If you think this then you really don't check into anything and just keep eating the grass the left feeds you. For Example, Ted Cruz want's no boots on the ground. He would strike them from the air and help the Kurds, which would be our boots on the ground.
And he did the right thing It's not America's job to police the world that's what the UN's job to do.
No partisan bull**** folks. Let's scoreboard shall we. Bush took out Saddam. Obama destroyed Gaddafi and severely weakened an already weak Assad. So that's 3 for Bush and 2 for Obama. However since Bush had to deal with 9/11, we look at replay and see his foot was on the line. So now it's 2-2 in the scoreboard of who's responsible for ISIL. Now let me clarify, Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad are terrible terrible people but what replaced the void after they were destroyed is much much worse. So to recap, 2-2 scoreline between Obama and Bush in the blame game for ISIL. But Obama has possession with the clock running down and a chance to win it. Perhaps he'll miss and sub himself out for Hilary where she'll go for the W in overtime!!! If Trump get's on the court, IT'S A 360 SLAM DUNK FROM THE FT LINE, GAME OVER!!!
Let's look at the right's position on the issue: 1. Trump- bomb the **** out of them 2. Cruz- Carpet bomb them into oblivion- make the sand glow 3. Congress-do nothing to prohibit those on terrorist watch list from buying automatic weapons. 4. Congress- do not give president authorization to use military force against ISIS. Does the right offer anything of substance? Obama knows there is no quick fix and will not let ISIS sucker us in to another ground war.
Colonel Ralph Peters call Barack Obama "total p***y" after this speech, live on the air: <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9gTWYxdtBzo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> And of course Colonel Peters is absolutely correct.
I find this surprising, since Col Peters has been such a fan of President Obama over the years, so much so I have always been surprised he is such a favorite of Fox News.
The same Peters that was an extremely strong supporter of of the Iraqi war in 2003? The same one that claimed that there was stability and not a civil war in Iraq after our invasion and occupation? The same Peters that then said a troop surge wouldn't work in 2007? Then claimed that the media was focused on getting a "D" elected President so they would lie about the success of the troop surge... after saying it wouldn't work? Honestly when it has come to the Middle East, he has been wrong virtually every step of the way for over a decade. Then again I suspect you didn't know who Peters was, and just liked that he called Obama a p***y.
That's the one. When some people find an "expert" who agrees with them, it doesn't matter how disreputable that "expert" happens to be.
Instead of asking distinguished former military members what they think, we should ask more university professors (especially liberal arts professors) and community organizers what they think. /end liberal genius post
This video sums up the Republican mindset perfectly: "Mr. President WE'RE ANGRY AND WANT YOU TO DO SOMETHING DRASTIC TO CATER TO OUR EMOTIONS RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!"
And Democrats are on the other side yelling "Mr. President WE'RE ANGRY AND WANT YOU TO DO SOMETHING DRASTIC TO CATER TO OUR EMOTIONS LIKE RE-INSTITUTING THE INEFFECTIVE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN OF 1994 RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!!"
Look don't get mad at me just because Fox News has you trained to wet your bed every night thinking about ISIS terrorist attacks on the homeland.
But even if you are in favor of sending in troops, after all we have seen from Barack Obama, should he be trusted with that responsibility? Barack Obama has asked for a formal authorization of military force against the Islamic State, but Congress has been slow to approve that, for a variety of reasons. Should Congress trust Barack Obama with this authority and with this responsibility? Tough question.
You've got it twisted kid, I'm not worried about an ISIS attack OR the fact that there are assault rifles in circulation. I leave that to the Republicans and Democrats among us.
As to this former Colonel, whoever he is. I don't really know anything about him, but any fairly high ranking retired officer that would take public shots at the current Commander in chief isn't someone really deserving of respect. Even if you don't agree with his policies and you think him short sighted, you don't publicly insult him. Doing so only makes the former officer look small, doing so in such a childish manner only serves to make the former officer look like he was unworthy of holding the rank he once held. I get that he has that DD-214 blanket and can do whatever the hell he wants, but he shouldn't keep having people call him by his former rank if he wants to engage in that sort of behavior. It would be like me dusting off my old class A's and then wearing them in public while acting like an *******. It's just disrespectful. Anyway, just my 2 cents.
