Rift widens between Obama, US military over strategy to fight Islamic State

Look, you've got to cut Obama some slack here. He's got his hands full trying to devise a strategy to conquer Ebola. It's difficult trying to wage war on multiple fronts simultaneously. Especially when you can't depend on your disloyal military leaders to assist you.

 

Very nice summation of how the balance between civilian and military are supposed to function together.

 

Kind of narrows the entire scope of the issue, since there are other retired officers of the military who warn that any military involvement would likely be disastrous for American foreign policy in general. Winning the hearts and minds and all that. There is no monolithic consensus in the military to even invade Syria/Iraq, let alone how to do it.

Obama was too ready to invade Syria the first time and tried to pressure the generals to do so, but they were the ones to ultimately tell the president that such a thing would be disastrous considering that the Chemical Attack Story the US was trying to pin on Assad was unravelling and pointing to the US-backed rebels. In short, they didn't want to walk into another diplomatic embarrasment.

 

What's all the fuss anyway? It's just a JV team that put on a Lakers uniform... why's anyone worried about them?

 

I'm still waiting for his qualifications with regards to international politics and diplomacy. His experience seems completely focused on waging war, which, while possibly admirable, doesn't make him an expert on dealing with international politics

- - - Updated - - -

I'm still waiting for his qualifications with regards to international politics and diplomacy. His experience seems completely focused on waging war, which, while possibly admirable, doesn't make him an expert on dealing with international politics

 

As the head of CENTCOM for 5 years and a top Marine Corps general, that's part of the job. The meme that generals only know war is a Euro-centric meme dating back to 1914. It was true then, but not true in the posst-WWII world. Generals, at least American generals, must know when war is a good option and when it is not. If you look back to early 2003, you would have seen it was the American generals who were against going into Iraq and it was the civilian politicians (chickenhawks) who favored invasion.

 

Yes ebola outbreak = boots on the ground
ISIS beheading Americans....not so much.
The only JV team here is team Obama. The worst joke ever played on our nation.

 

President Johnson thought he could run the entire Vietnam conflict on his own from the WH. Why in the world do our top military brass attend war strategy college only so they can be told by a president how to run a war? A president's war strategy is generally based on his polling numbers. The majority of Americans want some action taken against ISIS but have made it clear no ground combat troops will be used. So Obama is constantly appeasing them by saying openly no combat troops will be used in the ME. Why is this knucklehead so willing to telegraph his strategy to the enemy? So wonder why generals are so infuriated with this clown! Obama has got to go now!

 

The general's qualifications are not focused on waging wars because that is the president's job as we have seen with Obama and Bush. They make those decisions. But once a war has been waged, it is the general's job to come up with a strategy to win the war. That is why they attend war colleges. What experience does Obama have with regard to war strategy? For that matter what foreign policy experience does he really have? Did he receive this training and experience before he became president? Does it appear he has learned anything since taking office in 2008?

 

Again, President Obama is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't as far as Right Wingers are concerned.

That said, while I agree the US should be part of a global coalition for quelling the Ebola crisis, sending in US troops is just another example of a non-military Democratic President using the US military as "World Police".

 

Much of what I have read claims this is a domestic dispute (if you will) between the Saudi Royals and ISIS. And the influence the UK and the US have over Saudi Arabia to become more westernize is infuriating Wahhabis and Sunnis who strongly believe in the traditional relationship that once was between the two. Al-Baghdaddi believes it is time to change the relationship by removing the King of Saudi Arabia and taking his place. If he succeeds it will change Saudi Arabia forever and the oil will dry up. I believe this is why Obama has had a serious change of heart and is now putting the US military back in to the ME. Something we all know goes against what he promised during both his campaigns. His decisions of recent tell me this is far more serious than we are being led to believe. I believe we are in a no-win situation and eventually Saudi Arabia will fall or WW3 will become reality. The Saudi's oil is a strategic resource for the entire world. Allowing it to fall into the hands of ISIS would be a grave mistake.

 

Agreed we should stand together as a nation against serious threats, disagreed with your implication that we are at war with 1.6 BILLION Muslims (23% of the global population). Only a small fraction of Muslims are violent and constitute a threat just like only a small fraction of Christians murder abortion doctors and blow up clinics with people inside.

 

Actually, you continue to avoid the thread of Obama not listening to the generals and their expertise in eliminating these islamo-nazis. You for some reason believe that a community organize who has absolutely zero executive experience outweighs those that have the equivalent of PHD's in warfare.

 

I will cut him some slack when Obama quits playing politics of everything short of wiping his ass. Everything Obama does has a political spin to it, including him not being able call these terrorist nazis who use islam as their motivator. If Obama is to get respect, he must first earn it, just like the rest of us

 

It truly is laughable to compare Christian terrorists with Muslim terrorists. Christian terrorists aren't threatening anyone with death if they don't convert. Christian terrorists do not have the financial backing the Muslim terrorists get. Christian terrorists aren't waging large scale war using modern weapons and hiring jihadists to come fight for Allah. People who try and make this comparison just look ignorant.

 

Really? You compare a handful of nut cases to tens of thousands islamo-nazis cutting the heads of people everywhere? Wow, is all I can say to your comment

 

Obama is being damned by his own party members and his generals, former and present. Many democrats voted against his strategy to fight ISIS. Obama will eventually concede the advice he is being given and will eventually send in large combat units to fight. Anyone who does not see this happening is only setting themselves up for more disappointment by this president. But I'm guessing the diehard supporters of Obama will defend his actions while secretly condemning him for acting just like Bush Jr., which he is now.

 

Perhaps you can point out who those dissenting voices are that believe any invading enemy can be won without ground troops?

Obama needs to step up to the plate and be a leader and not say stupid stuff like a red line and not back it up. He is a laughing stock making such idiotic remarks, and the world is watching

 

The correct thing to do is put boots on the ground to fight ISIS before they gain even more ground and keep any and all Americans out of any areas containing deadly virus. What is his master plan, to infect out troops with deadly disease while he emboldens ISIS? Damned if he does damned if he doesn't? No, there is no damning if he simply acts like a President FOR ONCE. A child wouldn't have made the bad decisions he has made.

 

It's been done already

 

Hell, I would take Cornelius over the community organizer.

 

It states it right there. If you can't see it what is right in front of you, not my problem.

 

"tens of thousands islamo-nazis cutting the heads of people everywhere"? Do you have facts to back that up or are you just exaggerating like a liberal talking about gun deaths?

 

Possibly. He, like many other Presidents, is walking a tightrope between the needs of his own party and the needs of the country.

It will take boots on the ground to destroy ISIS, but why do those boots have to be American? I've been (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)ing for years that our Allies need to hold up their end of global security. The US has been shouldering the load for decades now, not for altruistic reasons, but shouldering it nonetheless. This is a chance to let other nations do their part. Especially our Middle East allies. They're the ones with the most to lose if ISIS wins.

 

What's laughable is advocating a war between Christians and Muslims.