ISIS

[Mike M (the other one)]

Trump ordered his top Generals on Friday to eradicate ISIS in 30 days.
SoD Mattis spent his first day at the Pentagon overseeing 31 airstrikes against ISIS.
The results:
25 Strikes in Syria
Bab: 2 strikes took out ISIL units and artillery.
Raqqa: 22 strikes destroyed 12 tactical units, 9 fighting positions, 2 underground improvised bomb making factories and an ISIS HQ.
Dier ez Zour: 1 strike took out 2 IS oil wells.

Unconfirmed:
ISIS Leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi wounded in strikes and captured.

6 Strikes in Iraq
??


Personally, I hope we got him this time.

[Benton]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-stealth-bombers-hit-suspected-isis-camps-libya-sirte/

Quote:The strikes were authorized by President Obama, according to U.S. defense officials. The strikes were aimed primarily at ISIS militants who had escaped from Sirte after U.S. strikes virtually obliterated the group in the coastal city last autumn.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/under-trump-administration-airstrikes-on-islamic-state-continue/article/2612668

Quote:According to U.S. Central Command, the coalition carried out 31 airstrikes on targets in those two countries on Saturday. Most of those strikes, 25, were in Syria and the remaining six were in Iraq. Those numbers are on par with the daily totals Central Command puts out.

...

On Friday, the day President Trump became commander in chief, military forces carried out 26 airstrikes. The number was 31 on Thursday, 26 on Wednesday, 23 on Tuesday and 17 on Monday, according to Central Command.

It's not much difference than what we've been doing. About the same number of strikes targeted by the same guys who targeted the last ones.

[GMDino]

(01-23-2017, 03:43 PM)Benton Wrote: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-stealth-bombers-hit-suspected-isis-camps-libya-sirte/


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/under-trump-administration-airstrikes-on-islamic-state-continue/article/2612668


It's not much difference than what we've been doing. About the same number of strikes targeted by the same guys who targeted the last ones.

But Trump was aware of them now so he gets "partial credit".  

[*wildcats forever*]

(01-23-2017, 03:43 PM)Benton Wrote: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-stealth-bombers-hit-suspected-isis-camps-libya-sirte/


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/under-trump-administration-airstrikes-on-islamic-state-continue/article/2612668


It's not much difference than what we've been doing. About the same number of strikes targeted by the same guys who targeted the last ones.

Brace yourself for this being called 'alternative fact'....

[*michaelsean*]

I didn't know you could actually order the day you successfully defeat an opponent. WTF was FDR doing all those years?

[*bfine32*]

Here's to hoping they are soon eradicated. I don't care is Rosie O'Donnell ordered the strikes and it is sad that is the focus. WTS, we can only do so much from the air. Hopefully a ground coalition is coming in right behind the attacks.

 

[Mike M (the other one)]

I never claimed Trump did anything other than tell Mattis to eradicate ISIS in 30 days. Let's see how it goes in the next 30 days.
And if he gets in done in 30 days or less... then that will send a big message.

[CKwi88]

Good luck with the 30 day period, unless he plans on turning the region to glass.

What does "eradicate ISIS" entail exactly?

[GMDino]

(01-23-2017, 04:34 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Good luck with the 30 day period, unless he plans on turning the region to glass.

What does "eradicate ISIS" entail exactly?

Chest thumping, "Mission Accomplished" banner and votes.

[Griever]

(01-23-2017, 04:29 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I never claimed Trump did anything other than tell Mattis to eradicate ISIS in 30 days. Let's see how it goes in the next 30 days.
And if he gets in done in 30 days or less... then that will send a big message.

is that 30 days from today, or when he was inaugurated? Im a little fuzzy on when his actual first day ways

[McC]

(01-23-2017, 04:44 PM)Griever Wrote: is that 30 days from today, or when he was inaugurated? Im a little fuzzy on when his actual first day ways

And this matters how?

[GMDino]

(01-23-2017, 04:49 PM)McC Wrote: And this matters how?

Well I would guess to Trump and his supporters it doesn't.

It could be six months from now and they create some alternative start date for the 30 days.

Or if could never happen and they'll happily stay blind to it and claim it was all just political talk and and at least he "did something" about ISIS.

But to most other people if someone says he'll do something in 30 days they want to know the actual time frame so they can judge that statement.

[Benton]

(01-23-2017, 04:29 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I never claimed Trump did anything other than tell Mattis to eradicate ISIS in 30 days. Let's see how it goes in the next 30 days.
And if he gets in done in 30 days or less... then that will send a big message.

If it gets done in the next 30 days — after they've spent years with the same strategy not getting the job done — then that speaks volumes to the allegations that CentComm has been operating for years under political motivations, manipulating reports to paint a rosier picture of efforts there. instead of doing the job ordered by the commander in chief.

[McC]

(01-23-2017, 04:51 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well I would guess to Trump and his supporters it doesn't.

It could be six months from now and they create some alternative start date for the 30 days.

Or if could never happen and they'll happily stay blind to it and claim it was all just political talk and and at least he "did something" about ISIS.

But to most other people if someone says he'll do something in 30 days they want to know the actual time frame so they can judge that statement.

Trump bad.  Trump always bad.  Trump always be bad.   And what if it takes 31?  How many tears will you shed?  How many more threads will you make?

Objectivity, the thing of which you have none.  Not interested in a better America, just one that is exactly as you and your goofy leftist comrades think it should be.  Hoping the plane you're on goes down cuz you hate the pilot.

[GMDino]

(01-23-2017, 04:49 PM)McC Wrote: And this matters how?

(01-23-2017, 04:51 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well I would guess to Trump and his supporters it doesn't.

It could be six months from now and they create some alternative start date for the 30 days.

Or if could never happen and they'll happily stay blind to it and claim it was all just political talk and and at least he "did something" about ISIS.

But to most other people if someone says he'll do something in 30 days they want to know the actual time frame so they can judge that statement.

(01-23-2017, 05:10 PM)McC Wrote: Trump bad.  Trump always bad.  Trump always be bad.   And what if it takes 31?  How many tears will you shed?  How many more threads will you make?

Objectivity, the thing of which you have none.  Not interested in a better America, just one that is exactly as you and your goofy leftist comrades think it should be.  Hoping the plane you're on goes down cuz you hate the pilot.

 

Did I suggest he would/should fail?

You ask why when the 30 days covers "matters".  I answered that question.  And, it would seem, I was correct that to Trumps supporters...it doesn't.

I didn't even say it mattered to ME....I just answered your question. 

So, does it matter to you?

[Belsnickel]

(01-23-2017, 04:51 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well I would guess to Trump and his supporters it doesn't.

It could be six months from now and they create some alternative start date for the 30 days.

Or if could never happen and they'll happily stay blind to it and claim it was all just political talk and and at least he "did something" about ISIS.

But to most other people if someone says he'll do something in 30 days they want to know the actual time frame so they can judge that statement.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a "mission accomplished" moment followed by years of denial that IS is still doing their thing.

[McC]

(01-23-2017, 05:20 PM)GMDino Wrote:  

Did I suggest he would/should fail?

You ask why when the 30 days covers "matters".  I answered that question.  And, it would seem, I was correct that to Trumps supporters...it doesn't.

I didn't even say it mattered to ME....I just answered your question. 

So, does it matter to you?

No, it doesn't matter to me.  But I'm not hanging on every word and syllable, trying to catch him on a technicality.  If it takes a year, you'll be focused on he missed the deadline and I'll be focused on hooray, the bastards are gone.

[Belsnickel]

(01-23-2017, 05:34 PM)McC Wrote: No, it doesn't matter to me.  But I'm not hanging on every word and syllable, trying to catch him on a technicality.  If it takes a year, you'll be focused on he missed the deadline and I'll be focused on hooray, the bastards are gone.

Here's the rub for me. Part of the populist/anti-establishment movement is holding our elected officials accountable. If an elected official says they are going to do something, they should do it. If pie in the sky goals are not feasible, then there needs to be a realistic message. It's actually one of my biggest issues with politicians is the constant over-promising and under-delivering nature of it. The public needs to stop being lied to, and Trump has been walking down that path throughout the entire campaign.

So, if Trump, or any elected official says that something is going to be done within x time frame, we need to hold them accountable. If 45 days from now ISIS is still going strong then we need to be asking him why. Why did you say 30 days? What made you think that would be a reasonable expectation? If our elected officials don't meet our expectations we have to tell them, because that is how a republic works.

I've written letters to officials on both sides expressing my displeasure or praise. Senators Warner and Kaine both received letters from me recently that were a very mixed bag. We can't be partisan on this, if your officials do something you don't like, no matter their stripes, they need to be told, and if it is enough of an issue they need to be told with votes.

[McC]

(01-23-2017, 05:44 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Here's the rub for me. Part of the populist/anti-establishment movement is holding our elected officials accountable. If an elected official says they are going to do something, they should do it. If pie in the sky goals are not feasible, then there needs to be a realistic message. It's actually one of my biggest issues with politicians is the constant over-promising and under-delivering nature of it. The public needs to stop being lied to, and Trump has been walking down that path throughout the entire campaign.

So, if Trump, or any elected official says that something is going to be done within x time frame, we need to hold them accountable. If 45 days from now ISIS is still going strong then we need to be asking him why. Why did you say 30 days? What made you think that would be a reasonable expectation? If our elected officials don't meet our expectations we have to tell them, because that is how a republic works.

I've written letters to officials on both sides expressing my displeasure or praise. Senators Warner and Kaine both received letters from me recently that were a very mixed bag. We can't be partisan on this, if your officials do something you don't like, no matter their stripes, they need to be told, and if it is enough of an issue they need to be told with votes.

I run a construction crew.  If i want something done in four hours, I tell them i want it done in two.   Simple psychology that works every time.  This is what leadership does.  I don't think he guaranteed the public he would have them gone in a month, did he?

It's like the inauguration crowd size nonsense. It's focusing on the wrong thing and being led to forget the right thing.

[Belsnickel]

(01-23-2017, 05:54 PM)McC Wrote: I run a construction crew.  If i want something done in four hours, I tell them i want it done in two.   Simple psychology that works every time.  This is what leadership does.  I don't think he guaranteed the public he would have them gone in a month, did he?

It's like the inauguration crowd size nonsense. It's focusing on the wrong thing and being led to forget the right thing.

No, that is not what leadership does. That's crappy leadership. Setting clear, measurable objectives that are actually attainable is a much better method. Setting a goal that is one for growth and improvement is good, but just saying 2 when you want it in 4 consistently means your workers know you really want it in 4 and so they will work that speed. If you want to increase their productivity and you currently see the job done in 4, which is by end of day at 5 and you tell them you want the job done and cleaned up by 4:45 and they can then call it a day, it's a much more effective method, and will allow you to move the goalposts down the road. Anyway, leadership fundamentals and theory aren't the topic of the thread.

Anyway, if holding our officials accountable for what they say is focusing on the wrong thing, then you don't get the anti-establishment thinking. I'm not saying that if he gets the job done in a year we don't celebrate it, I'm saying that if he gives a timeline we should be saying, if it hasn't happened and that timeline has passed, why?