Hence the reason we’ve been “bombing” ISIS for well over a year and haven’t stopped them from advancing. Thank goodness France and Russia aren't holding their pilots back like the idiot in chief Obama is doing.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/...s-strikes/

(11-20-2015 11:57 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  Hence the reason we’ve been “bombing” ISIS for well over a year and haven’t stopped them from advancing.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/...s-strikes/

The lessons of Vietnam have not been learned.

(11-20-2015 11:57 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  Hence the reason we’ve been “bombing” ISIS for well over a year and haven’t stopped them from advancing. Thank goodness France and Russia aren't holding their pilots back like the idiot in chief Obama is doing.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/...s-strikes/

Except for that pesky fact that we have stopped them from advancing.

Please do your homework.

Quote:ISIS is losing ground in Syria and Iraq

On the ground in Iraq and Syria, ISIS has in fact been stalled and in many places even turned back. According to Will McCants, the head of the Brookings Institution's Project on US Relations With the Islamic World, ISIS "lost something like 25 percent of their territory" since its peak last summer.

By the end of June 2015, ISIS had lost nearly 10 percent of the remaining territory it held at the beginning of the year. Red areas on this map show ISIS territorial losses, and green shows gains:

Quote:At the end of June, Kurdish fighters broke through in northern Syria, taking the strategic town of Tal Afar and advancing to within roughly 30 miles of ISIS's de facto capital, Raqqa.

These losses have continued since.

"You look back to the past two months," Gartenstein-Ross says, "and it's just two month of steady losses."

He ticks off a list of ISIS losses: Baiji district in Iraq, almost all of its presence near the Kurdish-held city Kirkuk, the outlying areas near Ramadi, and defeats in parts of Syria (like northern Aleppo). Just last week, ISIS lost the Iraqi town of Sinjar, which cuts off an important highway connecting its Iraqi and Syrian holdings.

The surprising reason why ISIS may be lashing out: because it's losing

Probably a good idea to block them from operating while high on bath salts.

(11-20-2015 12:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 11:57 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  Hence the reason we’ve been “bombing” ISIS for well over a year and haven’t stopped them from advancing. Thank goodness France and Russia aren't holding their pilots back like the idiot in chief Obama is doing.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/...s-strikes/

Except for that pesky fact that we have stopped them from advancing.

Please do your homework.

Quote:ISIS is losing ground in Syria and Iraq

On the ground in Iraq and Syria, ISIS has in fact been stalled and in many places even turned back. According to Will McCants, the head of the Brookings Institution's Project on US Relations With the Islamic World, ISIS "lost something like 25 percent of their territory" since its peak last summer.

By the end of June 2015, ISIS had lost nearly 10 percent of the remaining territory it held at the beginning of the year. Red areas on this map show ISIS territorial losses, and green shows gains:

Quote:At the end of June, Kurdish fighters broke through in northern Syria, taking the strategic town of Tal Afar and advancing to within roughly 30 miles of ISIS's de facto capital, Raqqa.

These losses have continued since.

"You look back to the past two months," Gartenstein-Ross says, "and it's just two month of steady losses."

He ticks off a list of ISIS losses: Baiji district in Iraq, almost all of its presence near the Kurdish-held city Kirkuk, the outlying areas near Ramadi, and defeats in parts of Syria (like northern Aleppo). Just last week, ISIS lost the Iraqi town of Sinjar, which cuts off an important highway connecting its Iraqi and Syrian holdings.

The surprising reason why ISIS may be lashing out: because it's losing

So again, why do they need to come here.

Where's you rather live Paul...America...or a bombed out desert hut?

(11-20-2015 12:17 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Where's you rather live Paul...America...or a bombed out desert hut?

Answer the question. If ISIS is not expanding, then why do we need to take in refugees? That is an oxymoron.

So did Obama lie about containing ISIS and we truly need to take in refugees, or did he tell the truth about containing and is lying about needing to take in refugees?

(11-20-2015 01:02 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 12:17 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Where's you rather live Paul...America...or a bombed out desert hut?

Answer the question. If ISIS is not expanding, then why do we need to take in refugees? That is an oxymoron.

So did Obama lie about containing ISIS and we truly need to take in refugees, or did he tell the truth about containing and is lying about needing to take in refugees?

Perhaps you don't know what contained means? There's still a war going on...there's still bombings taking place...Assad is still in charge of Syria.

Also, thousands have already left Syria months ago.

(11-20-2015 01:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 01:02 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 12:17 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Where's you rather live Paul...America...or a bombed out desert hut?

Answer the question. If ISIS is not expanding, then why do we need to take in refugees? That is an oxymoron.

So did Obama lie about containing ISIS and we truly need to take in refugees, or did he tell the truth about containing and is lying about needing to take in refugees?

Perhaps you don't know what contained means? There's still a war going on...there's still bombings taking place...Assad is still in charge of Syria.

Also, thousands have already left Syria months ago.

Well, send them back. Because ISIS is contained.

(11-20-2015 01:57 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 01:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 01:02 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 12:17 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Where's you rather live Paul...America...or a bombed out desert hut?

Answer the question. If ISIS is not expanding, then why do we need to take in refugees? That is an oxymoron.

So did Obama lie about containing ISIS and we truly need to take in refugees, or did he tell the truth about containing and is lying about needing to take in refugees?

Perhaps you don't know what contained means? There's still a war going on...there's still bombings taking place...Assad is still in charge of Syria.

Also, thousands have already left Syria months ago.

Well, send them back. Because ISIS is contained.

If others are there fighting, shouldn't they stay and help. It is their damned bombed out desert huts.

Never fight a war that you don't intend to win.

And in this case, never fight a war when you don't know whom you want to win.

(11-20-2015 01:59 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 01:57 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 01:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 01:02 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 12:17 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Where's you rather live Paul...America...or a bombed out desert hut?

Answer the question. If ISIS is not expanding, then why do we need to take in refugees? That is an oxymoron.

So did Obama lie about containing ISIS and we truly need to take in refugees, or did he tell the truth about containing and is lying about needing to take in refugees?

Perhaps you don't know what contained means? There's still a war going on...there's still bombings taking place...Assad is still in charge of Syria.

Also, thousands have already left Syria months ago.

Well, send them back. Because ISIS is contained.

Truth. It will set you free. Well, not everyody. For some, it will cause tremendous butthurt.

Russians sent BlackJack Bombers from Kola, around North Cape, through the English Channel, south around Spain, and east through the Med to launch Cruise Missiles at ISIS Targets in Syria.

I"ll post a graphic. Pretty impressive.

(11-20-2015 01:59 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 01:57 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 01:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 01:02 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-20-2015 12:17 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Where's you rather live Paul...America...or a bombed out desert hut?

Answer the question. If ISIS is not expanding, then why do we need to take in refugees? That is an oxymoron.

So did Obama lie about containing ISIS and we truly need to take in refugees, or did he tell the truth about containing and is lying about needing to take in refugees?

Perhaps you don't know what contained means? There's still a war going on...there's still bombings taking place...Assad is still in charge of Syria.

Also, thousands have already left Syria months ago.

Well, send them back. Because ISIS is contained.

The refugees aren't leaving because of ISIS, they're leaving because Assad is using chemical warfare on the rebels. There's 5 factors in Syria right now; Kurds, ISIS, The Rebels, Al-Qaeda, and Assads regime. Kurds are having a conflict with Turkey, Al Qaeda is working with The Rebels to overthrow Assad while Al Qaeda is also fighting ISIS and the Rebels are fighting Assads troops and tactics. The refugees are fleeing and ISIS see's this as an opportunity to attack the west.

Silly

(11-21-2015 06:15 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Silly

Doesn't matter how much the outside world tries to modernize them, the Middle East will forever be a place of factions and clans.

(11-21-2015 06:22 PM)DexterDevil Wrote:  

(11-21-2015 06:15 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Silly

Doesn't matter how much the outside world tries to modernize them, the Middle East will forever be a place of factions and clans.

I said silly to the premise of the thread; that it's silly the pilots are being blocked by the administration.

(11-21-2015 06:24 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-21-2015 06:22 PM)DexterDevil Wrote:  

(11-21-2015 06:15 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Silly

Doesn't matter how much the outside world tries to modernize them, the Middle East will forever be a place of factions and clans.

I said silly to the premise of the thread; that it's silly the pilots are being blocked by the administration.

Oh, agreed.