at 1:43 PM

joana on September 4, 2014 at 12:12 PM

I could have cited all your other moronic posts on this thread, but what would be the point.

You are an absolutely idiotic sloot. You ask others to be civil in response to your pile of steaming BS comments, but call others “mentally unstable”, etc.

Furthermore, I can tell by your spelling of certain words, such as ‘behaviour’, that you’re probably not even a native (or current) U.S. citizen.

Basically, STFU. And rush to your nearest clinic and get an encephalitic enema, because your head is full of $#!t.

ZeusGoose on September 4, 2014 at 12:59 PM

Hilarious!

tanked59 on September 4, 2014 at 1:45 PM

Now that should be as straight forward and easy to understand even you should get it.

smitty41 on September 4, 2014 at 1:29 PM

Unreasonable expectations. I figure he/she/it is somewhere on the intelect level between knuckle-dragger and Duuuhhhhh.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:45 PM

#smartpower

everdiso on August 21, 2014 at 3:13 PM

Schadenfreude on September 4, 2014 at 1:45 PM

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:45 PM

I was thinking more along the lines of an infinite number of monkeys at a keyboard. But yours work too.

cozmo on September 4, 2014 at 1:48 PM

Anyone who believes IS is or will become a military threat to the US needs to pick up their phone immediately and schedule a mental checkup. I’m honestly more worried with Canada.

Islamic terrorism is and has been a threat but IS didn’t change anything in that regards – at least I still have to see any sort of convincing explanation that it did (or even an unconvincing one). Terrorist is fought with counter-terrorism, not with military actions against non-military threats.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 11:03 AM

I must appologize first that my post can’t be written with Crayola, so you might not understand. ISIS is not a military threat. ISIS is a terrorist threat, and they are VERY well organized. Terrorist threats are dealt with by way of counterterrorism methods. Plain and simple, for simpletons like yourself.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Uh? You’re repeating what I wrote almost ad verbatim .

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:17 PM

Ahh, I see. Facts can be a real b*tch when they don’t go your way, eh? When presented with facts, you find it difficult to stick to the discussion and go out of your way to change the subject. I guess it is easier for you to make sh*t up than argue fact. Although, I do find it rather amusing how everyone on here has shot holes through each and every one of your arguements, and you still don’t get it.

I think I have been quite rational. I fail to see where I have shouted and used irate tones. Wave from the back of the short bus, joana.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:36 PM

Confirmed for crazy. I’ll try to explain it to you one last time: you wrote exactly what I did and that people were disagreeing with: that ISIS isn’t a military threat and that terrorism threats are dealt with counter-terrorism.

Can you understand this? I’m the only here that agrees with you. Why are you calling me names?

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:48 PM

We’ve already bombed ISIS into extinction a few times

How is that so? If we bombed them into extinction, then they theoretically should not have come back. If they are capable of coming back from extinction, then I would say they are pretty resilient. In the big picture, we’ve done very little to ISIS. The Kurds in the north prevented ISIS from taking control of the Mosul dam through absolutly no help from the U.S., and President Barky O’dog-eater will continue to leave them high and dry.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:51 PM

I was thinking more along the lines of an infinite number of monkeys at a keyboard. But yours work too.

cozmo on September 4, 2014 at 1:48 PM

That would be insulting to monkeys.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:52 PM

I’m the only here that agrees with you.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:48 PM

Don’t even go there

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:54 PM

How is that so? If we bombed them into extinction, then they theoretically should not have come back. If they are capable of coming back from extinction, then I would say they are pretty resilient. In the big picture, we’ve done very little to ISIS. The Kurds in the north prevented ISIS from taking control of the Mosul dam through absolutly no help from the U.S., and President Barky O’dog-eater will continue to leave them high and dry.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:51 PMes

Good lord…it’s scary.

Fine. We bombed the Al-Qaeda in Iraq, the Mujahideen Shura Council, the Jama’at al-Tawhid wa-al-Jihad and all those radical Sunni insurgent groups that have seemingly vanished out of existence. Sooner or later, the ISIS will join them.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:54 PM

I mean, I have to ask again: can you read? Are you a mentally sick person? Because you’re repeating what I wrote almost ad verbatim – while shouting in irate tones how wrong I am.

Seriously, check a doctor, I have never seen anything quite like this, even in the internet. That’s simply very abnormal behaviour.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:17 PM

This from the primordial life form that has the gall/stupidity to claim others try to deflect her ‘well reasoned arguments’ by using insults and personal attacks.

Hey, honey. The brown skid mark on your panties is the closest you’ve ever come to making a mark in this discussion.

As I’ve so diplomatically suggested before, STFU!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ZeusGoose on September 4, 2014 at 1:57 PM

That would be insulting to monkeys.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:52 PM

And I insult those poo flingers too.

joana is incapable of acknowledging her failure. Once a terrorist organization carries out sustained operations and holds occupied ground, it becomes a defacto state. In so being, it is a military threat to all surrounding territory. With US interests in those territories, it becomes a threat to US interests and personnel.

Therefore, ISIS is a military threat to the US. With them murdering US citizens and threatened the US itself, well, that is icing on the cake.

cozmo on September 4, 2014 at 1:57 PM

Troops React To Biden’s “Gates Of Hell” Comment: “How The F*ck Are We Going To Do That When We Can’t Leave The Front Gate Of Our Base!?”…

America’s GI “boots on the ground” in Iraq are so frustrated with the White House message about their mission against the Islamic State — which Vice President Biden vowed Wednesday to chase “to the gates of Hell” — that they’re wondering how they’ll accomplish the goal “when we can’t even leave the front gate of our base.”

Biden on Wednesday delivered what was probably the toughest statement to date from the administration, declaring, after another U.S. journalist was beheaded by the Islamic State, “we will follow them to the gates of Hell until they are brought to justice.”

But his tough talk was at odds with a message delivered earlier in the day by President Obama, who said that while his administration’s goal is to “destroy” ISIS — it also is to “shrink” it to a “manageable problem.”

Amid the mixed messages, a source in contact with special operators in Iraq told Fox News that “frustration and confusion reign” among Americans on the ground there.

The source relayed the complaint of an unnamed special operator: “Chase them to the Gates of Hell? How the [f---] are we going to do that when we can’t even leave the front gate of our base!?”

Resist We Much on September 4, 2014 at 2:02 PM

Troops React To Biden’s “Gates Of Hell” Comment: “How The F*ck Are We Going To Do That When We Can’t Leave The Front Gate Of Our Base!?”…

America’s GI “boots on the ground” in Iraq are so frustrated with the White House message about their mission against the Islamic State — which Vice President Biden vowed Wednesday to chase “to the gates of Hell” — that they’re wondering how they’ll accomplish the goal “when we can’t even leave the front gate of our base.”

Biden on Wednesday delivered what was probably the toughest statement to date from the administration, declaring, after another U.S. journalist was beheaded by the Islamic State, “we will follow them to the gates of Hell until they are brought to justice.”

But his tough talk was at odds with a message delivered earlier in the day by President Obama, who said that while his administration’s goal is to “destroy” ISIS — it also is to “shrink” it to a “manageable problem.”

Amid the mixed messages, a source in contact with special operators in Iraq told Fox News that “frustration and confusion reign” among Americans on the ground there.

The source relayed the complaint of an unnamed special operator: “Chase them to the Gates of Hell? How the [f---] are we going to do that when we can’t even leave the front gate of our base!?”

Resist We Much on September 4, 2014 at 2:02 PM

Maybe Uncle Joe plans to just send his wife over there with the shotgun. She can just fire it through the front gate at whatever happens to be standing there.

I know if I were a jihadi, two shotgun blasts in the air would scare the crap out of me!

CurtZHP on September 4, 2014 at 2:08 PM

ISIS is not a military threat. ISIS is a terrorist threat, and they are VERY well organized. Terrorist threats are dealt with by way of counterterrorism methods. Plain and simple, for simpletons like yourself. RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:10 PM

Anyone who believes IS is or will become a military threat to the US needs to pick up their phone immediately and schedule a mental checkup. I’m honestly more worried with Canada.

Islamic terrorism is and has been a threat but IS didn’t change anything in that regards – at least I still have to see any sort of convincing explanation that it did (or even an unconvincing one). Terrorist is fought with counter-terrorism, not with military actions against non-military threats. joana on September 4, 2014 at 11:03 AM

Randall, I’m just a humble seeker after truth. Please explain how your remark and hers differ substantially. Thanks.

Akzed on September 4, 2014 at 2:09 PM

Fine. We bombed the Al-Qaeda in Iraq, the Mujahideen Shura Council, the Jama’at al-Tawhid wa-al-Jihad and all those radical Sunni insurgent groups that have seemingly vanished out of existence. Sooner or later, the ISIS will join them.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:54 PM

*face palm* If we bombed those groups and, as you say, they vanished out of existence, then how can ISIS join them when those three groups are what ISIS is composed of? Your logic fascinates me.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 2:12 PM

Bomb them into extinction.

smitty41 on September 4, 2014 at 1:01 PM

I think that’s not possible, as tempting as it sounds. If only one of them survives, he will build a new Jihadi cell anywhere in the world, and everything will start all over again. And a lot will survive.

In my opinion there are only two possible solutions: hunt them down man by man, which is difficult because they grow like mushrooms. Or somehow change their minds and drag them into the 21st century. That sounds even more difficult.

Gelsomina on September 4, 2014 at 2:14 PM

In my opinion there are only two possible solutions: hunt them down man by man, which is difficult because they grow like mushrooms. Or somehow change their minds and drag them into the 21st century. That sounds even more difficult.

Gelsomina on September 4, 2014 at 2:14 PM

Actually there are three solutions. The third solution is to distribute iPods loaded with Obama speaches. This will set them straight, I guarantee it.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 2:20 PM

an increasingly panicked press, the members of which appear to have come to the reluctant conclusion that there is no hand on the tiller,

The Empty Chair – Clint Eastwood

But if you asked these members of the “panicked press” they would claim that no one ever told them.

thatsafactjack on September 4, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Actually there are three solutions. The third solution is to distribute iPods loaded with Obama speaches. This will set them straight, I guarantee it.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 2:20 PM

I’m all for it. We know that Operation iPod has been launched when we read about sudden mass suicides of IS members.

Gelsomina on September 4, 2014 at 2:31 PM

LOLZ. Ignorance is bliss.

Resist We Much on September 4, 2014 at 11:19 AM

And fatal.

kozanne on September 4, 2014 at 2:39 PM

Randall, I’m just a humble seeker after truth. Please explain how your remark and hers differ substantially. Thanks.

Akzed on September 4, 2014 at 2:09 PM

Good luck with that. These people here are just unhinged and mentally imbalanced. He vociferously disagreed with me while parroting exactly what I was writing.

*face palm* If we bombed those groups and, as you say, they vanished out of existence, then how can ISIS join them when those three groups are what ISIS is composed of? Your logic fascinates me.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 2:12 PM

Errr… this is kinda embarrassing. That’s exactly my point. Once you supposedly “bomb ISIS out of extinction”, they’ll just reappear under a different name once there’s a relief on the military pressure.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 2:44 PM

This from the primordial life form that has the gall/stupidity to claim others try to deflect her ‘well reasoned arguments’ by using insults and personal attacks.

Hey, honey. The brown skid mark on your panties is the closest you’ve ever come to making a mark in this discussion.

As I’ve so diplomatically suggested before, STFU!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ZeusGoose on September 4, 2014 at 1:57 PM

Let me rephrase the substance of my position:

I must appologize first that my post can’t be written with Crayola, so you might not understand. ISIS is not a military threat. ISIS is a terrorist threat, and they are VERY well organized. Terrorist threats are dealt with by way of counterterrorism methods. Plain and simple, for simpletons like yourself.

RandallinHerndon on September 4, 2014 at 1:10 PM

There.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 2:45 PM

OMG, she’s got like serious internet cred!!11!

Seriously, you sound like a 14 years old. Get help while you can.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 12:59 PM

Cindy’s right, actually.

You need to get over yourself.

Long time lurker, seldom poster, but I know good character when I see/read it.

kozanne on September 4, 2014 at 2:49 PM

kozanne on September 4, 2014 at 2:49 PM

Thank you, I appreciate it.

Cindy Munford on September 4, 2014 at 3:17 PM

There.

joana on September 4, 2014 at 2:45 PM

And that folks, is why most people don’t keep monkeys as pets.

Once they start flinging their feces, there’s no rhyme nor reason.

I suggest that it’s time to set our little pet monkey, joana, back into the wild. She becomes smellier and more flea-bitten with every comment. She’d probably be happier living on a big liberal farm like the HuffPo of DailyKos.

If nothing else, she’s obviously infected with the deadly Ebullshit virus.

ZeusGoose on September 4, 2014 at 3:57 PM

“We can’t move without the consent of the next administration.”

wagnert in atlanta on September 4, 2014 at 4:16 PM

so why are you against bombing ISIS into extinction and if the vacuum is filled with extremist simple rinse and repeat until the moderates step up?

In other words why wait until they come here or evolve here and attack before taking action?

Now that should be as straight forward and easy to understand even you should get it.

smitty41 on September 4, 2014 at 1:29 PM

I’d like to see that as well, but face it…ain’t gonna happen. We never get all of them in any war, so why should ISIS be any different?

Also, you have to figure that ISIS has backing from some deep pockets, and probably on some level in Washington.

Another thing is, I’m not convinced all those air strikes are happening. Given the awesome power that our air forces still maintain, the ISIS cancer should be greatly diminished by now, but it doesn’t appear to be that way.

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 4, 2014 at 4:16 PM

al-Obama dreaming of being at the head of an international coalition battling ISIS and regular islamic terror is a hoot.

The chances of this walking, talking, waffling narcissist getting 3 people to sign on to his “Coalition,” is about as certain as the Sun rising in the West.

I think it is about time some of them Saudis take over the fight. They can field two armies. One for ISIS, the other to fight ISIS.

dockywocky on September 4, 2014 at 4:22 PM

According to the White House Bureau of Propaganda, we got us a Blinkin, but who and where is the Winkin and Nod?

dockywocky on September 4, 2014 at 4:25 PM

“Bombing ISIS” means nothing. There’s nothing there. It’s not even a palliative. (…)
Unless you really want to carpet bomb all the zones in Iraq and Syria where Sunni extremism has become popular throughout the last decade, but that’s why I asked what did you mean with “Bomb them”?

joana on September 4, 2014 at 1:42 PM

No, I don’t want to bomb empty desert. Or just Sunni extremists.
ISIS / ISIL / IS has declared itself a “state”. As such, it’s possible to bomb their capitol, major cities, and infrastructure.

So: We nuke (yes, nuke!) their capitol. Blow up (MOABs) the refineries and fuel storage facilities that allow all those little Toyota pick-ups and big gas-hog military vehicles to scurry around. Then we start telling the cities of the Iraqi Anschluss that we rescued them before, and we shed enough blood then. We gave them their freedom, and they gave themselves to the Enemy. They fought us well enough, they can take out the few ISIS fighters there now without our help. But we will give them incentive: If they don’t get rid of ISIS, we will deny ISIS the use of those cities by wiping them out. “See what happened to the ISIS capitol? That’s you, in a couple of weeks. Get busy.”

After the first few, any city where there is an ISIS force will start killing them. Every man’s hand will be against them, as a matter of self-preservation. To misquote General Washington, does ISIS have Mosul, or does Mosul have ISIS?

ReggieA on September 4, 2014 at 4:44 PM

Wow ! Blaming the next administration already huh ? They must be pretty confident the Repubs will win!

cableguy615 on September 4, 2014 at 5:44 PM

cableguy615 on September 4, 2014 at 5:44 PM

I don’t know, I don’t think he would hesitate to throw a Dem under his legacy bus.

Cindy Munford on September 4, 2014 at 7:39 PM

Imagine what Reagan would have done after watching two innocent civilian American citizens beheaded. And he would have had widespread support. The bad guys of the world would notice, take note, and behave a bit better.

America has changed, and not for the best. Europe is militarily and morally impotent. The bad guys have noticed, noted, and are behaving accordingly, doing what bad guys love to do.

We haven’t seen anything comparable since the 1930s. The parallels keep piling up.

farsighted on September 4, 2014 at 11:38 PM

farsighted on September 4, 2014 at 11:38 PM

And what did Reagan do after they took out the Beirut barracks and nearly 300 of our service men? Nothing.

BTW, a Lebanese Christian was involved with those bombings.

This white hat-black hat cut and dried stuff isn’t reality. But we can pretend. Guess it makes the medicine go down.

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 5, 2014 at 2:15 AM

Reading the back and forth, I think joana makes some decent points. There is no way to win the long-term game by bombing ISIS.

But then, this:

Unless you really want to carpet bomb all the zones in Iraq and Syria where Sunni extremism has become popular throughout the last decade (a GREAT job from American war hawks, btw…

She points out the exact correct solution, and then throws it away as if it was nonsense.

The USA has not executed a war properly in a loooong time. Properly executed, war is horrible. It should either be avoided, or pursued with fury and haste.

connertown on September 5, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Probably a waste of time to talk military topics with leftists. They are just provoking you. You might as well discuss fetal care…

They are against all western military force because, like Islamics, they think that History/ Allah will deliver to them the coming utopia, so the West, and its military, is just holding up the inevitable.

Since leftists don’t believe in God after all, once the holocaust is over they will leave Islamics to their fantasy paradise and leftists will inherit the real earth – which only they are smart enough to “manage” (like that word?).

The problem with both delusions is the incalculable human suffering they entail and their pathetic hubris in believing that they can master the chaos they instigated.

virgo on September 6, 2014 at 12:53 PM

Moby

Bmore on September 7, 2014 at 3:02 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3