Obama says the darnedest things

Remember how al Qaeda was on the run and that attack in Benghazi was due to Youtube video?

Now, Obama says ISIS is contained on the day before a ISIS-instigated bloodbath in Paris that kills more than 100.

French President Francois Hollande vows, “Faced with war, the country must take appropriate action. …  France will be merciless towards these barbarians from Daesh” — an Arab acronym for Islamic State.

Meanwhile, Obama goes on the radio today and talks about veteran benefits.

Advertisements

83 comments on “Obama says the darnedest things

  1. Nyp says:

    How dare the President talk about helping veterans! The nerve!

  2. Steve says:

    It’s almost as if nothing ugly recently happened!

  3. nyp says:

    I know. He hasn’t said a word about the terrorist attack. Didn’t make a statement to the nation last night in the White House briefing room.
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/11/13/watch-president-obamas-statement-attacks-paris
    Didn’t convene a meeting of the National Security Council in the Situation Room of the White House this morning.
    http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/260157-obama-meeting-with-national-security-team-on-paris-attacks
    Didn’t leave on Saturday afternoon for a G20 Summit Meeting in Ankara, Turkey on Middle East terrorism.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/paris-terror-attacks-add-urgency-to-obamas-g20-mission-in-turkey/2015/11/13/2932c24a-8a17-11e5-be39-0034bb576eee_story.html

    It’s almost as if nothing ugly had recently happened.

  4. Again…our Community Organizer in Chief is clueless. The victory lap over the possible droning of Jihadi John lasted one day before this well orchestrated massacre in France completely overshadowed it. Last Sunday…on Meet the Press (Depressed) fellow Democrat Diane Feinstein took the President to task for his timidness and over cautiousness in confronting ISIS:

    DIANNE FEINSTEIN: (In regards to ISIL, and the downing of the Russian plane)

    “I hope it’s a wakeup call to Putin, and I hope to some extent it’s a wakeup call to us.
    I have said before and I really believe it, we will fight them now or we will fight them later. It’s only a question of time. And they’re now in 12 countries. They’ve done 25 major attacks in these countries outside of Syria and Iraq in the last two years. This is a huge, worldwide problem. And we’ve got to play a major roles, the Russians should as well.

    CHUCK TODD:

    Fourteen months ago, you said this about the president: “I think I’ve learned one thing about this president, and that is he’s very cautious, maybe in this instance too cautious.” It had to do with Syria. He obviously has made an incremental step about what he wants to do with Syria with these special forces. Is it enough?

    DIANNE FEINSTEIN:

    No. Special forces are limited. I think 50. That won’t do it. If we’re really going to use special operations, quick in, quick out, you have to do it in a much more comprehensive way to get at ISIL. This just isn’t one facility. It’s not one building in Raqqa or somewhere else. It’s many different places.

    The other thing that seems to be emerging is the belief that bombing alone isn’t going to do it. We’ve had over 7,000 sorties, others have made sorties as well. We have made the majority of the sorties. And that hasn’t changed the dynamic. So I think we’ve got to look at those things which can be major in scope. And this means put together a strategy with Russia and move ahead.”

  5. nyp says:

    You appear not to be paying any attention to what is currently going on in Sinjar, or on Highway 47.
    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/11/12/kurds-begin-offensive-to-retake-strategic-iraqi-town-sinjar-from-islamic-state/
    Nor have you considered whether the containment of ISIS’s geographical expansion strategy might have something to do with their resort to indiscriminate terrorism.

  6. And let’s not forget Obama’s claim about what is supposedly one of the biggest challenges or threats facing our military…Brian (tall tale) Williams is johnny on the spot…

  7. nyp says:

    Incredible to me that you do not think that climate change is a national security issue.
    Simply incredible.

  8. Steve says:

    No, no!

    Climate change is most certainly real and a national security issue.

    The things being claimed as necessary in reaction to climate change and the supposed primary cause are what remain, at the least, questionable.

  9. nyp says:

    Not to Thomas Mitchell. He thinks it is all a giant hoax. A massive conspiracy. He does not believe the climate is heating up at all.

  10. Steve says:

    The political power plays are very real.

  11. Barbara says:

    If people weren’t making money off of climate change, it would cease to be an issue at all.

  12. Too hot to cuddle. Now there’s a scientific breakthrough. Probably got a federal grant for that insightful scientific endeavor.

  13. Steve says:

    Climate change is producing low weight babies.

    Climate change negatively affects birth weight, study finds

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/09/150929092741.htm

  14. Nyp says:

    Oh, OK.
    Whatever.

  15. Steve says:

    Could it be, nyp is seeing the absurdity?

  16. nyp says:

    Interesting study of the contribution of drought in Northerneastern Syria, the resulting mass urbanization, and the Syrian Civil War:

    http://mashable.com/2015/03/02/global-warming-syria-civil-war/?utm_cid=mash-com-Tw-main-link#N51X6cFDakqf

  17. Bernie Sanders just moments ago in the Democrat debate declared…”The rise in international terrorism is a direct result of climate change.” His buffoonery never ceases to amaze. He said that if elected he would wipe ISIS from the face of the earth…this the same old codger who was intimidated off the stage by two female “Black Lives Matter” nincompoops in Seattle with 25,000 of his supporters watching in disbelief. If any of these three nitwits become President…we’re toast.

  18. nyp says:

    Department of Defense Military Advisory Board:
    “The potential security ramifications of global climate change should be serving as catalysts for cooperation and change. Instead, climate change impacts are already accelerating instability in vulnerable areas of the world and are serving as catalysts for conflict.”

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2014/11/14/does-our-military-know-something-we-dont-about-global-warming/

  19. I rest my case…politically correct buffoonery at it’s finest. We’re in deep kimchi folks…

  20. nyp says:

    Those genuinely interested in national security matters may wish to consult the website of the U.S. Center for Climate & Security: http://climateandsecurity.org/

    “Climate change, in both scale and potential impact, is a strategically-significant security risk that will affect our most basic resources, from food to water to energy. National and international security communities, including militaries and intelligence agencies, understand these risks, and have already taken meaningful actions to address them. But progress in comprehensively preventing, preparing for, adapting to and mitigating these risks will require that policy-makers, thought leaders and publics take them seriously.”

    Of course, if, like Thomas Mitchell, you believe that global warming is all a hoax, none of this matters.

  21. Steve says:

    Blaming everything on climate, then claiming it’s all due to human activity, then calling exclusively for economically devastating “solutions” for a fully unstudied, politically determined, “cause” is simply ignorant.

    Adapting to the inevitable changing climate, is not ignorant. But people who call for adaptation are regularly vilified for even suggesting it.

    Meanwhile, the Democrats continue to attack the supposed “rich” while offering zero specifics on how they would implement their ideas.

    And, yes, Hillary is a woman…as she again, reiterated, tonight.

  22. Barbara says:

    There is no way to adequately described the incompetency of Obama. Each of these candidates is delusional.

  23. Rincon says:

    Over 100 people are killed in France. The President should stop everything and hold the nation’s hand. 34,000 people die on our roads every year and everybody yawns. The only real weapon the terrorists have is in our own heads, and what a potent weapon it is!

  24. Rincon says:

    Some of these claims about climate change are almost as laughable as those that say it doesn’t exist.

  25. Vernon Clayson says:

    But Obama “is light skinned and doesn’t have a Negro dialect unless he wants one? What’s all the fuss?

  26. Steve says:

    Unlike many other online quiz’s, I found this to be a detailed one and it hit the mark quite nicely.
    It placed me in Ben Carson’s camp. (If you take it, pay attention to the importance sliders in the left hand frame of each question)

    http://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz

  27. Winston Smith says:

    Yep, regime change is our job, cuz we’re the World Police…

  28. Steve says:

    Empire, Winston.

    Empire.

  29. Interesting survey. I apparently side with Paul, Rubio, Bush and Cruz, in that order. Sanders and Clinton not so much.

  30. From this morning’s Meet the Depressed (Press):

    CHUCK TODD: “I’m joined by Michael Leiter, who served as director of the National Counterterrorism Center under both Presidents Bush and Obama. Well, then how do you explain the Obama administration’s policy here?

    MICHAEL LEITER: Well, I think that’s where we have the real delta. You have the intelligence community saying, “Strategically, they won’t be satisfied staying here. They will ultimately come to the West.” But then you have a policy which frankly, isn’t sufficiently robust and muscular to really defeat that enemy as it starts to move to the next stage.

    JEFF GREENFIELD (CBS Correspondent):

    Yeah, the question is this: everybody seems to want a robust response. Nobody seems to want to put American combat troops. But if, in fact, ISIS in Iraq and Syria is something more like a state that this, but are we kidding ourselves, can this be done without a large infusion of American combat troops?

    MICHAEL LEITER:

    I think the answer is no. We may not need the same number that we needed when we first went into Iraq. But we need more troops to push the Iraqis faster. We need more than 50 special operations forces in Syria to take the fight there, and we have to make clear that they don’t stand a chance against us. And right now, we are basically playing even. And that helps the movement beyond Syria and Iraq see that this is an attractive army to fight for in Paris–

    JENNIFER RUBIN (Washington Post):

    I think what we see here and what Michael delicately alluded to is a complete divorce between what is necessary and what the president and the administration is willing to do. They have this vision that they are ending wars. They are not ending wars. They have a vision that they’ll do a light footprint, that they’ll let the countries in the region handle it.

    That is false. And what we see now is this imbalance between what we will need, which I do believe will include a significant American force, and what they are willing to do. What is telling is the person that they put out to talk to the shows this morning was Ben Rhodes. An administration White House official, not a national security person, not someone respected in the national community, or in the international community, they are fighting a political PR battle, not a national security battle.

  31. Nyp says:

    So what are we talking about here – 50,000 US soldiers in … Syria? 100,000? 150,000?

  32. More than 50…just ask Diane Feinstein and Michael Leiter.

  33. Nyp says:

    How many more? What size US land operation do you think we should have in Eastern Syria? And what is the precise objective?

  34. That’s for the generals, intelligence specialists & the forces already on the ground to determine. Had our fearless leader listened to them earlier…we wouldn’t be faced with this fuster cluck.

  35. Rincon says:

    Doesn’t anyone think out of the box? Unless the rest of the world helps, screw it. Let them form their caliphate. Then we’ll have a whole bunch of these idiots in one place. Much easier to deal with them then when they create trouble.

  36. Patrick says:

    Bush and the republicans were told, when they declared their war against reason, by a great American military leader, that if they wrecked it, they’d own it.

    Well, they wrecked it, and now, they own it.

  37. Steve says:

    “Unless the rest of the world helps”

    France.

  38. Nyp says:

    In other words, you have no idea.

  39. Steve says:

    France could easily invoke their NATO membership. The “rest of the world” would be enjoined quite intimately.

    That gives us a pretty damned good idea how many people would be involved.

    Trouble is, once the targets in Syria are dust, just where does the war happen? To date, ISIS is known to be in some 25 different countries while aligning with none.

  40. Rincon says:

    It’s a worldwide guerrilla war. Whack-a mole at its biggest. Here’s the cost of our biggest guerrilla war,

    58,307 KIA or non-combat deaths (including the missing & deaths in captivity)[53]
    153,303 WIA (excluding 150,332 persons not requiring hospital care)[54]
    1,626 MIA

    And a million or so Vietnamese, but hey, who’s counting?

    And we still lost!

    You don’t fight a guerrilla war by smashing them with armies. You need to remove their support among civilians who aid them. Hearts and minds, kids. Unfortunately, we’ve been losing hearts and minds with our stupidity during the past 14 years. We had our chance in Afghanistan to do it right and blew it big time. We also blew it in Iraq by going in in the first place. And now Conservatives are once again beating the drums of war. We never learn.

  41. Steve says:

    Francois Hollande is a liberal.
    He ordered the air strikes on Syria.

  42. Winston Smith says:

    Blowback from unconstitutional attempted regime change. When will someone besides Rand Paul be honest about what’s going on? Nobody even attempted to refute what he said in the debate about us arming ISIS, they just ignored it, hoping it would go away. The Middle East has been a shithole for decades, but the Globalists want us messing around there, no matter the problems it brings to us, and with no real permanent resolution besides nuking everything in sight.

  43. nyp says:

    OK, so we have some guys here who say it is all Obama’s fault because he hasn’t done enough, and some others here who say it is all Obama’s fault because he has done too much.

  44. Rincon says:

    If we’re going to get out of the “shithole”, the first thing we have to do is stop buying their oil. 40 years after the first Arab oil shock, we still haven’t bothered. Pitiful. But at least Bubba still has his monster pickup truck and soccer moms with one or two kids have their Chevy Suburban.

  45. Anyone naive enough to think that if we stop buying Middle Eastern oil…that radical Islamic terrorism or the expansion of the Islamic radical caliphate will slow…or the spreading of this murder, torture, enslavement and mayhem will slow…I have some brothel front property in Pahrump I’d like to sell you.

  46. Also, it’s high time to STOP the President’s plan to take in Syrian refugees at this time…because it’s impossible to properly vet them…making it much too dangerous to contemplate at this time. This should be a bi-partisan proposition to end this madness.

  47. And one more thing, will one of the President’s ardent defenders please explain why the ISIS Command and Control training center that the French just bombed (with our intelligence info)…hasn’t been taken out in one of the sorties or drone attacks that have been ongoing for last eighteen months???

  48. And last but not least…it’s so entertaining to watch the Democratic candidates for President (and President Obama himself) twisting themselves into PC pretzels by refusing to refer to the terrorists as Islamic terrorists. ISIL – “Isamic State of Iraq and the Levant,” or ISIS – “Islamic State in Syria…duh. By refusing to call a spade a spade, we may be watching the demise of the Democrats due to their devotion to political correctness. This is also the case with their cuddling embrace of the “Black Lives Matter” radicals to the detriment of all other lives. They are being painted into a very uncomfortable corner that will come back to haunt them and bite them squarely on their exposed derrieres. Progressive, leftist, socialist Democrats being hoisted on their own PC petards…how consummately comical and deeply satisfying.

  49. Steve says:

    “French just bombed”

    The US is under constraint to be “surgical” (trying to minimize collateral damage) in trying to “contain” Daesh while France is responding in self defense.

  50. nyp says:

    You want to know another one of those lilly-livered liberals who steadily twisted himself into a PC pretzel by refusing to refer to the terrorists as “Islamic terrorists”?

    George W. Bush
    http://tinyurl.com/mf4vz48

  51. Agreed little nyper…GW Bush was just as stupid as the current batch of Democrat presidential hopefuls in regards to not calling Islamic terror what it is…

  52. Hey Steve, maybe our intelligence can pass along another strategic ISIS location to the Ruskies…so they can act in retaliation for their airliner being taken out?

  53. Rincon says:

    If we hadn’t bought so much Mideast oil, the whole area wouldn’t matter much to anyone and they wouldn’t have had enough money to make much trouble For example, Iran wouldn’t have had a nuclear program. Imagine if we had a problem with terrorists from Chad. How hard would it be?

    “…will one of the President’s ardent defenders please explain why the ISIS Command and Control training center that the French just bombed.(with our intelligence info) hasn’t been taken out in one of the sorties or drone attacks that have been ongoing for last eighteen months?..” You assume that no new targets ever show up. Please don’t go into the military.

  54. Steve says:

    Oh, I think airliners are a target of opportunity rather than specificity.
    Russia wasn’t the target, creation of terror was the goal.

    France is going all in and they own the reason.

  55. Speaking of Vietnam, Arclight strikes?

  56. Actually Rincon…I think Steve’s response was more accurate. Please don’t YOU go into the military…

  57. nyp says:

    I’m still hoping someone will tell me how many thousands of US troops they think we should use to invade northern Syria? 10,000? 50,000?

  58. What ever it takes to annihilate these barbarians. Write a letter to the generals…

  59. Steve says:

    Nyp wants to invade northern Syria….what does nyp suggest we do with all the other places Daech is currently known to be occupying?

  60. nyp says:

    I dunno. You want to invade those places a well?
    BTW – I am not aware of any military leader who favors the introduction of large-scale ground forces into Syria, Iraq or Yemen. Are you?

  61. Steve says:

    “I dunno”

    Yet you want specifics from everyone else.

    There are reports stating a battalion of Russian troops are currently on the ground in Syria. That’s around a thousand fighters already there. You really think that won’t increase, even if done quietly?
    Getting NATO involved would limits France’s current options for response but Francois Hollande has already asked the US and Russia to step up and assist. The next step would be a NATO response and we would see about 15,000 troops if that happens.

  62. Nyp says:

    Good point. Actually, I don’t think we should put any troops there apart from some Special Ops and CIA people.

  63. Steve says:

    I think we should support our long time ally and do as much as we can to get them what they ask for.

  64. Art imitating reality…and an evaluation of the enemy we face…and their stated strategy. This makes a helluva lot more sense than the BS we’re hearing from the administration…

  65. nyp says:

    So some folks here think Obama isn’t doing enough.
    Some think he is doing too much.
    And some get their national security information from “Homeland.”

  66. Steve says:

    “Friday’s acts of war were decided and planned in Syria. They were organized in Belgium and perpetrated on our soil with French complicity with one specific goal: to sow fear and to divide us,”

    “Syria has become the biggest factory of terrorism the world has ever known and the international community is still too divided and too incoherent.”

    Francois Hollande

    He’s right. How can the world hope to clean this mess up when it cannot even agree on what the mess is in the first place?

  67. I’ll take Peter Quinn over Ben Rhodes…any old day.

  68. Rincon says:

    “Oh, I think airliners are a target of opportunity rather than specificity.
    Russia wasn’t the target, creation of terror was the goal.” I don’t see much Islamic terrorism in South America or Canada, Australia, etc. Don’t they have planes there? Maybe the U.S. is just unlucky….yeah, that’s it. I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that we’re in everyone’s face.

  69. Patrick says:

    I thought unless an absolutely definitive answer to a question could be discerned, which would solve the problem absolutely, absolutely nothing should be done; but maybe it’s just another one of those things people say when they just want to say something.

  70. Steve says:

    Rincon forgot the Twin Towers, for shame.

  71. Steve says:

    The airport wasn’t in any of those countries.

  72. Rincon says:

    Although I take the twin towers with their 2977 deaths seriously, I also realize that our reaction to it in Afghanistan and Iraq totaled about 6,814 with 52,000 wounded*. In the time since 9/11, we’ve lost about half a million to our cars, along with millions maimed. Half a million compared to 3,000. I repeat: The terrorists’ greatest weapon is our minds and our overreaction. We think with our emotions, not our intellect.

    *I agree that it was necessary to invade Afghanistan, but we really screwed it up.

  73. Rincon says:

    Seems that years ago, I predicted that by invading Iraq, we created two new terrorists for every one we killed. I think my estimate was a bit low.

  74. Steve says:

    You missed the hints.

    The aircraft were hijacked using loopholes in our search protocols. We simply did not look for box cutters. They didn’t care where the planes were going, only that they were carrying a full load of fuel.

    The airport in Egypt failed to find the bomb before it made its way onto the plane, this was also more likely an attack of opportunity than one of directed target.

    There was a gap in security at the airport in Egypt that allowed terrorists access to a plane. That gap decided which plane they attacked.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s