No plan - yet. Despite knowing about ISIS for over a year now.
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 11, 2024 00:01
VIEWED: 18196
PAGE 7 of 13
Quote:
President mom jeans has a plan. Once he gets Luxembourg on board for the catering he'll be good to go.
Fixed it for ya.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by ElvisChrist:
Now see, THAT is actually a plan. Might seem like a Crazy Eddie kind of plan, but that might be exactly what's needed.
I long ago proposed bombing Cuba with Care Packages full of Twinkies, Coca-Cola, McNuggets, and more junk food, with notes explaining that this is what we call "JUNK" food - the kind of crap we throw down our gullets when we don't have time to eat anything good.
And then just sit back and watch the walls crumble as they realize what they're missing.
LOL. You'd probably get the Cubans sending back their own Care parcels to the US, full of decent food.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Barry squirms and lies as he double downs on his ISIL as JV to al Qaeda.
Obama Fumbles ‘JV Team’ Question
President Obama enjoys his sports analogies, so let’s just say that he fumbled when he was asked whether he made a “misjudgment” eight months ago in dismissing the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria as the equivalent of “a jayvee team.”
Obama said he “wasn’t specifically referring” to ISIS when he made the junior varsity reference during an interview with The New Yorker in January. But the magazine article and a transcript of the interview — which Washington Post Fact Checker Glenn Kessler obtained and wrote about earlier this month — shows that Obama was referring to ISIS when he said “ if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant.”
The subject of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) — or the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), as the president refers to it — came up during a Sept. 7 interview on Chuck Todd’s debut as host of NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
The context of the article and the reference to the al Qaeda flag “now flying in Falluja” make it clear that ISIS was among the groups that Remnick asked about and was one of the groups that Obama dismissed as “a jayvee team.” In fact, Obama himself makes an indirect reference to ISIS when he talks about Fallujah.
http://www.factcheck.org/2014/09/obama-fumbles-jv-team-question/
And even the Washington Post gave the President's excuse...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/09/03/spinnin
g-obamas-reference-to-isis-as-a-jv-team/
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
President mom jeans has a plan. Once he gets Luxembourg on board for the catering he'll be good to go.
Fixed it for ya.
If it ain't broke it don't need no fixin'.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So Congress has been back from their FIVE WEEK VACATION for more than a week, and still zero action on The Hill to do anything about ISIS. Why is Congress so afraid of this one?
Obama can launch strikes, but the day that starts, he's on a ticking clock under the War Powers Act, and Congress, for all the bluster and phony concern raised by the GOP, is planning zero votes to authorize any military action or continue any strikes.
Meanwhile, the #2 and #3 guys in ISIS are former generals that the Bush cartel threw out of power in their de-Baath-ification strategy after the 2003 invasion and occupation. Not like disbanding the Iraqi army was ever going to have any blowback, of course. I know, I know - nobody could have seen this coming. Where have I heard that before?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by ElvisChrist:
So Congress has been back from their FIVE WEEK VACATION for more than a week, and still zero action on The Hill to do anything about ISIS. Why is Congress so afraid of this one?
Obama does not need Congressional approval to commence military operations.
You know this.
Quote:
Obama can launch strikes, but the day that starts, he's on a ticking clock under the War Powers Act, and Congress, for all the bluster and phony concern raised by the GOP, is planning zero votes to authorize any military action or continue any strikes.
zero votes? You know this ... how ? From what I hear, there are many on both sides of the aisle who want to do something.
Quote:
Meanwhile, the #2 and #3 guys in ISIS are former generals that the Bush cartel threw out of power in their de-Baath-ification strategy after the 2003 invasion and occupation. Not like disbanding the Iraqi army was ever going to have any blowback, of course. I know, I know - nobody could have seen this coming. Where have I heard that before?
Don't blame Bush for events 11 years ago and give a pass at what al-Maliki did 2 years ago.
Obama let al-Baghdadi out of Gitmo, who promptly told the guards " See you in New York " as he left.
You were saying ?
Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen
I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.
" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, the big speech is tonight. Think he'll offer up the same genius military insight that Kerry did, for Syria, and brag about how unbelievably small our effort will be, as we stand shoulder to shoulder w/ the Iraqis, while not actually having any shoulders , or boots on the ground, to be NEXT to them ?
This is real life, Barry. You wanted this job. Now stop telling us you'll organize a select group of blue ribbon panelists and study the problem, and DO something about it.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Cursed double.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by ElvisChrist:
So Congress has been back from their FIVE WEEK VACATION for more than a week, and still zero action on The Hill to do anything about ISIS. Why is Congress so afraid of this one?
Obama does not need Congressional approval to commence military operations.
You know this.
Congress has the explicit and exclusive power and authority, according to the Constitution, to declare war, and they also control the purse strings (the federal budget) that pays for such things. You should know this, but apparently you never finished high school.
Quote:Quote:
Obama can launch strikes, but the day that starts, he's on a ticking clock under the War Powers Act, and Congress, for all the bluster and phony concern raised by the GOP, is planning zero votes to authorize any military action or continue any strikes.
zero votes? You know this ... how ? From what I hear, there are many on both sides of the aisle who want to do something.
They "want to do something," but where are the scheduled votes? Show them to me. Hey, I *want to* go to the Moon, but I don't have a schedule drawn up for doing so, nor have I budgeted the money to make it happen. There's an old saying: Want in one hand, and shit in the other, and see which one fills up first. What Congress wants to do means nothing at all; what they vote for is all that matters.
Quote:Quote:
Meanwhile, the #2 and #3 guys in ISIS are former generals that the Bush cartel threw out of power in their de-Baath-ification strategy after the 2003 invasion and occupation. Not like disbanding the Iraqi army was ever going to have any blowback, of course. I know, I know - nobody could have seen this coming. Where have I heard that before?
Obama let al-Baghdadi out of Gitmo, who promptly told the guards " See you in New York " as he left.
You were saying ?
Quote:
Pirro said that Obama released the current head of ISIS from government custody in 2009. The Defense Department said that the man now known as Baghdadi was released in 2004. The evidence that Baghdadi was still in custody in 2009 appears to be the recollection of an Army colonel who said Baghdadi’s "face is very familiar."
Even if the colonel is right, Baghdadi was not set free; he was handed over to the Iraqis who released him some time later. But more important, the legal contract between the United States and Iraq that guaranteed that the United States would give up custody of virtually every detainee was signed during the Bush administration. It would have required an extraordinary effort to have held on to Baghdadi and there is no evidence that he was on anyone’s radar screen, assuming that he was in custody at all in 2009.
The U.S.-Iraq agreement drove the release of thousands of detainees in 2009, but Obama had nothing to do with that.
We rate the claim False.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jun/19/jeanine-pi
rro/foxs-pirro-obama-set-isis-leader-free-2009/
This one didn't even rate the usual "mostly false" - it just got tossed right into the "FALSE" pile.
Once again you've been fed utter bullshit by your messiahs over at Fox, and you're still insisting that it tastes like chocolate cake.
I find it hilarious that you've fallen for this line of crap that was soundly debunked as complete bullshit months ago.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME