Gen. Martin Dempsey,Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Says … US May Send in Ground Troops to Fight ISIS (Video)
BOOTS ON THE GROUND … I THOUGHT THAT OBAMA SAID THERE WOULD BE NO BOOTS ON THE GROUND?
Foreign policy from the Divider in Chief, even the military and WH are divided …
Barack Obama said emphatically that the US would put no boots on the ground against ISIS, not so fast. General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate panel yesterday that the United States may send in ground troops if they are needed to defeat ISIS. Gen. Dempsey stated, that he hasn’t ruled out recommending U.S. ground forces deploy to attack ISIS targets if the current air campaign in Iraq fails. Dempsey said that Obama might reconsider boots on the ground and come back to him on a case by case basis. Oops. That is a much different message than Obama is trying to show in public to his left-wing, moonbat base.
ABC NEWS: US Troops Could Fight ISIS in Iraq
The nation’s top military officer opened the door slightly today to the possibility of American troops accompanying Iraqi forces on the battlefield against ISIS if needed.
The latest deployment of 475 American forces to Iraq includes 150 advisers who will be working closely with Iraqi brigades at the headquarters level to coordinate the Iraqi military’s offensive operations against ISIS.
Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the advisers “will help the Iraqis conduct campaign planning, arrange for enabler and logistics support, and coordinate coalition contributions.”
He told the committee that he currently does not see a need for American troops to serve as JTAC’s with Iraqi units, though he could change his recommendation as events warranted.
Dempsey said that Gen. Lloyd Austin, who oversees U.S. Central Command, had initially recommended using American JTAC’s with the Iraqi and Kurdish forces that retook the Mosul Dam last month, but ended up using work-around technologies. Dempsey said he does not currently see the need to embed the controllers with Iraqi forces, “but I’m not walking away from what I said. If we get to the point where I think we need the JTAC with the Iraqi security forces, I will make the recommendation.”
At least it was ironclad until Tuesday, when Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told members of Congress he hasn’t ruled out recommending U.S. ground forces deploy to attack ISIS targets if the current air campaign in Iraq fails.
“To be clear, if we reach the point where I believe our advisers should accompany Iraqi troops on attacks against specific ISIL targets, I will recommend that to the President,” Dempsey said.
Comedian Jon Stewart shredded President Barack Obama during his program Monday night, accusing him and his minions of acting “chaotic and confused” on how to deal with the Islamic State. Maybe the youth will now understand that Obama is a complete screw up.
Stewart concluded by pointing out a key difference between the Obama and Bush administrations: the Bush administration was “incredibly disciplined and focused” in doing the wrong thing, while the Obama administration is doing the right thing, but couldn’t be more “chaotic and confused” about it.
Judge Jeanine Pirro: Mr. President, Why are You so Afraid of Words … Arab Nations Know Obama Is Not A True Ally
Judge Jeanine Pirro rips the Ditherer in Chief, Barack Obama as only she can …
So why no use of the word war and by not using the word war to avoid a war vote in an election year? Is Obama politicizing the “counter-terrorism” efforts against ISIS. No, never. And we wonder why Americans support a strategy to rid the world of ISIS, but have no confidence in Obama to do it.
NBC/WSJ Poll: Large Majority of Americans Support Barack Obama Mission to Destroy ISIS, But Have No Confidence That He Can Do So
THIS IS WHY YOU NEVER ELECT, LET ALONE REELECT A COMMUNITY AGITATOR TO BE PRESIDENT AND COMMANDER IN CHIEF … A VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE.
It is a sad state of affairs in the White House these days and the people have lost confidence in President Barack Obama. In the most recent NBC/WSJ poll, although 62% of voters say that they support Obama’s decision to take action against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, however, even more, 68%, say they have little to some confidence that he can reach his goals of degrading and eliminating ISIS. Sadly, that seems to be Obama’s own opinion as well with his mixed messages and a plan that counts on premises that he was against just months ago.
It is hard to win a war on terror when you cannot even bring yourself to say it.
Nearly 70 percent of Americans say they lack confidence that the U.S. will achieve its goals in fighting the terrorist group ISIS, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Annenberg poll. The findings come in the wake of President Barack Obama’s national address announcing new measures to combat the Sunni militants.
Pressure is mounting on the U.S. and its allies to cripple the militants, who have waged a brutal campaign across Syria and Iraq. ISIS already has beheaded two American journalists and on Saturday released a video showing the execution of a third Westerner, British aid worker David Haines.
The poll – conducted before the latest execution emerged – showed that a combined 68 percent of Americans say they have “very little” or “just some” confidence that Obama’s goals of degrading and eliminating the threat posed by ISIS will be achieved. Just 28 percent said they had “a great deal” or “quite a bit” of confidence. Still, 62 percent of voters say they support Obama’s decision to take action against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, while 22 percent oppose it.
The NBC/WSJ poll also shows that just 38% of voters approve of Obama’s job in handling foreign policy.Which is actually higher than the most recent FOX News poll that has Obama’s approval rating in dealing with foreign police at 34% approve and 59% disapprove.
Posted September 14, 2014 by Scared Monkeys
America - United States, Barack Obama, Bystander in Chief, Community Agitator, Epic Fail, Foreign Policy, ISIS, Islam/Muslims, Islamist, Islamofascist, Jihad, Leading from Behind, Misleader, NBC/WSJ Poll, Polls, Radical Islam, Terrorism, War on Terror | 8 comments
Michael Foley, Brother of Beheaded American Journalist James Foley, Says US State Department Threatened Us
IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE A GOVERNMENT OF, BY AND FOR THE PEOPLE … NOT ONE AGAINST THE PEOPLE!!!
In an exclusive interview with Megyn Kelly last night on ‘The Kelly File’ , Michael Foley, the brother of beheaded American journalist James Foley said that the American State Department threatened him personally. UNREAL. It is one thing for the United States government not to negotiate with terrorists and pay ransoms, but to hinder a family in trying to get their loved one back, at any cost, so-to-speak. It’s not like Obama was busy trying to secure Foley’s release. He was too busy on vacation and golfing.
Kelly: I’m wondering if you feel he [Obama] and the administration did all they could to get Jim back.
Foley: No, no. We’re appalled by the situation and you know, it went past not doing everything they could, they were actually in impedance and got in our way and that’s what really bothers me to the core. We were, I was specifically threatened by the Department of State about raising funds toward ransom demands for my brother. We were smart enough to look past it but it slowed us down. We lost a lot of time trying to regroup.
In an exclusive interview with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly last night on the Kelly File the brother of beheaded American journalist James “Jim” Foley, Michael Foley, expressed disappointment over how the Obama administration is handling the threat of terror army ISIS and in the administration’s handling of his brother’s capture leading up to his death. James Foley was beheaded three weeks ago by an ISIS terrorist and a YouTube video of the gruesome murder was posted online. President Obama was on vacation at the time and eight minutes after making a statement about the murder, returned to the golf course, a move a majority of Americans found to be in bad taste.
In reacting to President Obama’s speech earlier this week, Foley said he wanted to see a more involved strategy put on the table to stabilize the region. Further in reaction to a question posed by Kelly about whether the Obama administration did everything it could to bring James Foley home, especially after the Bowe Bergdahl swap and comments by Obama saying Americans leave no man behind, Michael Foley said his family is “appalled” by the situation. Foley also talked about how he was threatened directly by the State Department and said that when the family tried to get information from the U.S. government or from other allies, they were stonewalled
FEEL SAFE AMERICA … THE OBAMA WHITE HOUSE HAS NO IDEA WHAT VICTORY OVER ISIS LOOKS LIKE, THEN JOKES ABOUT IT.
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest was asked a rather simple question today by Yahoo! News correspondent Olivier Knox, following President Obama’s ISIS speech last night, what “victory” over the Islamic State would look like and what “destroy” really means? Earnest replied with a joke, “I didn’t bring my Webster’s Dictionary up here.” WTF!!! Really, if ISIS and their destruction a laughing matter? How does one plan a strategy against a terror group like ISIS and not define what a victory is? These are serious times and call for serious people. Sadly, we have nothing by jokes in the White House. It starts from the top and trickles down … these people are not serious and America should be scared as hell they are in charge.
There is a reason why Gallup poll now says that Republican party better able to protect United States than Democrats from terrorism, 55% to 32%.
REPORTER (according to the Washington Times Yahoo! News correspondent Olivier Knox), it was :What does victory look like here? You’ve talked about destroying ISIL, I honestly don’t know what that means. What does that mean?
JOSH EARNEST: I didn’t bring my Webster’s dictionary with me up here. We’ll, you know. It’s only –
REPORTER: Talking about that — I understood it when you said –
JOSH EARNEST: I think that’s a pretty illustrative phrase to describe the situation that we envision. We’ve talked about the threat that ISIL poses in the context of foreign fighters.
Posted September 11, 2014 by Scared Monkeys
America - United States, Barack Obama, Bizarre, Comedian in Chief, Democrats, Epic Fail, Fun, Humor, Idiot, ISIS, Islam/Muslims, Islamofascist, Liberals, Media, Misleader, Moonbats, Obamanation, Progressives, Radical Islam, Restoring America, War on Terror, WTF, You Tube - VIDEO | no comments
HEY MR. PRESIDENT … YOU DO REALIZE THAT THE “I” IN ISIS OR ISIL AS YOU LIKE TO SAY STANDS FOR “ISLAM,” RIGHT?
Barack Obama, the Apologist in Chief was at it again last night with his “tin-horn” speech on the ISIS threat. Obama was finally able to muster up the “cojones” to call ISIS a terrorist group, but he just could not find it in himself to say they were Islamic. UNREAL. So ISIS is not Islamic because Obama says so and because they kill Muslims? HUH? Mr. President, you might want to read the Quran and that religion of Peace.
“ISIL is not Islamic. No religion condones the murder of innocents. And the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim. And ISIL is certainly not a state.”
The Left Has Lost the Loving Feeling … Michael Moore Slams Obama Says History Will Only Remember You Were a Black President
OUCH … Uber-Lefty Michael Moore rips Barack Obama and says, history will only remember you were a black President … So much for the Obamamessiah.
How many times can you say that you agree with Michael Moore? It has only taken Michael Moore six years what so many knew many years ago, Barack Obama is an epic failure. Moore stated during an interview with The Hollywood Reporter, “When the history is written of this era, this is how you’ll be remembered: He was the first black president.” That’s interesting, because in many respects, that is the only reason why he was first elected. Moore also went on to call Obama a disappointment. Wow, even the Far Left has Obama buyer’s remorse. Is it possible for socialists to have buyers remorse? Of course it is, individuals like Michael Moore rail on capitalism, but it was capitalism that made him rich.
Note: If the Left abandons Barack Obama, we may see Obama’s poll numbers hit s historic, all-time presidential low into the 20′s.
“When the history is written of this era, this is how you’ll be remembered: He was the first black president,” Moore said during a discussion at The Hollywood Reporter’s video lounge at the Toronto Film Festival.
“OK, not a bad accomplishment, but that’s it,” the director said. “That’s it, Mr. Obama. 100 years from now: ‘He was the first black American that got elected president.’ And that’s it. Eight years of your life and that’s what people are going to remember. Boy, I got a feeling, knowing you, that — you’d probably wish you were remembered for a few other things, a few other things you could’ve done.”
“So, it is, on that level, a big disappointment,” Moore said.
When the interviewer asked whether Moore agreed with President Obama’s 2012 assertion that he’d “saved Detroit” by bailing out General Motors and Chrysler, the filmmaker recoiled. “Detroit, at this point, would stand a better chance if they were an Iraqi or Syrian city, in terms of getting some sort of help,” he said.
Barack Obama’s 9-10-14 Full Speech on ISIS … Wrong President at the Wrong Time: From the Jayvee Team to America’s Greatest Terror Threat
SORRY, OBAMA LOST ME AT AS COMMANDER IN CHIEF MY HIGHEST PRIORITY IS THE SECURITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, OKAY REALLY IT WAS AT MY FELLOW AMERICANS
Lying to the American people and playing politics with healthcare, the IRS and jobs is bad enough, but lies and playing politics with terrorism kills.
Barack Hussein Obama is the wrong president at the wrong time with a speech that many feel are just more words. Let’s get serious folks, it was WE THE PEOPLE who forced Barack Obama, kicking and screaming, to speak to the American people with regards to the terror threats of ISIS. The only reason why Obama addressed the American people was because of his sinking poll numbers of terrorism and foreign policy. In gaffe after gaffe, or in Obama’s case, how he really felt, Obama claimed that ISIS offered no threat, they were just the jayvee. As ISIS ravaged innocent men, women and children he stood back and did nothing. As ISIS created a caliphate and took over lands in Syria and Iraq, Obama did nothing. Isis beheads an American journalist and Obama says bad things have always happened, its just the media and social media that make more out of it today. Then when Obama first presents what he will do to ISIS he admits he has no strategy and then when he comes up with one it is to make ISIS a “manageable problem”. WTF!!!
So now Barack Obama provides us with more words, little details and a 180 on so many of his own words, policies and principles, it makes anyone’s head spin, even Democrats and liberals. Just curious, since when has the core principle of Obama’s presidency been, if you threaten America, you will find no safe haven. REALLY? Did Obama also provide Yemen and Somalia as examples of successes against terrorism? Hold the phone, did Obama just say that ISIL poses a threat to the people of Iraq and Syria, and the broader Middle East, including American citizens, personnel and facilities? Mr. President, you said ISIS was the jayvee. You dismissed them as not a threat and not on par with Al-Qaeda and now they are a threat to all, including America? Then what might be the flip-flops of all times, Obama states that there will be no American boots on the ground, but instead we will reply on Syrian opposition fighters. The very people that President Barack Obama once derided as “former doctors, farmers, pharmacists and so forth” are now form a key pillar of the U.S. leader’s strategy to beat back the militant insurgency known as Islamic State. ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!
The White House (CNN) — My fellow Americans — tonight, I want to speak to you about what the United States will do with our friends and allies to degrade and ultimately destroy the terrorist group known as ISIL.
As Commander-in-Chief, my highest priority is the security of the American people. Over the last several years, we have consistently taken the fight to terrorists who threaten our country. We took out Osama bin Laden and much of al Qaeda’s leadership in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We’ve targeted al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen, and recently eliminated the top commander of its affiliate in Somalia. We’ve done so while bringing more than 140,000 American troops home from Iraq, and drawing down our forces in Afghanistan, where our combat mission will end later this year. Thanks to our military and counter-terrorism professionals, America is safer.
Still, we continue to face a terrorist threat. We cannot erase every trace of evil from the world, and small groups of killers have the capacity to do great harm. That was the case before 9/11, and that remains true today. That’s why we must remain vigilant as threats emerge. At this moment, the greatest threats come from the Middle East and North Africa, where radical groups exploit grievances for their own gain. And one of those groups is ISIL — which calls itself the “Islamic State.”
Now let’s make two things clear: ISIL is not “Islamic.” No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim. And ISIL is certainly not a state. It was formerly al Qaeda’s affiliate in Iraq, and has taken advantage of sectarian strife and Syria’s civil war to gain territory on both sides of the Iraq-Syrian border. It is recognized by no government, nor the people it subjugates. ISIL is a terrorist organization, pure and simple. And it has no vision other than the slaughter of all who stand in its way.
In a region that has known so much bloodshed, these terrorists are unique in their brutality. They execute captured prisoners. They kill children. They enslave, rape, and force women into marriage. They threatened a religious minority with genocide. In acts of barbarism, they took the lives of two American journalists — Jim Foley and Steven Sotloff.
So ISIL poses a threat to the people of Iraq and Syria, and the broader Middle East — including American citizens, personnel and facilities. If left unchecked, these terrorists could pose a growing threat beyond that region — including to the United States. While we have not yet detected specific plotting against our homeland, ISIL leaders have threatened America and our allies. Our intelligence community believes that thousands of foreigners — including Europeans and some Americans — have joined them in Syria and Iraq. Trained and battle-hardened, these fighters could try to return to their home countries and carry out deadly attacks.
I know many Americans are concerned about these threats. Tonight, I want you to know that the United States of America is meeting them with strength and resolve. Last month, I ordered our military to take targeted action against ISIL to stop its advances. Since then, we have conducted more than 150 successful airstrikes in Iraq. These strikes have protected American personnel and facilities, killed ISIL fighters, destroyed weapons, and given space for Iraqi and Kurdish forces to reclaim key territory. These strikes have helped save the lives of thousands of innocent men, women and children.
WELCOME TO OBAMA IN WONDERLAND …
The tin-pot dictator Barack Obama told Congressional leaders he does not need their vote to wage war against ISIS. Isn’t that rich. Even when so many are on board with collectively annihilating ISIS and it is Obama who has been pulled into this kicking and screaming, the president took the opportunity to do what he does best, be negative and divisive. With the polls showing that an overwhelming majority think that Obama has been to lax in dealing with
ISIL ISIS and want more action taken against the terror group. So why no vote? Isn’t this the same president who for 6 years has been bitching and moaning about no bipartisanship in Washington? Is this a matter of Obama wanting to go it alone because he is a narcissist, is it because he does not want to show the optic ever of Democrats and the GOP coming together on any issue, or is it because he does not want liberal Democrats to have to vote for war ahead of the 2014 midterms and upset their radical left-wing base?
This is what happens when you have a president that does everything with a political taint to it, rather than what is best for America.
President Obama told congressional leaders at a White House meeting on Tuesday he doesn’t need their authorization to expand his military campaign against Islamic terrorists.
The president offered the assurance one day before a prime-time address he’s scheduled to give to the nation.
The president is also weighing the possibility of airstrikes against ISIS targets in Syria, as well as asking the United Nations to pass a binding resolution requiring governments to prevent the flow of foreign fighters to the region.
While Obama told the House and Senate leaders he would welcome congressional action that demonstrates a unified front, the president told the bipartisan group “he has the authority he needs to take action against (ISIS) in accordance with the mission he will lay out in his address,” according to the White House.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have called on Obama to better clarify his strategy this week, and the White House has said the president will offer a frank “assessment of this critical national security priority.”
White House press secretary Josh Earnest cautioned that the address would not provide a timeline for the military campaign, nor was Obama expected to outline costs for the operation.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is emerging as the most outspoken congressional leader pushing for a vote on President Barack Obama’s plan to take on the Islamic State, even as the White House insists the president already has authority to take on the militant group.
On Tuesday, McConnell aggressively called on Obama to back a vote in Congress on his military strategy before the November elections, which will pit the GOP leader against Democrat Alison Lundergan Grimes in a pivotal race that could determine control of the Senate.
“He really ought to ask for our support, whether or not he may think he’s authorized to do what he intends to do. I think it’s in his best interest,” McConnell told a reporter.
And Democratic leaders are also trying to stay out of the fray, though some rank-and-file Democrats in the Senate are agitating for a roll call on continued airstrikes in Iraq or an expansion into Syria.
FLASHBACK 2007 … However, that was not always the case. The Gateway Pundit reminds us of Obama, in his own words, criticizing GWB in 2007 for actually going to Congress and getting approval as opposed to Obama who says he does not need Congress to wage for on ISIS. HUH? Bush followed the War Powers Ac in Iraq and that is not good enough for then, Senator Obama. My how times have changed. Hear Obama criticize how the president, Congress and the MSM have failed the American people. Did he just say that the MSM reported spin instead of facts? Seriously?