Reply With Quote
of course. AlJazeera caters to Sunni population much of it with extreme views. Obviously their English programming is different from their much more radical Arab programming, but it's essentially the same voice.
what other example is in your quote? Was it the restating the name of the elites and their state religion or you telling us what you believe?
You can mindlessly thrash out insults all you like but we both know you look like a fool when you write your stupid takes. I at least point out the stupidity first before telling you you're stupid.
of course. AlJazeera caters to Sunni population much of it with extreme views. Obviously their English programming is different from their much more radical Arab programming, but it's essentially the same voice.
that's weird...I get a "page not available" error
no, they targeted "lifestyle" activities
1) soccer
2) pop music
3) dining out (with Satanic wine)
That doesn't even show up as a link for me.
If ISIS is contained, why this:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/11/17...syria-oil.html
I thought they were going to retire the Worthog. Guess not:
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/24...to-keep-flying
Charlie Sheen should have retired his Warthog.
Fact Checkers Confirm That What President Obama Said About ISIL Being Contained Is True
Looking back at Obama’s interview where he made this comment, it is quite clear that it’s within a narrowly defined scope: ISIS’s territorial expansion in Iraq and Syria. He did not rule out the potential for a terrorist attack, and he also made it clear that the United States’ anti-ISIS efforts are a work in progress.Experts agree that the President was correct, though his choice of words wasn’t great, given some people’s inability to understand stateless terrorism.
References or suggestions that Obama claimed ISIS no longer presents an active threat are incorrect.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. One hundred and twenty-nine people were killed in Paris on Friday night. ISIL claimed responsibility for the massacre, sending the message that they could now target civilians all over the world. The equation has clearly changed. Isn’t it time for your strategy to change?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, keep in mind what we have been doing. We have a military strategy that is putting enormous pressure on ISIL through airstrikes; that has put assistance and training on the ground with Iraqi forces; we’re now working with Syrian forces as well to squeeze ISIL, cut off their supply lines. We’ve been coordinating internationally to reduce their financing capabilities, the oil that they’re trying to ship outside. We are taking strikes against high-value targets — including, most recently, against the individual who was on the video executing civilians who had already been captured, as well as the head of ISIL in Libya. So it’s not just in Iraq and Syria.
And so, on the military front, we are continuing to accelerate what we do. As we find additional partners on the ground that are effective, we work with them more closely. I’ve already authorized additional Special Forces on the ground who are going to be able to improve that coordination.
On the counterterrorism front, keep in mind that since I came into office, we have been worried about these kinds of attacks. The vigilance that the United States government maintains and the cooperation that we’re consistently expanding with our European and other partners in going after every single terrorist network is robust and constant. And every few weeks, I meet with my entire national security team and we go over every single threat stream that is presented, and where we have relevant information, we share it immediately with our counterparts around the world, including our European partners.
On aviation security, we have, over the last several years, been working so that at various airports sites — not just in the United States, but overseas — we are strengthening our mechanisms to screen and discover passengers who should not be boarding flights, and improving the matters in which we are screening luggage that is going onboard.
And on the diplomatic front, we’ve been consistently working to try to get all the parties together to recognize that there is a moderate opposition inside of Syria that can form the basis for a transition government, and to reach out not only to our friends but also to the Russians and the Iranians who are on the other side of this equation to explain to them that ultimately an organization like ISIL is the greatest danger to them, as well as to us.
So there will be an intensification of the strategy that we put forward, but the strategy that we are putting forward is the strategy that ultimately is going to work. But as I said from the start, it’s going to take time.
And what’s been interesting is, in the aftermath of Paris, as I listen to those who suggest something else needs to be done, typically the things they suggest need to be done are things we are already doing. The one exception is that there have been a few who suggested that we should put large numbers of U.S. troops on the ground.
And keep in mind that we have the finest military in the world and we have the finest military minds in the world, and I’ve been meeting with them intensively for years now, discussing these various options, and it is not just my view but the view of my closest military and civilian advisors that that would be a mistake — not because our military could not march into Mosul or Raqqa or Ramadi and temporarily clear out ISIL, but because we would see a repe ion of what we’ve seen before, which is, if you do not have local populations that are committed to inclusive governance and who are pushing back against ideological extremes, that they resurface — unless we’re prepared to have a permanent occupation of these countries.
And let’s assume that we were to send 50,000 troops into Syria. What happens when there’s a terrorist attack generated from Yemen? Do we then send more troops into there? Or Libya, perhaps? Or if there’s a terrorist network that’s operating anywhere else — in North Africa, or in Southeast Asia?
So a strategy has to be one that can be sustained. And the strategy that we’re pursuing, which focuses on going after targets, limiting wherever possible the capabilities of ISIL on the ground — systematically going after their leadership, their infrastructure, strengthening Shia — or strengthening Syrian and Iraqi forces and Kurdish forces that are prepared to fight them, cutting off their borders and squeezing the space in which they can operate until ultimately we’re able to defeat them — that’s the strategy we’re going to have to pursue.
And we will continue to generate more partners for that strategy. And there are going to be some things that we try that don’t work; there will be some strategies we try that do work. And when we find strategies that work, we will double down on those.
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/11/16/president-obama-remarkable-grasp-fight-isis-hes-correct.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed &utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Polit icus+USA+%29
One of the original targets was the soccer game where the President was. Give it a rest.
no, they targeted "lifestyle" activities
1) soccer
2) pop music
3) dining out (with Satanic wine)
WTF is your interest in putting the events in time sequence? WTF is the importance to you or anybody?
I have to say something tbh.
Since the Russian airstrikes, ISIS has been running scared. Rusians have been bombing those sons of es to oblivion. And this is why Saudi/US/France and other ISIS backers have been crying and moaning.
then US re-thought their strategy and started bombing ISIS in Iraq (finally, for real this time)
So Obama's words are possibly true. Russia/Assad were giving ISIS major casualties and Iraq started gaining ground on them in Iraq. That is why this attack is not reallly a show of force from ISIS but more a desperate backlash due to the losses they are sustaining.
ISIS will be obliterated in a matter of weeks (as I called before) if US/Russia really want to.
No.
Just no.
Russia has concentrated its bombing on rebels trying to take out Assad. Most are not ISIS. And Russia still will not put the plane bombing on ISIS, neither will Egypt. Tell me how many Russian planes have bombed ISIS strongholds in Iraq? ISIS are not just in Syria. Your dream world with Russian heroes is pure folly. And your hero Assad has and would be as brutal as ISIS if he had the means. But he will not go as far as to publicize them. So who is the most dangerous? Those that hide atrocities, or readily tell the world? We know ISIS is more dangerous to the West now, but to life in general the Assads hold records. Read about the city of Hama.
This all might slowly change as the West and Russia will now hold meetings to possibly coordinate.
And ISIS will not be obliterated within weeks unless civilian deaths are huge. You still don't get the fact ISIS comes and goes in all these cities and towns in Iraq and Syria. The collateral damage will be huge if your prediction is correct. They will hide amongst civilians and go underground while the bombing goes on. They will wait it out.
This is not as easy as you dream. Might as well prescribe to the reactionary "blow everyone up in the ME"
Last edited by pgardn; 11-16-2015 at 11:51 PM.
Repugs, esp this incredible dumb , refuse to accept any responsibility for Repug destruction of Middle East stability
Jeb Bush Accuses Obama Of ‘Getting Us Into A Quagmire’ In Middle East
“It means a strategy — we don’t have a strategy right now. This president is incrementally getting us into a quagmire, without having a strategy to defeat ISIS. This is a threat to Western civilization, a threat to our own country. We need to be merciless in this effort.”
http://www.nationalmemo.com/jeb-bush-accuses-obama-of-getting-us-into-a-quagmire-in-middle-east/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign =Morning%20Memo%20-%202015-11-17&utm_term=MM_frequency_six
Repugs CREATED ISIS!
A Repug asshole wants a STRATEGY in the Middle East?
Like the wonderful Repug strategy of 2003?
I heard senile, emotionally unstable McLiar on NPR this moring"
"Obama wants to fight ISIS in USA rather than in the Middle East"
Typical BULL from what the Repugs offer as senior statesman offering sage advice.
Meanwhile, somewhere, Mossad is laughing
Russia just launched scores of missiles at raqua the ISIS capital also helpind Assad fight ISIS and al quaeda in Aleppo.
Don't believe the CIA mouthpieces called US media. Russians are on the forefront fighting ISIS. Finally the world has joined them
Broaden arrest powers?
Seems like a lot of these s could have been brought down earlier.
The neighboor hood that has been a "hot bed of previous terrorist activity" known to have sent many to Syria to join the UnIsamic state.
8th guy on the loose had been stopped before and was on suspected terrorist radar.
France has ACLU type gotry groups that's been whining for *rights* and helping these bomb s in the process.
Russia just now finally confirmed that their downed airliner was destroyed by a bomb.
France24 Breaking News: France to join Russia in an alliance to fight ISIS
Putin orders his navy to work with france
Damn. Putin tells his generals on national TV to treat French as allies
ALPHA NIGA
Why don't you post links to these stories?
lol edit "what a leader" to "Alpha niga" for ST e cred. pathetic tbh
Putin is pragmatic. I'll give him that. He's not half the leader Donald Trump will be, but he is pragmatic none the less.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
