American Soldier Dies in Iraq Saving Kurds from ISIS

POSTED BY: SHINYGOODGUY
UPDATED: Thursday, June 25, 2026 02:29
VIEWED: 3925
PAGE 2 of 4

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE

SHINYGOODGUY

Monday, October 26, 2015 2:10 PM

No I wasn't referring to any one in specific. If Obama was ever caught fraternizing with the Saudis, well, forget it, they would run him outta town on a rail - you know, the old tar & feathers!

SGG

SHINYGOODGUY

Monday, October 26, 2015 2:17 PM

This is a very schizophrenic post Rap. How can you criticize and praise Obama in the same post!?

SGG

SIGNYM

Tuesday, October 27, 2015 1:55 AM

Quote:
No I wasn't referring to any one in specific. If Obama was ever caught fraternizing with the Saudis, well, forget it, they would run him outta town on a rail - you know, the old tar & feathers!-SGG

Well, seeing as how the rightwing is convinced that he's a Kenyan Muslim Marxist (not sure how all of those go together logically) he could probably get away with a lot less than the overtly white Anglo-Saxon Protestant Presidents before him.

But I hope I made the point that ISIS and Wahhabism are baked into the Saudi cake, as it were. The Royal family only stays in power by the blessing of powerful Saudi clerics, and those clerics (and a significant portion of the Royal family) have one foot in ISIS-land. They see ISIS as a purifying Islamic force, even though it may sweep the Royal family (and its privileges) away.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

AURAPTOR

Tuesday, October 27, 2015 6:01 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:

This is one of several such missions and your latching onto this so you can attack our commander and chief says lots about your false patriotism.

It's the only mission ( so far ) that a US soldier has been KIA while fighting ISIS, after Obama said we'd not make use of US combat forces on the ground.

Sorry, but he was a US combat member, and he was , on the ground.

You're getting pissy and hurling insults because I posted Obama's own words ?

That's rich.

AURAPTOR

Tuesday, October 27, 2015 6:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
This is a very schizophrenic post Rap. How can you criticize and praise Obama in the same post!?

SGG

Praised the soldier for his duty, and blamed Obama for HIS ass hattery of using soldiers as a perpetual campaign prop.

BIG difference in the two. Sorry you're confused over this matter.

SHINYGOODGUY

Thursday, October 29, 2015 3:06 PM

Nope, not confused. Just wondering about your thinking on the matter. So, if a soldier dies - POTUS is to blame. And if the mission fails, POTUS is to blame. But if it's a success - nothing, he's still an asshat. Got it, TFC (total fucking chaos).

BTW, Obama is on his last term. He can't run again, you do know that right!?

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
This is a very schizophrenic post Rap. How can you criticize and praise Obama in the same post!?

SGG

Praised the soldier for his duty, and blamed Obama for HIS ass hattery of using soldiers as a perpetual campaign prop.

BIG difference in the two. Sorry you're confused over this matter.

SHINYGOODGUY

Thursday, October 29, 2015 3:19 PM

Well, seeing as how the rightwing is convinced that he's a Kenyan Muslim Marxist (not sure how all of those go together logically) he could probably get away with a lot less than the overtly white Anglo-Saxon Protestant Presidents before him.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, it's the old double standard. White guys can do what they want (steal a few million, right this way sir - Club Riviera). A Harvard Law Professor wins the Grand Prize and "oh, he couldn't have won that without cheating! How dare he out-think,
out-do and thoroughly spank our White Hope at our own game."

Bush, Bush II, Reagan and Clinton all kissed King Abdullah's ring, yet Obama is the Muslim American turncoat. That other stuff I know nothing about, so I can't comment.

SGG

THGRRI

Thursday, October 29, 2015 8:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:

This is one of several such missions and your latching onto this so you can attack our commander and chief says lots about your false patriotism.

It's the only mission ( so far ) that a US soldier has been KIA while fighting ISIS, after Obama said we'd not make use of US combat forces on the ground.

Sorry, but he was a US combat member, and he was , on the ground.

You're getting pissy and hurling insults because I posted Obama's own words ?

That's rich.

I take it then you're not happy we went into Syria and captured the main ISIS money man a month or so ago?

Just looking to see where you stand on how we should take on ISIS. It appears you don't want our special forces involved in Syria or Iraq at all. Is this true?

It appears that since our commander and chief says he does not want to have our troops on the ground fighting, and that he wishes to let Muslims lead the way and clean up their own mess, that you're against even one American solider getting involved. Is this true?

SHINYGOODGUY

Friday, October 30, 2015 3:14 PM

Funny thing THGRRI, is that people criticize Obama for not having a plan to combat ISIS and yet here we have a strategic and surgical strike, and yet people still complain.

"He didn't keep his word."

It amazes me just how simple-minded people seem to be. It wouldn't do much good to announce to the world that we're leaving troops behind to fight ISIS. Do you think that would be telegraphing our intent? Wouldn't that take away the element of surprise? Surgical strikes assisting the Kurds was a brilliant idea (whoever came up with it), but the president gave it the green light. And I say BRAVO!

SGG

SIGNYM

Friday, October 30, 2015 3:21 PM

Quote:
Just looking to see where you stand on how we should take on ISIS. It appears you don't want our special forces involved in Syria or Iraq at all. Is this true?

First of all, since Syria doesn't want the USA "involved" in Syria, any "involvement" that the USA gets into will be illegal. By YOUR standards, it would be an "invasion".

And just as an aside, whyizzit that the USA thinks it can decide which leaders should "go" and which leaders can "stay". I mean, who made us King of the World?

There's something interesting going on in Syria, that you haven't detected, and it leads to some interesting thoughts about what "our" soldiers might be doing there.

The Kurds are a culturally united (but politically separated) people who live in Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey. They make up some of the most effect anti-ISIS fighting forces, whether located in Syria or Iraq.

in Syria (YPG is the armed group) are extremely effective anti-ISIS fighters. However, since Turkey has been battling a Kurdish independence movement within its own borders (PKK) it doesn't have a problem with bombing Kurds in Syria. https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-the-PKK-PYD-YPG-K
RG-KDP-and-the-Peshmerga Illegal, because one nation (Turkey) is bombing another (Syria), and also another indication how Turkey supports ISIS in Syria.

What the USA says it wants to do is put armed groups in Syria (again, illegal, the Syrian government hasn't asked for our "help") but the question is ... where would these troops operate??? Since we refuse to cooperate with the Syrian government, they can't go to Damascus-controlled territory. And since finding "moderate rebels" is well-nigh impossible, and it would be folly just to dump off our troops in completely hostile ISIS-held territory, the only place American troops could operate from would be with the Syrian Kurds .... where they might be bombed by Turkey.

Do you suppose that these American troops - assuming that they actually wind up being deployed in Syria - would be functioning more like hostages?? That is, embedded with the Syrian Kurds to discourage Turkey (our NATO ally) from bombing those areas?

----------

Also, Iraq has not asked for our "help" in the form that we offer: Apache helicopters and associated forces. In fact, the Iraqi Parliament asked the Russians for help, and they may ultimately and formally ask us to leave. What then?

-----------

I recall saying somewhere on this website, a few months ago, that it seemed as if alliances were fundamentally re-arranging in the Mideast. What I sensed at the time was a Saudi-USA split over ISIS, and oil prices. Unfortunately, in this triangular relationship (Saudi Arabia-ISIS/ USA/ Russia-Iran) if we're not "for" ISIS then we wind up on Russia's "side". Where we don't want to be. So our policy winds up being unsettled.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE