It is being speculated that President Obama is about to ask congress for an authorization of force vote to combat ISIS. I think liberals and conservatives generally agree we don't want to put boots on the ground to regain territory once under US control. Knowing that Obama policies are about to cut troop levels and we are withdrawing troops from the region why does a new authorization of force make sense?
I encourage everyone to make their thoughts on this known to their representatives in Washington. ISIS is more of a civil war the governments of that region and their military need to resolve. I would support providing military equipment and drone strikes to help but nothing more.
Carpet bomb them for the next 50 years.
What's Obama's definition of force?
While I am nowhere near ready to commit conventional ground forces to this war at this time I believe we should be utilizing special operations forces now both in tandem with indigenous forces and high value operations on their own. We should keep the option open for additional forces as needed. We do not need to handcuff our military leaders.
One of the reasons the UAE has withdrawn their forces from the air strikes is the lack of combat search and rescue for downed pilots. We have the best units for this in the world. We should be stepping up to the plate here.
Never fight a war that you don't intend to win. In to win, or don't go in.
We haven't been in to win since WWII. Maybe Korea, at least slightly, at least in not to lose.
I might be okay with special forces in rescue efforts for downed pilots, but to go put boots on the ground now would be fighting a war we had won once. There is no value in American troops fighting in Iraq again, and Syria doesn't want us there. If we are serious we can inflict enough damage with drone strikes to provide the needed air cover for Iraqi ground troops to win. This is Iraq's war and they need to be willing to fight to keep their nation.
I am against another war, but I do applaud Soetoro for bringing it to congress.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
This is their issue, we can never fix the Middle East, we need to stop spending money to do so. If Israel and the Kurds want to buy weapons from us, cool, we can export. If they want to pay for our jet fuel for us to provide air support, cool. But I'm sick of killing people for people who really aren't that friendly to us.
(02-06-2015 06:54 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote: [ -> ]It is being speculated that President Obama is about to ask congress for an authorization of force vote to combat ISIS. I think liberals and conservatives generally agree we don't want to put boots on the ground to regain territory once under US control. Knowing that Obama policies are about to cut troop levels and we are withdrawing troops from the region why does a new authorization of force make sense?
I encourage everyone to make their thoughts on this known to their representatives in Washington. ISIS is more of a civil war the governments of that region and their military need to resolve. I would support providing military equipment and drone strikes to help but nothing more.
I agree 100 percent.
Leave it alone. That includes not arming people.
(02-06-2015 08:24 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote: [ -> ]Carpet bomb them for the next 50 years.
that's my thought....
it's why I would never think about entering politics at any level (and I've been asked....it's was as easy to respond as it is to get out of jury duty)
lmfao.....
it's an easy 'don't go, shut-up' policy that should be enacted....
does anyone remember the 'how to handle a bully concept'....
if we focus on global policy and securing borders that matter....
it's gravy from there....
these stupid fkrs are nothing more than east la gangs.....'cept they don't care who they kill....
securing the borders eliminates that problem in entirety......
spend the ****** money where it's needed and not based on some stupid rant from a media type (like brian williams)
gdm stupid people.....just wake the fk up!
Yes, bomb the area indiscriminately. That will surely lesson any support of the other 1.3 Billion muslims in the world who aren't at war with the US.
(02-08-2015 02:05 AM)UCF08 Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, bomb the area indiscriminately. That will surely lesson any support of the other 1.3 Billion muslims in the world who aren't at war with the US.
First, who is talking about bombing the area indiscriminately? Bomb hell out of the places where they are, don't bomb the places where they aren't. That's not bombing indiscriminately.
Second, the idea that aggressive bombing would somehow cause the rest of the Muslim world to hate us is based on the mistaken concept that they think the same way that westerners do. The eastern thought process is different. They're not going to like us. If we show sufficient resolve to accomplish military victory, they will fear and respect us. As long as we keep up the current half-assed effort, they will hate us and think us to be very foolish. They respect strength, they hate weakness, and what we are showing them is in their eyes extreme weakness. Lose your ethnocentrism.
You mean besides the second post in the thread that stated 'carpet bomb them for 50 years', and the post directly above mine supporting that notion? As for your psychological analysis of all muslim people, we'll agree to disagree, but not a single thing you've posting is based in fact.
(02-08-2015 10:50 AM)UCF08 Wrote: [ -> ]You mean besides the second post in the thread that stated 'carpet bomb them for 50 years', and the post directly above mine supporting that notion? As for your psychological analysis of all muslim people, we'll agree to disagree, but not a single thing you've posting is based in fact.
Carpet bombing is not necessarily indiscriminate. That would depend upon how the targeting was done.
And my comments are not psychological, they are cultural, and there's quite a bit of empirical and analytical support. If you were an intelligent person with whom reasonable conversation were possible, we could discuss that. But you're not, and therefore not worth my time and effort.
Quote: Carpet bombing is not necessarily indiscriminate. That would depend upon how the targeting was done.
I expected more from you than this Owl.
(02-08-2015 07:34 PM)UCF08 Wrote: [ -> ]Quote: Carpet bombing is not necessarily indiscriminate. That would depend upon how the targeting was done.
I expected more from you than this Owl.
I wouldn't say that I've ever expected more from you. I don't expect anything of value from you.
That's just hurtful, but the real shocker was your conflation that the entirety of the muslim world can at all be addressed as a monolithic culture. I mean come on, you know better than that.
Troops on the ground! Make it happen!