10-31-2015, 04:32 PM
(10-31-2015, 04:25 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Your ability to analyze a situation and consistently come to the wrong conclusion is amazing.
1) Haven't you consistently railed against ISIS? Yes. Haven't you repeatedly suggested the US should do something about ISIS? Yes. So when the US does exactly what you have suggested "your" against it. Figures. Makes perfect sense considering the source of the contradiction.
2) Do some research on the history of the presidential use of force authorization. The President doesn't need Congress to vote of the use of force. The President certainly wouldn't ask for a public vote for covert operations. Like Bengalzona mentioned there is a reason they have publicly announced our involvement in operations I am certain we have already been conducting.
3) The Special Operation Forces (SOFs) will be involved in training and coordinating non-Assaud forces to combat ISIS. Question: Why the **** would we want our SOFs training Syrian, Russian, and Iranian forces to be better war fighters? Especially since ISIS and Iran have common interest in the region and we certainly don't want Iran increasing their influence in the region any more than they already have since we interceded in Iraq. Answer: We don't want that which is why we aren't working with them. You have zero ability to think strategically. Your only concern is religion so you and these "savages" share something in common.
Ah your answer..... Send more troops .
I don't have a problem sending but this back and forth bs by Obama.... Half in half out is a joke.
If we send troops I want to send them with 0 limitations. But we never do that ....
Yes we don't want Iran getting any more power ..... Yet we remove sanctions. Obviously Obama administration wants Iran to be a leader in the region. Or did they only do that deal to validate a foreign policy gain in his presidency.?
The lack of consistency of this administration annoys me.
