Kissinger wrote an op ed piece saying we should declare actual war on ISIS, and go all out to win it. Not a police action, but declaration of war. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...out_attack_on_isis_says_kissinger_123892.html This NYTimes article says the president will make a case for increased bombing, and bombing in Syria. To boot, he would eat crow and admit they should have armed the Syrian rebels who would have nipped ISIS in the bud. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/09/u...e-back-to-haunt-him.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=1 This WaPost article says Obama won't seek any authority to bomb Syria. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...gainst-islamic-state-congressional-aides-say/ I'm not sure he has the authority to engage in a protracted air war. Democrats held W to the standard he needed a congressional vote. He's already put boots on the ground in Iraq - on the same order of magnitude as W put troops in Afghanistan. Should Obama seek authority? You tell me. What about building some sort of coalition? Democrats mocked W's efforts along those lines. Would it be hypocritical to not hold O to that standard? Here's the thing. I bet O can get the votes required in the senate for the authority he needs and wants. Surely there are hawkish republicans who'd vote to take out ISIS - McCain and others of similar views.
Kind of like the...Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Meet the new enemy, same as the old enemy.
I don't think we have to do battle with these guys. Where is their money to pay all these recruits coming from? We need to find the answer to that and shut it down. I don't suppose driving jeeps and shooting a few poor hapless souls continues to be fun if payday never comes.
I did a little research into how violent the situation is over there. By far, the civil war in Syria caused the most casualties. On the order of 200,000 over 3-4 years. Of those about 25% Syrian military. The rest, civilians and ISIS and other rebels. Iraq body count says about 2,000 killed in Iraq per month. Eyeballing the reports, half of those are from IEDs and air strikes. I assume the 2K includes both good guys and bad guys. In 2006-2007, the monthly body count was significantly higher.
The article Denny posted basically spelled it out. Essentially they are an organized crime syndicate and bring in millions a day.
Ah yes, I had heard this before. Well there you go, shutting down their oil sales should not take troops. A bank operating as a tax collector. Imagine that!! Perhaps put a few banks out of business. This should not be that difficult, but then I still don't think a hand from the US should do this stuff. Perhaps we should help those that have an interest understand what needs to be done.. We shall see tomorrow what Mr. Obama has decided. I dread to learn what it shall be.
That had to be a painful speech for President Obama to have to give. He had to channel Presidents Reagan and George W. Bush. I am calling this speech his "Team America...Fuck Yeah!" speech. Also, they had the God reverb laid on a bit thick.
The strategy to confront IS! I believe the strategy is to pester the people of IS with air strikes for two years. Then turn the issue over to the new Commander in Chief. But in the mean time you all know that this is not Islam! But,,, but all the fighters for IS come from Islam, they are the sons of Islam from all over the world. From the Ivory Coast to Somalia, from Russia to Canada, from Algeria to Pakistan, even the US, from all over the world! We will now bomb this sons of Islam in the deserts of Syria and Western Iraq for the foreseeable future. Never seeking the recruiters. This is not so clever but I guess it will do until we have a leader.
Re: The strategy to confront IS! Maybe a mod could move this to the Dealing with IS thread. I forgot that one was already in place.
Actually, it kind a seems like he just lifted the strategy from Bill O'Riley at Fox. "Bomb the hell out of them. Kill as many as you can!"
