It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Bankruptcy of the Obama policy on ISIS

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 08:04 PM
Let’s forget the Trump sideshow for a minute and get down to the important issue:

Obamas flimsy speech and the war on ISIS
Which I'm sure the ptb were delighted in the Trump distraction

Not to send 10’s of thousands of troops to immediately exterminate ISIS is a cruel and cynical path.

The West’s air forces (US/Russia/UK/France/ Germany/even Japan/China [and even many Arab states]) and the east’s ground forces: Syrian/Egyptian/Iraqi/Jordanian/Kurds/Turks in the right numbers can be rid of ISIS in 2 weeks if the leaders had the will.

Russia has the will and the way but the West, led by the spineless con man Barack Obama, still wants to play this out for all that it is worth…led by some sinister factional inside power group that has Obama by the proverbial balls….and their squeezing hard!

No one ever thinks of the fact that the more ISIS is allowed to rule millions of people and the more they use this erratic bombing to slowly degrade ISIS’ areas of rule only brings more suffering on the millions of people under their power as Obama’s tedious, slow, process of beating ISIS plays out over, at this rate, years and years and years.

Read here about the suffering of the people under ISIS

Russia tried to garner the support and momentum for such a force but the US batted it down, of course… with Obama’s slow, tedious, phony war on ISIS as the polarization and hatred is agonizingly perpetuated by the very existence of ISIS day after day.

Obama is fighting to continue this unsuccessful torturous way to a victory that will not come unless massive ground power is unleashed on ISIS along with massive air power as ALL military commentators have said.

If this process (the idea of an expeditionary UN force of 100,000) would have been initiated from day one, right now ISIS would be a bad memory.

But Barack Obama doesn’t have the leadership capacity to get himself out of a paper bag, let alone the audacity, capacity, vision and flexibility to form this real life coalition, something any or most presidents would have been doing….Similar to what George HW Bush did in 1992 to remove Saddam Hussein’s invading army from Kuwait…a very successful invasion that could be a model for what Obama should be doing.

But no, Obama wants to send 50 to 200 special ops. If they really send them around ISIS they could likely get captured and we’ll have the horror of these religious gangsters slaughtering on of our men (God forbid) while Obama fiddles in the white house.

The cliché is constantly being put forth: we don’t need thousands of our troops again in Iraq and definitely Syria.

Even though three times when the US really wanted to win a quick war in the ME they succeeded without any real blowback: the war in Iraq in 1993; the war in Afghanistan in 2001; and the 2003 invasion of Iraq (which was lost NOT on the battlefield but the way the US administered Iraq).

And anyway the troops for this coalition will NOT be exclusively western troops but ME troops included.


Crack brigades from each of these countries can beat ISIS in a month without many casualties.

Obama wants a cowboys and Indians long war of attrition that will cause more casualties; allow for unnecessary suffering of the people under ISIS, and extend the credibility of ISIS in the Muslim world…

Indeed the Colon Powell doctrine of a massive force will win the war in a short time with less casualties than the Obama method and then a international ME conference to adjust to the aftermath of ISIS can proceed.

The key to forming this coalition is American leadership which unfortunately is sorely lacking

So if this isn’t adapted, a clear and concise plan that will work, it must be that a certain faction amongst the powers that be DO NOT WANT A SOLUTION!

edit on 9-12-2015 by Willtell because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-12-2015 by Willtell because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 08:17 PM
a reply to: Willtell

Well written OP!

The obvious fact of the matter is that the West is not interested in destroying their secret army.

Logic makes this painfully obvious when you look at the military capabilities of America alone and their repeated failure of actually fighting Daesh, to the point of accidentally dropping them more ammo!

Add to that- their well orchestrated psy-op of arming/funding "moderate" rebels.

Honestly given the history of our alphabet agencies and their global network of conspirators, I find it distrubing that they were able to successfully spin their modus operandi and actually convince people that it is benevolent!

edit on America/ChicagoWednesdayAmerica/Chicago12America/Chicago1231pmWednesday9 by elementalgrove because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 08:19 PM
a reply to: Willtell

Obama is a bag of nancy wrap in weakling cloth and carried in a wussy basket.

What did you expect out of someone who has never actually done anything to earn anything, everything has always been handed to him.

He is the epitome of the manchurian candidate.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 08:59 PM
Indeed we need to realize and remember that Islamic jihadis werent on the map before the late 70’s.

Now seriously, If Trump wants to study this problem then that in itself would be a good thing. But it has been thoroughly analyzed by very wise people and they have concluded the USA has its hands all over this.

Through geopolitical chicanery and mass psychological training of pre-modern religious bigots they used to attack the Russians for geo political selfish gain and has come back to bite us in the ass

That’s it Trump, cased closed

Oh but also the fact of the power of Wahhabi Islam, a brutal murderous recent sect of Islam, that hates all other Muslim schools of thought as well all other religions.

This pernicious sect of Islam has been the most destructive thing to Islam since the Genghis Khan rampaged through Islamic lands murdering thousands

Though in fact Wahhabism is worst because it kills the soul with its wicked sectarian hatred of anything other than Wahhabism

So truthfully if Wahhabis could be kept out of the US the terrorism would come to a halt completely

Wahhabism has ONLY risen because of the oil wealth of Saudi which spreads this narrow version of Islam

It hates and persecutes the noble Sufis, Shias, and other non Islamic faiths and other main line Islamic schools of thought as a part of their orthodoxy.

It is a pernicious dogma almost on the level of the medieval Catholic Church

So if Trump wants to investigate terrorism look no further than Wahhabism and their doctrines as the source

Just like you won’t see a regular Sunni or Shia (other than the war in Israel) doing terrorism in the west-- only Wahhabis turned jihadis--you wont see a non fundamentalist Christian doing Christian terrorism which is uniquely confined to fundamentalists in that religion as well

It boils down to people believing in a literal interpretation of scripture

It may just be that in the future we may have to look at this closely

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 09:19 PM
Do you really think that Russia would allow the USA to put boots on the ground in Syria ?
Dont be naive.

a reply to: Willtell

edit on 9-12-2015 by ErrorErrorError because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 09:21 PM
a reply to: ErrorErrorError

I've made the point that the US is the biggest barrier to destroying ISIS

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 09:33 PM

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: ErrorErrorError

I've made the point that the US is the biggest barrier to destroying ISIS

Why doesent Russia put their groundforces in Syria to destroy Isis? France ? Uk ? Surely Obama cant stop Uk or France sending troops in. You think russians are there to destroy Isis? They have been bombing them for two months now, Isis is still gaining grond.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 09:42 PM

originally posted by: ErrorErrorError

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: ErrorErrorError

I've made the point that the US is the biggest barrier to destroying ISIS

Why doesent Russia put their groundforces in Syria to destroy Isis? France ? Uk ? Surely Obama cant stop Uk or France sending troops in. You think russians are there to destroy Isis? They have been bombing them for two months now, Isis is still gaining grond.

If you really want to know I’ll tell you.

Here it is briefly

The US has a COVERT OPERATION in existence.

That covert operation is to destabilize Syria and overthrow Assad through any means necessary particularly the war in Syria backed by the Covert operation along with Turkey and the Gulf States.

The covert operation is a legally binding operation that makes it mandatory for the president, secretary of state and defense secretary to operate until success or the finding is taken away

A Finding is what initiates this through the Security Council, CIA and congressional committees

This is all very Hush hush

But that’s the motivating factor behind Obama and the US policy here

Btw the covert operation is run by the Secretary of state

edit on 9-12-2015 by Willtell because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 09:55 PM
Just plz leave canada out of this mr Trudeau.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 10:52 PM
a reply to: Willtell

S&F for your OP.

We should not forget that Russia and China until August were opposed to a military invention in Syria, IS has had all the freedom to grow and organize within Syria.
So strong even that they had no problems to invade Iraq and even conquer a lot of territory within Iraq.
Iraq did formally request for military assistance in 2014 in the form of air support and many yazidis were saved from IS, but sadly many were also captured, killed or (especially young females) enslaved.

Syria requested military assistance from Russia back in August, Putin backs Assad while the rest rather see him go in order to establish the transition from fighting into negotiations and elections in Syria.

We should not forget is that IS has great support among muslims, if a US led coalition would have gone to Syria to end IS, it would have angered many muslims with attacks in western countries as a result.
We have seen it in France, the UK and the US.
Furthermore, IS is an ideology, we can not fight nor defeat an ideology through war.
It is not only IS but also boko haram, al qaeda, taliban, al nusra and so on.

This is why the answer must come from the islamic community, is this what we see in the islamic state (IS) true islam? than we should not interfere and muslims should go back to the middle east to live according to islam as it is meant to be.
If not? then muslims should cut away the branches within islam that produce these extremist groups in order to free their religion from this devastating ideology.

If we speak out against it as non muslims, the only result we accomplish is anger which results in attacks against us.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 11:41 PM
What is happening in Iraq and Syria right now is positioning for post ISIS. ISIS has been in retreat for sometime and losing territory daily in particularly in Iraq where they are being hit on multiple fronts. The beef between the Turkish backed Kurds and Iraq is who's forces are going to Mosul from ISIS first. As a military force ISIS is falling apart. So what you will see ISIS become s a terrorist organization, unable to fight a conventional war they will go back to IEDs, suicide bombings, terror attacks etc.

Sending outside forces into that mess would be dumb. With so many factions and the multi dimensions to the conflict you would just make things worse. Like those people who joined the Iraqi Kurds for fight ISIS now are likely to end up fighting Iraqis and Turkish Kurds as well.

As ISIS continues to see defeat after defeat all the factions in the area will begin plotting and planning for the time ISIS is dead and moving enact those plans.

new topics

top topics


log in