It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama will not send troops into Iraq. Will consider further actions over coming days: Statement.

page: 5
15
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: nixie_nox

And bless you for that. When I read threads like this one (and there are oh so many other fine examples) I realize we are truly and utterly screwed.




posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: whyamIhere
You guys know the definition of insanity.

There is never going to be a good outcome for us.

Let somebody else stop them.

We just can't seem to do anything right in the Region.



I agree with you completely. 17 billion dollars down the drain training their forces.

POOF...all gone for nothing. All the begging for U.S. aid is falling on my deaf ears now. All those humvees, tanks, helicopters...everything. Now in enemy hands because their army threw down and ran.

That's not our fault. Let them sort it out between themselves. God help the innocent killed in the process.

The ONLY upside I see in this whole mess....

Come November when gas is $7.00 a gallon, and people here are crying because Christmas is around the corner, and they can't make ends meet. A crap load of self absorbed, out of touch with reality, incumbent career politicians, will get tossed out on their asses.


Des



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Destinyone

I think you're right.

They hate us.

We do not understand the culture or the customs.

If we did. We would of never gone in the first time.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital

In other words what Obama mean is,

-The president before me screwed Iraq, Is not my fault

-I am downgrading the military so we don't have boots to send to Iraq

-The Iraqi government better share Iraq with Al-Qaida terrorist and Taliban

- I love terrorist and will arrange negotiations with them to make Iraq more Taliban

-I will make sure that the billions of dollars Bagdad embassy will not be part of the bargain, as the profiteers of Bush war needs a place where to hide


Got it.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Though, they won't be sending any troops, they did mention that this crisis will cause gas prices to rise. Just scrolled on CNN.

So. Ya.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: nixie_nox

Boehner is not the president.



Obama cleans his clubs with the tears of Boehner, and the shirttails of Biden. The only thing missing between them is the brain power to know what a mulligan is. And as a citizen of the US I call mulligan on electing Obama.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 05:59 PM
link   
Obama, although he is sounding reasonable about making Malaki include the Sunnis in power before he attacks, doesn’t understand something: he has to do something about this…real soon

He is playing coy so he could have leverage with Malaki

Obama knows dam well he can’t let some barbarians take over Iraq after the US used all that power to take it over. It would be the greatest foreign policy disaster in American History

Colin Powell said it to the jack ass George Bush: “Once you invade Iraq you own it.”

I was totally against the Iraq invasion but since the US did it they ARE OBLIGATED TO FIGHT AND SAVE THE COUNTRY!

You can’t equate this to Vietnam since America didn’t invade and destabalize the country.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

One thing is for sure, Obama is not war president, either that or he is such a terrorist sympathizer that he doesn't give a crap what happen to Iraq right now.

Still he is going to do nothing because he will be out of the white house soon enough, leaving the Iraqi mess to the next president to fix.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell

Obama, although he is sounding reasonable about making Malaki include the Sunnis in power before he attacks, doesn’t understand something: he has to do something about this…real soon

He is playing coy so he could have leverage with Malaki

Obama knows dam well he can’t let some barbarians take over Iraq after the US used all that power to take it over. It would be the greatest foreign policy disaster in American History

Colin Powell said it to the jack ass George Bush: “Once you invade Iraq you own it.”

I was totally against the Iraq invasion but since the US did it they ARE OBLIGATED TO FIGHT AND SAVE THE COUNTRY!

You can’t equate this to Vietnam since America didn’t invade and destabalize the country.


You might have a chance if Iraq bordered on Mexico then he would help in the next 15 minutes.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 07:27 PM
link   
Of course the US is not going to help the Iraq government fight off the radicals, this is exactly what they want. Typically they'd be sending support to the radicals and claim that they were simply "freedom fighters" who were fighting for "democracy", like they did with Libya and Syria, but they cannot do that in this case because it's too obvious what is going on. So they'll just sit back and watch it all unfold this time.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 07:45 PM
link   
I am starting to wish that the Military would of stayed.

And President Obama's dad would of pulled out.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital
He isn't going to do anything, because he installed the current terrorist leader when he released him from a US Prison, 5 years ago. Seriously, do you not think, for one moment, the Obama admin hasn't known what was going on? He not only knew, he helped facilitate it. Let's get real here.

There are 3 factions of muslims in Iraq. By watching what is going on, you can determine which side Obama personally identifies with. Accepting he is a muslim is not a far reach. Once you get there, determining his faction answers all the remaining questions.

Who has he droned? What faction did they side with? What about the prisoners he just released from Gitmo? What about past prisoners? He operates by deception, this is his modus operendi. He says he released the Gitmo prisoners to get a US soldier back. Yet, after they were released, when interviewed, they vowed to return to the battle. At that moment in time, we all were consoled by president, were we not? "The world is less dangerous than ever before."

He spoke those words less than 24 hours before the Iraq seige took place. So, either you believe he is ignorant and totally inept, and our government knew nothing, OR, you believe he knew, and he chose to intentionally lie and deceive America, and the world, with those words. I choose he knew. Especially since Iraq said they have been asking for US help for a month.

So, that leaves us with a rather fowl taste in our mouths, doesn't it? Our president is an obvious sympathizer with this terrorist faction, and by doing nothing to aide the government, and don't forget, the Prime Mininister HE installed, he is aiding and abetting the enemy. Ouch. A hard and difficult truth to swallow for some. Many will deny it, but it's far beyond that anymore.

Once you have come this far, now look back. Syria. Lybia. Egypt. It all falls into place nicely, doesn't it? Simply check the factions and the interplay here, people. The facts are low hanging fruit for the picking, if you can stomach the truth.



www.thegatewaypundit.com...



“Abu Duaa was connected to the intimidation, torture and
murder of local civilians in Qaim”, says a Pentagon document.
“He would kidnap individuals or entire families, accuse them,
pronounce sentence and then publicly execute them.”

Why such a ferocious individual was deemed fit for release in
2009 is not known...


But wait! That's not all!

m.cnsnews.com...


(CNSNews.com) - Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) a message back on January 21 in which he flatly stated his group’s intention to march on Baghdad and move into “direct contact with the U.S.
“Our last message is to the Americans. Soon we will be in direct we will be in direct confrontation, and
Baghdadi said. “So watch, for we are with you, watching.”


When the House Foreign Affairs Committee held a hearing February 5 on al Qaida’s resurgence in Iraq, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iran and Iraq Brett McGurk presented written testimony explaining
the agenda of ISIS (also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant,
or ISIL), and discussed Baghdadi’s audio message to Americans.


See. They knew. They lied.

Obame purged the military generals and top ranking officials for a reason. Some have tried, repeatedly, to tell you, but you just refuse to listen.

Maybe now, just maybe, someone will pay attention to the usurpation of the seat of the presidency. Maybe.

Or, it will just continue to be swept under the rug, because the truth is unbearable. The damage too great. What about the civil unrest it will cause? Well, what about the damage that is being done, from within, because we cannot bear to deal with it? Which is worse?

edit on 13-6-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)


Edited: phone is acting strange, sorry, it copied all the text twice
edit on 13-6-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Ever wonder why you always hear what Obama will not do first?



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Libertygal

I gave my vote to Obama on his first term, in hopes that he was true and honest.

Sadly by the end of his first term I knew, right away that he was nothing but closet muslim trying to screw our nation and payback to his buddies in the middle east.

Sadly many people still doesn't get it, we do have a chameleon in the white house. He is ruling by executive action and his mighty pen, but I wonder why we have a congress that has not stood against him and is just acting like lame ducks.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 09:16 PM
link   
a reply to: ausername

EXACTLY...

How many times must we tolerate this latest Criminal In Chief spewing lies before we start to read through the B.S.

Eventually there will be boots on the ground. First it will be "advisers" Then Xe or some other covert arm will get into it if they aren't already there,...

The state-run media will talk away the reasons why but the end result is we will have our boys killing and being killed for the New World Order...


edit on 13-6-2014 by coastlinekid because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 09:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: Libertygal

I gave my vote to Obama on his first term, in hopes that he was true and honest.

Sadly by the end of his first term I knew, right away that he was nothing but closet muslim trying to screw our nation and payback to his buddies in the middle east.

Sadly many people still doesn't get it, we do have a chameleon in the white house. He is ruling by executive action and his mighty pen, but I wonder why we have a congress that has not stood against him and is just acting like lame ducks.



It's not that they won't stand against him, they can't. Those who want to don't dare because of the consequences, they are afraid. Like many Americans, they just want to survive his presidency and move on from there.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 09:31 PM
link   
a reply to: ausername
Oh, they could, but like you said, they are hiding their heads in the sand and holding their breath, waiting for his term to expire. But, don't fool yourself. There are still many in Congress who think he walks on water. Not as many as before, but enough.

What is at play here is the Constitutional Crisis the 'birthers' warned about. It's happening, and has been, but now people are taking notice of it. The 'birthers' had the point right, regardless of whether or not they won or failed and lawsuits. It all comes down to loyalty for a people and a nation, and this is where the failure began.

People cannot say they weren't warned. It had nothing to do with race. Islam is not a race. It had to do with where many felt one mans' heart and loyalty lay, and it was not with the US, and her people.

And the Nation weeps.

Meanwhile, DHS prepares for civil unrest. But what will be the catalyst? It was almost a Nevada ranch. Now, we have thousands that died for a cause, for a country, regardless of whether you felt it right or wrong, is beside the point. The sacrifice is what matters. Those that fought and died did so for a cause, and now, our president refuses to defend it.

The Emperor has no clothes.

Do you hear me now?



edit on 13-6-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 09:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Libertygal


good grasp,,

this might help,,

The State of Palestine (Arabic: ???? ??????? Dawlat Filas?in), is a sovereign state in the Levant
that is recognized by the United Nations.

the Levant,,for instance is included here,,


the "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant" (ISIL),


The Levant

today consists of the island of Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, and part of southern Turkey (the former Aleppo Vilayet).

"ISIL: Rising power in Iraq and Syria
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
has outgrown even al-Qaeda as it seeks to establish a new caliphate."
www.aljazeera.com...

a new caliphate,,,

this is the work of a Caliphate, now find out who.

for instance,,

"Establishing the Caliphate is that great objective
which has been lost due to the Muslims'
ignorance and negligence."

or

"Establishing a Caliphate following the guidance of the Prophet (SAW) "

www.islaam.net...

Id start with Kings,, Arabian/Mulim Kings,,

for instance,


last great Caliphate,,



and that was when Western Civlization went into the Dark Ages.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
I have a question.

Isn't ISIS part of the same group that the US has aided in Syria?


Officially, the USA is only meant to be aiding the moderate rebels in Syria, meaning that ISIS shouldn't be receiving anything. Buuuuuut, i wouldn't be surprised if they were getting aid.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Really? People are actually complaining we haven't trashed Iraq badly enough, that we should put people back there?

Are you all daft? That is the absolute worst thing to do, the worst. They hate us in the ME. Really hate us. We have a habit of shoving our noses in other countries' business, and then leaving it in shambles. Is it really so hard to grasp why we're so damn despised? Putting Americans back in Iraq won't make a flying fornication's worth of difference in either the short-term or the long-term. That's just going to leave more people seething, a reminder that the Imperialists can't keep to themselves. And at this rate, Imperialists is becoming a good descriptor, because we conquer. We take their resources. We impose our culture & ideals on foreigners who don't want them. We don't understand their cultures, and there's plenty of countries in the ME with plenty of tribes and religious sects that it's simply laughable to think we have a grasp of their social mechanics. We don't. That is why our presence is spat on, why our ideas for bettering them fail. We literally don't understand them. They don't live or think like Westerners, and they don't want our help to learn to emulate us because it is just not who they are. Our intentions at whatever point may have been good, but we failed. And we will continue to fail, even if we try to fix what we broke. We aren't wanted over there, it's that simple. Imposing ourselves again is going to implode the region more and more each time we go.

If we do end up with the pro-re-invasion folks getting boots on the ground, and it goes to hell in a hand basket worse than the first go around, I'll be first in line to say "Told. You. So."


edit on 6/13/2014 by Nyiah because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/13/2014 by Nyiah because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/13/2014 by Nyiah because: Typos...




top topics



 
15
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join