What Are Cons Gonna Do If Obama Defeats Isis?

Considering everything Obama has accomplished in spite of the obstructionist cons, there is still ten months for him to wipe out ISIS. And as much as the allies don’t want to see another war monger in the White House, they are probably going to help Obama get the job done.

If Obama succeeds, what do the fear mongers have to run on?

But the bigger question is, how are the cons going to stop him from beating ISIS without exposing themselves as the anti-Americans that they are?

The whole world knows that if a con wins next year, WWIII is assured.

 

If Obama stopped giving ISIS free weapons, he might have a fighting chance.

 

If Obama defeated the IS the republicans would deny the fact that it happened.

 

Pinocchio Obama and his Team Incompetence administration are not even trying to beat ISIS. He should stick to what he does well like lying, golfing, erasing red lines/emails and spending tax payer money.

 

If Obama succeeds they will still be there supporting conservative politics like they always do, which is unfortunate to so many lives. To the bigger question I say they won't stop him from beating ISIS but I think we can expect them to put any and all kinds of spin and rhetoric on it if he does.

 

So how exactly is he defeating them? It seems more like the US is barely engaging them. Or is the plan to step aside and let Putin do the wet work, then claim to be diplomatically superior? Maybe we can roll out the plan in a video, like Michael Jackson did with Thriller, like a 15 minute video with dancing zombies. And Michael was still black (I LOVE America for just being able to say that happened).

After last nights' "debate" I am dismayed to hear that all kinds of WC (warmonger-correct) terms being laid out for "Carpet Bombing" in Syria. Fucking assholes.

 

Yup. And then accuse him of taking credit for something he didn't do.

 

To beat ISIS:

Stop supplying them with weapons

Bomb the oil trucks heading to Turkey instead of pamphlet dropping to inform the drivers to leave before the bombs come.

Get out of Iraq; you too Turkey. As Iraq requested yet they still 'invaded'.

Stop with the whole Assad must go rhetoric; he is not going anywhere.

Tell Israel to go back off its instigation propaganda.

Indict NATO on War crimes (for basically sitting around letting this all unfold contrary to NATOs' obligatory world position) Just shows you how unimportant they really are.

Indict Turkey on War crimes (Russian Plane downing and killing of Russian Pilot) and supporting ISIS (purchasing oil from ISIS)

America, get over the Totalitarian Superior complex: let the Assad rhetoric go: sit down with Putin and join in the actual fight against ISIS: then again isn't this what they want a,
cold war with Russia, again.

America tried its hardest to enter Syria years ago but could not. ISIS is Americas 'boots on the ground'; their way into Syria without the world questioning. Unequivocally, Russia enters in to Syria to back Assad much to Americas chagrin. Putin knows the game America is playing. To Putins credit, he is patiently letting America fall to chaos for their lack of 'what to do now'.


Please get over the Cons vs Lib BS. For all the points made about the Cons, actuality represents the Dem/Lib controlled the Congress and Senate for most of the last 8 yrs. so this worldly position we are now in, if Congress is to blame, was and still is on Obama and the Democrats.

 

Yeah, fear mongering is terrible.

 

I thought carpet bombing was when Ali Baba and teh forty thieves passed over Baghdad on their flying carpets dropping camel poops on Sadaam Insane.

 

So "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" and "turn the sands of Islam into glass" and "take their oil" are really not threats, and I'm the fear monger.....The debate the other night had all but one con claiming we are already in WWIII, and we need another full invasion of Iraq and Syria....I'm sure Putin will back down again, like the Ruskies did during the Cuban Missile Crisis, because the U.S. is the WORLD SUPERPOWER and the WORLD DICTATOR. No country would dare question our superiority, huh.

 

I don't know if you remember the "coalition" being chumped by Shrub into following him into the invasion of Iraq. Do you not know that the U.S. lost all credibility and integrity with the allies? Do you think they would follow Obama back into another invasion of Iraq, or Syria, with a gun slinger "follow Me!" mentality?

Or would the U.S. be going it alone if Obama did another full scale invasion? And how much would it cost the tax payers this time? Or should Obama let the allies lead the charge this time? Maybe Obama is letting the Turks, Saudis, Iraqis and Kurds send in the ground troops to take on ISIS, and we just supply the air support. Maybe Obama doesn't want to start something with Russia in Syria.

I think it's obvious that Shrub started something the U.S. couldn't finish. We still haven't won in Afghanistan, after twelve years. Trying to be the world dictator isn't working out to well. But Trump and the cons sure want to beat that dead horse some more.

 

IS is gonna be defeated by a coalition of factions and countries, not primarily the USA.

Why propose this conflict as if it is mainly between US and ISIS? Because the US invaded Iraq years ago and IS is a result of that? Seems true but not a valid reason for seeing current events like that. America is an important player in this conflict, but one of many.
It's like saying this conflict with IS is a conflict between the west and middle east while there is a massive coalition of west and middle east (and others of course). It may seem correct but it is so off it will distort the truth.

They didn't got any weapons from Obama or US government directly. If you claim otherwise please expand on why you have that conviction? Thanks in advance

 

Sure do wish Obama would earn his Peace Prize . Let's hope the cease-fire negotiations with the nation of Syria are going well .

 

Who gives a fuck about that prize. We can look past that.

 

Oh to be sure, it has been a mess. I voted for Carter because I didn't want another round of Ford (Nixon light). It was fun watching him fall so much. But Jimmy let me down when he abruptly pulled the plug on support for Iran. Yes, I know the Shah was a puppet, but it touched off a sequence of events that has since snowballed. Carter was soundly defeated by Reagan who came in talking tough about the hostages in Iran. Shortly after the election they were on their way home. Carter would not make a firm plan and cut off diplomatic relations with Iran. Ross Perot (of all people) flew to Iran with a huge sack full of cash to bribe the Iranians into keeping the hostages out of the Iranian prisons and sequestered safely. I always thought he was grandstanding with this and when he ran against Clinton I was sure of it.

But Reagan thought he could Hollywood his way across the middle east like it was an old western movie. Talking tough and righteous until a truck bomb in Beirut took out 240 or so Marines in the middle of the night in their barracks. It would have been a politically strong move to go on the offensive, especially when they openly admitted doing it. Instead Ronnie Raygun pulls everyone out of Lebanon, a full retreat. Then sends our troops to invade a tiny Caribbean island full of med school last chancers. Reagan was right that Carter made the US look like a nation of wimps. But Reagan did as well.

But behind the curtain Ronnie and his creepy CIA sidekick GHW Bush would assemble a team of engineers, scientists, a psychic, a special effects crew and several psychologists to create several disconnected projects that merged later as the Strategic Defense Initiative. Openly it was touted as a way to stop nuclear missiles while they were reaching apogee. Just testing this expensive white elephant filled the lower orbital ring with millions of bits of exploded scrap metal. A ring of flack swinging around at 10,000 to 20,000 miles per hour. Particle beam weapons research really drained the budget as did all those "secret military" shuttle missions. While Reaganomics and high gas prices drained American wallets, our government was installing guns in the sky. Because the chicken hawks in the Pentagon and their Washington whipping boys want to have their push-button, video game war NOW!!!!

Bush 1 was really politically as unimportant as King Tut. All he did was keep Reagan's crap on track while sparring with the democrats over taxes. Bush 1 also utilized the CIA to the point they had their own SWAT teams and were heavily influencing governments around the planet. Bush 1 showed Washington that being watched became more profound the further up the food chain you were. But Bush 1 couldn't campaign worth a crap and with everyone fearing WW3 as a result of Reagan AND Bush's shady (Iran-Contra) deals. Perot pops up and proves with charts and graphs as well as 30 minute infomercials that the government is mismanaging the money. And it's way worse than $600 hammers. But Perot was an arrogant wealthy outsider with a big mouth. He was a "businessman" (an overtly sexist title these days) with very little political experience. This was made obvious some time later when he pulled out after rumors of credible threats to his family.

Clinton wiped the floor with Bush 1 after playing the sax on Arsenio Hall. It was nice to see a charismatic president after so much tightassedness. But he lied about pot, we all knew it was a lie, but we figured he was just being coy for the fogies. Instead arrests for pot go up on his watch to a record 750,000 per year. A back door tax basically. But feeding from the very group he promised to serve. Clinton had the right idea about the middle east though, stay the fuck out and pay bribes to keep them out of our back yard. But, GW and his brother destroyed that legacy and shut off the bribe money. This left the nation open to attack. GW didn't let it go to waste and tied it to Saddam, who had threatened his daddy, Bush 1. So GW got to nab the trophy, a guy who pissed off Reagan and everyone else.

It's as if some guy who had a stroke wrote American history over the last century.

 

By arming syrian rebels and certian individuals, ISIS was able to acquire weapons from the US and other international governments. I realize Obama didn't directly hand ISIS American weapons himself. In fact, giving weapons to terrorist gangs has been an ongoing policy long before the days of Obama. It stems back to Reagan (if not before that). I was merely wording my sentence the way the OP worded his, "Obama defeating ISIS."

 

I'm just curious and so I will google and see, but I wanted to ask where you heard of the U.S. arming Syrian rebels.

Nevermind. I just found an article about it on CNN. http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/09/politics/us-syria-rebels-arms-program-suspended/

 

American and Russian arms have such loose controls, intentionally, that we can't possibly blame a particular administration for their proliferation. Like American cars, American weapons took a hit when foreign replicas of the AK-47 flooded the market. But the guns are just the initial bump to get the show started. Ammunition is where the long term profits originate. A single rifle can fire thousands of rounds, well above the cost of he rifle itself. Sort of the way a decent car will outlast itself in gasoline costs.

Selling bootleg guns is profitable because most are destined to be used in crimes anyway. Crimes drive the need for ammunition higher. When I was working for big oil some years ago I went to a country in the middle east to write about operating the new VFD momentum pump drive. While there we visited the home of one of the local machinists for something like a barbecue. He also made wine and had a still in a shed behind the house for making liquor. But he also had a small machine shop where he repaired and modified guns. What was interesting was the way he had adapted parts from different models so that obsolete rounds could be fired by switching barrels.

With such inventive people it's a mistake to underestimate their resolve. I'm ashamed of the US government for taking advantage of so many of them just to make a buck. Unfortunately I was never afforded the opportunity to vote on the key elements of life in America while I've been allowed to vote. I never got to vote on the drug war or the Iraq war. I never got to vote on Skylab, KFC or Disco either.