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: I will send US troops to fight ISIS if they get nukes

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 04:54 PM
link   
RT Source.



US President Barack Obama has, for the first time, admitted he would deploy US ground troops to Syria and Iraq to fight Islamic State - that is, if the extremist group obtained a nuclear weapon.

“If we discovered that [Islamic State] had gotten possession of a nuclear weapon, and we had to run an operation to get it out of their hands, then, yes,” Obama told reporters at a news conference in Brisbane, Australia, on Sunday. “I would order it."



However...


US officials said there is no evidence that Islamic State possesses or could easily attain a nuclear weapon.



Well it's now going to get interesting if you ask me.
Will a Republican false flag set this meeting up...

Because, Democrat Obama looks certain to stick to his "no-troops" policy...

He'll probably see out his term without involving the U.S. in a War...
Much to the dismay of a large portion of the Planet who are sick of IS and wish to see them evaporated from the global stage.


I never intended to turn this thread partisan...
& I must say that the Dems are just as likely to start a false flag if necessary for them...

However I feel it'd be a right-leaning policy wanting a war.
As a central-centrist in the middle of the nucleus...
I have to admit to "advocating", for want of a better word, a full blown military invasion to deal with IS & the murderous Assad!


The sooner the better imo.
Where do you stand ATS?


Boots?
Or no boots?




posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 04:56 PM
link   
This is just the same old "weapons of mass destruction" sell again to put boots on the ground in the ME. Rinse, wash, repeat. Nothing ever changes...



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   
No boots.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Wookiep

Actually it's not, pal.

If you read the second quote, they said this...
"US officials said there is no evidence that Islamic State possesses or could easily attain a nuclear weapon."

So they're in fact distancing themselves from the idea.



That's why I turned partisan, and invented the false flag hypothetical.


Do you not agree that Assad & IS should be dealt with by the best Armed Forces on the planet?
Instead of Iraqis who aren't capable or well trained enough to deal with them...



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:11 PM
link   
This sounds familiar somehow ... Oh I remember!



Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.


George Bush, 2002



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:12 PM
link   
So we have Obama out of the blue saying he would send ground troops in *IF* ISIS gets nuclear weapons.

Then we have denials that ISIS has nuclear weapons.

Hmmm.

Get ready. They are buttering the bread already.




posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Oh sure, they say that now right up until they need an excuse to put boots on the ground when the majority of Americans don't want another war. Remember when Obama REALLY wanted to bomb Syria, before ISIS was even known to the world? Kinda weird how ISIS pops up once the admin and his friend McCain didn't get their way on that one.

Honestly, I'm not totally sure what to think of ISIS. They came out of no-where one day, and now they are the new "boogieman". Just as Saddam was once the boogieman. I wouldn't even be surprised if half the recruits were trained by the cia etc, just like the "rebels" fighting in Syria were, which many by the way were a part of an Al Qaeda faction.

The whole ME is a mess, it always has been, let them destroy themselves for all I care. We've had boots on the ground twice in Iraq since the early 90's, last time for over 10 years, did that help?

I say stay the hell out once and for all.
edit on 18-11-2014 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:16 PM
link   
Boots will be on the ground, it's just a matter of time.

ISIS seem to be a convenient inconvenience, just as the U.K parliament voted against any intervention in Syria. Which in turn stopped the U.S from doing so, well at least knowingly.

But all this talk of Nukes, how did we even get here?



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Cobaltic1978



But all this talk of Nukes, how did we even get here?


If I read the article correctly, he was asked by a journalist at the conference about nukes.


we know how the media love a bit of doom...

I suppose I did my part in sharing the doom here, but ATS can see through these things so I don't feel too bad.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:47 PM
link   
This is s ridiculous statement.

The fact that they are capable and willing to aquire nuclear weapons in itself IS A REASON TO SEND BOOTS ON THE GROUND.

Imagine these lunatics with nuclear weapons!

To fight ISIS would be the only justified war the US has ever fought other than WWII and the civil war


Obama is a fool in my eyes not to see the threat of ISIS



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:50 PM
link   
I say let Israel take care of IS. We've given them plenty of foreign aid and military hardware. They claim to be an effective fighting force. Let's see them fight somebody other than people with bottle rockets in a ghetto. IS is right there in their neighborhood, and Israel is supposed to be our allies. Come on, allies, step up.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

I agree.


I personally like Obama, but his policy with IS & Assad has been lacklustre.


To fight ISIS would be the only justified war the US has ever fought other than WWII and the civil war


Agreed.

It's bring back some nobility that the U.S. has lost in its last few endeavours.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

Considering that the Zionists love the idea of Arabs dying I don't see them stopping IS anytime soon.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Who exactly is going to PAY for these boots and continued operations against IS? Last I checked the US was broke. I say if Arab Nations want IS stopped then it is time to pay for it themselves.



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   
You can bet that when ISIS starts attacking oil production that we will have boots up their asses so fast that it will make your head spin.

edit on 1806u11 by JHumm because: add a word



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   
ISIS truly is a nonstarter.

They are about to bite the hand of every country around their supposed terror-tory. (You like that?)

Countries that don't generally agree on anything else think that ISIS is too much to be allowed to continue.
edit on 18-11-2014 by AgentShillington because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Any weapon can cause mass descruction if you use it in a certain manner that kills many. The question should really be what is our number that we will draw the line at?



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 07:01 PM
link   
first let me say that i'm very angry that out president doesn't seem to care enough to put a stop to the murderous ISIS threat.
but as so many here are fond of saying, there is more than one country with the military capabilities that can match the U.S. why don't they step up and handle them, and stop waiting for the U.S. .

you bitch when we do, then bitch when we don't. why doesn't another country take charge and handle the problem.
edit on 18-11-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

It is exactly the same as the "they-got-weapons-of-mass-destruction-we-gotta-go-ther-with boots n-die-in-the-process". What, you missed that story?

They denied, they sorta admitted, we accused, they denied, we went, we looked, and looked and looked, they still denied, we looked some more...they denied...

Its exactly the same. Its the ole' "We gotta go over there and get those nukes (weapons of mass destruction was the same thing).

By the way? A nuke IS a weapon of mass destruction.

No boots. No boys. No women. No bodies. P-lease....
edit on 07-31-2014 by mysterioustranger because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2014 @ 07:42 PM
link   
Problem is if they get one covertly from their good buddies in Pakistan, or through some rogue deal with some Russians, most likely obama will learn of it after it has been detonated in a city.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join