Althouse: "We will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are."

September 10, 2014

"We will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are."

Thank you, George Bush. I mean, Barack Obama.

92 comments:

PB said...: He's just following the playbook as set out for him after being read the riot act by the joint chiefs. Now Congress needs to make sure that whatever funds aren't subject to the usual democrat, community organizing, green energy vigorish.; 9/10/14, 9:12 PM
Malesch Morocco said...: Isn't there an Obama equals Bush tag?; 9/10/14, 9:13 PM
wildswan said...: He won't really do anything. Except make this speech and then back to golf and parties.; 9/10/14, 9:14 PM
Matt said...: He has a cunning plan to bomb the enemies of the people he wanted to bomb last year in Syria.

But no worries, I'm sure that those "moderate" Syrian rebels who were so happy to sell a reporter to ISIS wouldn't be willing to sell them weapons we give them.; 9/10/14, 9:18 PM
Hagar said...: America can treat Ebola!
So, but what does this have to do with fighting Islamic extremism?

He will use the same strategies that he has so successfully used in Yemen and Somalia? WTF???; 9/10/14, 9:18 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Have to do the tags in the morning. Working on the iPad now.; 9/10/14, 9:19 PM
The Godfather said...: Why does he keep calling it ISIL? The press universally calls it ISIS (or the Islamic State, but I understand why he doesn't call it that).; 9/10/14, 9:20 PM
traditionalguy said...: Obama called the Islamic State ISIL like they do. Why most people are stuck on stupid calling it ISIS is a mystery.

Maybe the media doesn't want to acknowledge that ISIL intends to conquer The Levant and is only temporarily using Eastern Syria and Western Iraq as a base to build its oil wealth strength for an attack to conquer the Mediterranean coastal lands from Turkey around to Morocco.

Isis is an old Egyptian goddess. But the Islamic State in the Levant is the claimant to lands and shoreline centered on Israel.

Interestingly enough massive oil and natural gas fields have recently been discovered off the Mediterranean coast located on the Israeli offshore land.; 9/10/14, 9:21 PM
FullMoon said...: "You tell 'em I'm comin' and Hells comin with me, YOU HEAR?HELLS COMIN' WITH ME!!" cut to fast horses, dramatic music, and guns 'a blazin'.
oh wait, that was kurt russell as wyatt earp.

Obama, not so much; 9/10/14, 9:25 PM
Lewis Wetzel said...: This Obama guy is a lousy president. It's like he thinks he is president of some fantasy-football country or something.; 9/10/14, 9:27 PM
President-Mom-Jeans said...: ISIL is not islamic. Barry Three Putt says so.

I know I feel safe.; 9/10/14, 9:32 PM
madAsHell said...: Whoa....the office forces Barry into uncharted territory. He is suddenly seeing the challenges that Bush faced.

I'm sure that he is shittin' his pants right now.; 9/10/14, 9:41 PM
sakredkow said...: Thank you, George Bush. I mean, Barack Obama.

At least Obama has a chance of hunting the terrorists down in the country where they actually are.; 9/10/14, 9:42 PM
Drago said...: phx: "At least Obama has a chance of hunting the terrorists down in the country where they actually are."

LOL

Incoherent.

In how many countries do you think islamist terrorists were hunted down during the Bush Administration?

Or is this another rhetorical sleight of hand where you on the left pretend that obama is the big bad killer of terrorists single handedly whacking them left and right with a blade in his teeth?

Too funny listening to the left try to reconcile obama's complete, utter reversal of all his policies related to Bush/Terror.

Of course, all the lefty spin here in the states doesn't change the one most important fact of all: no one in the world trusts obama or believes him.

Given his performance to date, why would/should they?; 9/10/14, 9:45 PM
sakredkow said...: Isis is an old Egyptian goddess.

And why spoil the name of a perfectly good Egyptian goddess?; 9/10/14, 9:45 PM
Presley Bennett said...: That statement's not really news. Obama's had drones flying around taking out terrorists since he got into office and he's had special forces doing missions and tracking and targeting and doing whatever. So in this way his plan is just more of the same. He is incapable of making any significant adjustments. He doesn't have the temperament for it and I don't think he's got that kind of team around him.; 9/10/14, 9:46 PM
Seeing Red said...: iSIL is a terrorist organization with no vision???

bWAaaaaaaaaaa

Vodkapundit has some awesome tweets.

We r going hunt them down in the USA, fortunately, republicans have been declared terrorists so the country will be safe soon.....; 9/10/14, 9:48 PM
Revenant said...: The US government is more of a threat to the United States than ISIS is.; 9/10/14, 9:49 PM
Mark Nielsen said...: Great thread title over at Ace of Spades tonight: "Obama Just Called the 80s And Asked to Borrow Its Foreign Policy for a Couple of Months".; 9/10/14, 9:50 PM
rcocean said...: Yawn. We will hunt them down, but if they lay low and later wish to come to the USA, we'll welcome them.

Yah! Open borders!; 9/10/14, 9:51 PM
Seeing Red said...: Was it this blog which made the point hunt down with what?

Armed Forces & materiel are being gutted.

We aren't ordering new replacements.; 9/10/14, 9:55 PM
The Godfather said...: He said that the Islamic State is not Islamic because no religion condones the killing of innocents. I guess 9/11 was the work of the atheist church from an earlier post?

Holy moley! Did this bozo learn nothing from Rev. Wright, his spiritual mentor? The Old Testament Jews slaughtered the Canaanites right and left, and when God learned that they'd left somebody alive, he was really P-Oed. Judaism isn't (wasn't) a religion?

Has he never heard of Christianity? The Muslims and Jews that the Crusaders killed? The Orthodox Christians they killed in Constantinople? Has he heard of the Thirty Years War? Bloody Mary the queen of England?

I'm a Christian and a fan of Christianity, but if I ever tell you that Christians have never killed innocent people, come and put me in the room with rubber walls.

AND Christians are pussy cats compared to other religions -- I'm not naming names.; 9/10/14, 9:59 PM
wendybar said...: wildswan said...
He won't really do anything. Except make this speech and then back to golf and parties.

Took the words right out of my mouth!!! Yawn...same old, same old; 9/10/14, 10:00 PM
Revenant said...: Armed Forces & materiel are being gutted.

Yeah, now we're only spending twice as much as all of our enemies put together. However will we survive.; 9/10/14, 10:01 PM
Seeing Red said...: Walking around money.; 9/10/14, 10:12 PM
traditionalguy said...: The middle-east is Muslim and proud of it. Muhammed's little revelation was all for military conquest, robbery and murder. And the moment the Muslims get a whiff again that they can join up with the stronger horse Caliph, they will all arise and re-start the conquest, the robbery and killing those not worth enslaving.

The Europeans/British Empire got the better weapons and defeated the last Caliph. And all went dormant among the Arabs.

The Israelis got nukes and are safe for now until Obama and Jarrett finish leveling the killing fields for their beloved Iranian Mullahs by maneuvering them into full nuclear armaments.

But ISIL is going for the prize and will not stop as long as Obama is President any more than the Iranians stopped while Carter was President.; 9/10/14, 10:19 PM
Alexander said...: Islam prohibits the killing on innocents. Of course, what's unspoken those who refuse to submit to Allah and the law given to us by way of his prophet Mohammad (peace unto him!) are by definition guilty.

It's not enough to claim the other guy follows the law when his law and your law aren't the same thing.; 9/10/14, 10:20 PM
Michael K said...: "Yeah, now we're only spending twice as much as all of our enemies put together. However will we survive."

Yeah, on Vietnam pensions.

Maybe we will survive.; 9/10/14, 10:25 PM
David said...: Hear President Obama on August 31, 2013, just over year ago:

Now, after careful deliberation, I have decided that the United States should take military action against Syrian regime targets. This would not be an open-ended intervention. We would not put boots on the ground. Instead, our action would be designed to be limited in duration and scope. But I’m confident we can hold the Assad regime accountable for their use of chemical weapons, deter this kind of behavior, and degrade their capacity to carry it out.

Our military has positioned assets in the region. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs has informed me that we are prepared to strike whenever we choose. Moreover, the Chairman has indicated to me that our capacity to execute this mission is not time-sensitive; it will be effective tomorrow, or next week, or one month from now. And I’m prepared to give that order.

But having made my decision as Commander-in-Chief based on what I am convinced is our national security interests, I’m also mindful that I’m the President of the world’s oldest constitutional democracy. I’ve long believed that our power is rooted not just in our military might, but in our example as a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. And that’s why I’ve made a second decision: I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people’s representatives in Congress.

As he knew would be the case, the debate never happened and nothing was done. Obama, who in summer of 2011 had called on Assad to resign, also failed to give any meaningful support to any of the forces opposing Assad. He formed no coalition, gave no further speech to the American people on the topic, and let American drift with no goal and no strategy.

ISIS is a product of that indecision and other factors, one of which is the absence of a credible US military force in the region. We had such a force, but negotiated poorly with Iraq and removed it. A small, powerful and mobile US ground force in Iraq could have been a decisive counter to ISIS, and could also have assisted in Iraq's own forces to retain a fighting spirit.

Having refused to act earlier, Obama now says he must act (without any action by Congress and probably against his true instincts). But now the task is much more difficult militarily. More importantly, most of the players in this arena, allies and foes alike, now seriously doubt Obama's resolve in carrying out any policy that involves sustained and effective use of force. Friends and foes are going to test that resolve. The foes are further probably willing to test whether the force we do bring to bear is enough to be effective. Can or will we do enough by air alone to neutralize ISIS? Will ISIS hunker down and disperse temporarily or will they try to continue to advance? Have our military clearly defined the force needed? Will Obama use enough force to prevail?

The speech is over. Not a memorable speech, but one way or another its consequences will be memorable. The next few months will tell us what these words actually meant.; 9/10/14, 10:28 PM
Titus said...: Can u turds never rely on other pube sites for your talking points?

Perhaps a voice of your own?

You dumb old white fucks.

tits.; 9/10/14, 10:30 PM
chillblaine said...: So let me get this straight. There are moderate Syrian forces that will train in Saudi Arabia, then go fight against IS. These 'moderates' and I.S. both oppose the Syrian regime, which is an Iran proxy. So, Iran and Saudi Arabia are suddenly on the same side? And Kerry is going to kite-surf around to all these Arab countries and try and sell this? Ok, if you say so...; 9/10/14, 10:30 PM
Joe said...: “We will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are,...”

'By which I mean; we won't actually hunt them. Rather we will taunt them and pound our chests in indignation.'; 9/10/14, 10:33 PM
khesanh0802 said...: This is not anything terribly new or aggressive. It is the absolute minimum required to keep IS from taking all of Iraq and more. The air strikes Obama talked about are ones that many here recognized weeks ago were necessary if we wanted to slow IS down. Do I really want to see people training in Saudi? The Saudis are major funders for Islamic fundamentalists. I don't trust them. What I'd prefer would be to see the Saudis commit to use of their air force in this campaign. I suspect that would spark a revolt, though.

If I read things correctly we are sending two division headquarters to Iraq. What are they going to do without the necessary troops to implement their plans? Our commitment is going to escalate whether Obama admits/likes it or not. An increased air campaign is going to require increased logistical support on the ground somewhere. Carriers can not run operations continually for an extended period. We will need land bases for resupply and repair as well as pilot rescue/medevac etc., etc. Maybe we can use Saudi for the basing requirements, but it will require personnel to fulfill the operational and security requirements.

Reality is going to rear its ugly head very quickly.

I did not watch the speech, but the still photos I have seen don't make Obama look like he is having fun.; 9/10/14, 10:52 PM
RecChief said...: like they went after the perpetrators of Benghazi?; 9/10/14, 10:56 PM
RecChief said...: I thought he said (ad nauseum) that the war in Iraq was over. He said it over and over. Now it's not? And he wants a surge? I thought it was Republicans who want to take us back in time? You mean it's 2007 all over again?; 9/10/14, 10:58 PM
Revenant said...: Maybe we will survive.

There was no point in our history when we were less threatened, militarily, than we are now.

No country can attack us without being annihilated, and no country that wishes to attack us is capable of destroying us.

The biggest threat we face is bankruptcy. Good luck paying for *any* kind of real military twenty years from now when half the money's going to interest payments and the other half's going to Baby Boomer Medicare.; 9/10/14, 11:09 PM
Seeing Red said...: Can't forget the promise he made to the West Point graduating class, either, but as Insty says, promises have expiration dates.; 9/10/14, 11:10 PM
Anonymous said...: At this point, why does anyone care what King Putt has to say?

Does anyone actually believe him?

If you do, you seriously need to get some help. There is just too much evidence that believing him is a foolish thing to do.; 9/10/14, 11:11 PM
chillblaine said...: "There was no point in our history when we were less threatened, militarily, than we are now."

An ICBM can travel to its destination in minutes. Our geographic blessings (Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, friendly neighbors) are no longer impediments to our enemies.; 9/10/14, 11:18 PM
khesanh0802 said...: Here's an interesting take on what our "air campaign" will be doing.; 9/10/14, 11:20 PM
cubanbob said...: "We will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are".

Now you know the excuse that Holder will use to pardon Lois Lerner. TEA Partiers beware, he has a different concept and definition of terrorism and terrorists.; 9/10/14, 11:24 PM
Lewis Wetzel said...: Revenant wrote:
"No country can attack us without being annihilated, and no country that wishes to attack us is capable of destroying us."
That's why "countries" with "armies" aren't attacking us, you dufus. And I mean dufus in the nicest way possible.; 9/10/14, 11:24 PM
Drago said...: Titus, when he has nothing left: "Perhaps a voice of your own?

You dumb old white fucks."

LOL

Thanks for your brilliant geopolitical insight Titus. It's precisely what we've come to expect from you.

You'd be better off and on sounder ground if you just go back to talking about Lena Dunham's deep deep deep deep super deep belief in science.

Not deep enough belief to actually have studied or learned any of course.; 9/10/14, 11:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Don't know what he is talking about. Terrorism was a figment of Cheney's imagination. Obama sees Man-caused-disasters, and domestic terrorists, aka Tea Partiers, and registered gun owners.

Is he going to hunt down Tea Partiers and registered gun owners?

Malesch Morocco said...
Isn't there an Obama equals Bush tag?

It is offensive to equate Obama with Bush. Bush believed in what he was doing. At least he supported our troops he sent to war. Obama doesn't know what the f*ck he is doing, and he purged our officers in the battlefield for his own political gains.

Bush fully supported troop surge in Iraq to get the job done. Obama sent 1/3 of the troops required to Afghanistan to make sure he would not offense his base.; 9/10/14, 11:31 PM
cubanbob said...: khesanh0802 said...
Here's an interesting take on what our "air campaign" will be doing."

That's been obvious from the jump. An intelligent president like Nixon would have done the same but with a twist, he would have armed the Kurds to the teeth not only in Iraq but in Syria and Iran as well. Would have kept the Mullahs busy and not so troublesome for a long time. Unless the democrats got involved and mucked things up. Come to think of it Reagan tried doing something like that with Iran-Contra and the democrat communists mucked it up as well.; 9/10/14, 11:34 PM
Chef Mojo said...: Revenent said:

The biggest threat we face is bankruptcy.

True. But a big enough attack or series of attacks will trigger the gallows trap of bankruptcy. Look what they did to our economy 13 years ago by just knocking down two skyscrapers, part of another building and destroying four airliners at the cost of a few dozen of their people.

What if they get serious? While we have a far weaker economy and industrial base than we had in 2001?

They don't have to defeat us militarily to destroy us.; 9/10/14, 11:35 PM
James Pawlak said...: Whatever he spews out from his latrine mouth, he will do the least harm to Muslims as will prevent his removal from office on a charge of "Treason", about which please see Article-III, Section-3 of The Constitution.; 9/10/14, 11:39 PM
Lewis Wetzel said...: At the time the Soviet Union collapsed, it had enough nuclear works to knock the world back to the paleolithic, and put Russian tanks in Paris before the lights went out.
I hate it when I agree with Revenant.; 9/11/14, 12:09 AM
Carnifex said...: I jumped to Althouse to see what she had to say bout the "hyper=partisan" accusations being leveled against the John Doe prosecution, and instead I find comments on a bungler bungling.

As Michael Moore said, (and I rarely agree with MM) One hundred years from now, Obama will be known as the first black president only. I would add, that after this worst administration in history, he might be known as the first and only black president.; 9/11/14, 12:17 AM
Fen said...: "and let me be clear - once we capture them we will incarcerate them in Gitmo for a few months so they can regain their stamina before we release them back into the Middle East"; 9/11/14, 12:43 AM
Fen said...: "some say we should let them go on their own recognizance... others say we should jail them for all eternity...but I see a middle way where we let them go after maybe a few years. Perhaps sooner with good behaivor"; 9/11/14, 12:47 AM
Fen said...: "Today, we mourn the loss of a great American city. But let me be clear - that was not ISIS that attacked the homeland. Its was a weather balloon. Or swamp gas. Quite possibly both."; 9/11/14, 12:48 AM
Fen said...: "As we lay our fellow countrymen to rest, let us never forget - they don't hate us because of who we are, they hate us because Koch Brothers! Down with Goldstein! We will win! We will win! [climbs atop coffin] We will win!"; 9/11/14, 12:56 AM
holdfast said...: "We will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are".

And then what? Kill then? Kiss them? Appoint them as tenured faculty at the University of Illinois?

President Precious forgot the last part of that statement - or maybe he could not choke it out? Remember, this guy counts real, live terrorists like Bill Ayers and Khalidi among his personal friends.; 9/11/14, 1:21 AM
MisterBuddwing said...: I would add, that after this worst administration in history, he might be known as the first and only black president.

Funny how blacks bear that kind of racial burden ad infinitum - and whites don't.

Or, to put it another way - why is it blacks aren't allowed to fail at the same rate that whites do?

(I don't maintain that whites in America enjoy a privilege for being white. But I would suggest there are times when being white is pretty darn convenient.); 9/11/14, 1:21 AM
Bob said...: ISIL should screw with him by taking refuge on a golf course.; 9/11/14, 1:29 AM
Lewis Wetzel said...: "But I would suggest there are times when being white is pretty darn convenient."
Not being black is more convenient than being white.; 9/11/14, 2:08 AM
The Crack Emcee said...: Revenant,

"Yeah, now we're only spending twice as much as all of our enemies put together. However will we survive."

Damn it, I HATE to come here and someone's making sense,..; 9/11/14, 3:56 AM
The Crack Emcee said...: Revenant,

"The biggest threat we face is bankruptcy. Good luck paying for *any* kind of real military twenty years from now when half the money's going to interest payments and the other half's going to Baby Boomer Medicare."

Two in a row - very good, Revenant.

No, if we keep going as we have - white supremacy trying it's best to stifle our potential by maintaining itself - then, yes, we are doomed.

On the other hand, if we unleash what we have, then we are unstoppable.

I'm betting the white supremacists will settle for self-annialation.

For Jesus,..; 9/11/14, 4:00 AM
The Crack Emcee said...: cubanbob,

"Now you know the excuse that Holder will use to pardon Lois Lerner. TEA Partiers beware, he has a different concept and definition of terrorism and terrorists."

That's right - because he includes crazy right-wingers, who see enemies without, enemies within, enemies in the spirit world,...

Watch out, nutjobs,..; 9/11/14, 4:04 AM
The Crack Emcee said...: elkh1,

"Is he going to hunt down Tea Partiers and registered gun owners?"

Considering white history - blacks would cheer that,..; 9/11/14, 4:05 AM
The Crack Emcee said...: Carnifex ,

"As Michael Moore said, (and I rarely agree with MM) One hundred years from now, Obama will be known as the first black president only. I would add, that after this worst administration in history, he might be known as the first and only black president."

Yeah - because as the demographics of this country keep changing, the emphasis is going to stay on what whites think, right? Riiight.

The idea that whites, acting as racist obstructionists, won't be part of the story is estimated to be about ZIP. Your every move against blacks - no matter their station - will be included as part of the story. That's the new reality of white supremacy:

We know it for what it is.

Michael Moore doesn't see it because - yeah - he's white (as I always told you Democrats are, too). He can be disappointed. I don't think Eric "A nation of cowards" Holder cares. And neither will history:

Whites are America's losers for getting it all so wrong.

Just as I said, confidently, that George W. Bush will be looked upon kindly eventually, I know Barack Obama will be seen within the context of white's hostility - and almost nothing more. That's how big of a bunch of assholes you've been.

Watch - I was right once before, when Bush was hated, and I'll be right once again:

I'm not seduced by white media,..; 9/11/14, 4:17 AM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: "Yeah - because as the demographics of this country keep changing, the emphasis is going to stay on what whites think, right? Riiight"

I am sure that reparations for blacks will be high on the Latino agenda.; 9/11/14, 5:11 AM
Diogenes of Sinope said...: Code Pink, anti-war protesters, MSM anti-war coverage.....missing in action.; 9/11/14, 5:43 AM
Kelly said...: I didn't think it was a bad speech, but will he follow through? Obama is always talking about how cynical Washington is, he doesn't understand how cynical he has made so many of us. I think he'll follow through, I hope so anyway.; 9/11/14, 6:06 AM
lgv said...: We will do little, because that is all we can do without boots on the ground. We will continue the drone attacks and tally the dead like we are accomplishing something. Meanwhile ISIS will continue on with limited success.

I hope we don't try to help Syrian opposition. That ship has passed. It's too late. It had to be done years ago. And even if we had, it would not have ensured success.

Arm Kurdistan and let them take over as much of Iraq as possible. Then let Turkey annex part of Syria. Arm the Ukraine. Just some ideas to bandy about. Not very politically correct, liberal or neo-conny.; 9/11/14, 6:19 AM
Brando said...: Our Nobel-Prizewinner in Chief strikes again. What an absolute tool.

Here's the problem with his plan:

1) Is ISIS really a threat to the U.S.? If it is, how would that threat materialize? It's unlikely they would take over a chunk of the Middle East, build an ICBM and then launch it across the world at us. But perhaps they have associated terror cells around the world--even in the U.S.--that can launch attacks on us. If so, make that case--demonstrate why this is likely.

2) If that case is likely--that ISIS cells are an imminent (and not theoretical) threat to the U.S., then explain why dropping bombs on their fighters in Iraq and Syria would prevent those cells from hitting us here in the U.S.

3) If somehow you could explain (a) why ISIS is a credible, imminent threat to the U.S., and (b) why destroying them in the Mid-East would eliminate or reduce that threat, then please explain why limited air strikes and a few hundred troops to train Iraqis would be sufficient to do the job. Particularly considering, you genius of geniuses, the fact that you campaigned on the argument that ten years in Iraq with over a hundred thousand troops there did not achieve any results. We didn't build and train an effective Iraqi army after eleven years--why would a handful of American advisers do it now?

4) Please also explain how this jibes with your attempt to get us to go to war against Assad last year. Had we toppled Assad, would this not have made ISIS more powerful in the region? Is the mere fact that Assad claims to have gotten rid of his chemical weapons enough to have us indirectly support his regime by knocking out one of his enemies?

I get that ISIS is evil, and this is the main reason why so many Americans favor intervention now. But that doesn't solve the questions of whether this intervention is necessary to protect America, or whether the intervention would actually do that.

It's a lot to expect from a Cicero-reading constitutional law professor (who amazingly does not think he needs to go to Congress for this, even though he apparently did need to do so when he wanted to bomb Assad last year?).; 9/11/14, 6:23 AM
Brando said...: "Code Pink, anti-war protesters, MSM anti-war coverage.....missing in action."

The vast majority of them were never anti-war. They were just anti-Bush. They'll probably become anti-war again if a Republican gets into the White House.

Don't worry, we can trust Obama! He's a sensitive soul, a citizen of the world!; 9/11/14, 6:25 AM
Michael said...: Notwithstanding the assurance of our president, the I in ISIL stands for Islamic.

Again, you cannot beat what you cannot name.; 9/11/14, 6:55 AM
MayBee said...: Here's last night's video of Jay Carney vs John McCain.

It confirm's everyone's suspicion that Obama's tendency is to ignore things and hope they go away.

And this from NYT's Baghdad bureau chief confirms suspicion Obama thinks happy talk will smooth things over until they go away.; 9/11/14, 7:06 AM
Vet66 said...: It's kabuki theater. Iran backs Assad while Saudi Arabia backs the rebels. Obama needs to appease Iran to continue the nuclear dialogue. Obama owns Iraq now so most bombing will be Toyota Hilux pick-up trucks caught in the open and ill-advised gatherings under a palm tree near the gates of hell in the middle of nowhere. Another red line drawn in the shifting sands on the banks of the river Styx. No broad coalition in sight.; 9/11/14, 7:16 AM
khesanh0802 said...: Brando @0623

Excellent analysis. The more it is analyzed the more clear it will become that this is a poll driven strategy. Surprise!

No wonder he's not having fun!; 9/11/14, 7:21 AM
MayBee said...: If you pretend things are other than they are, then you can put focus on the things you want to focus on.
So, say there is an ISIS force building in the ME and children coming across our souther border. Those things are hard for everyday people to know about, so you don't talk about them and if you do, you insist things are fine. Then you can focus on things like raising the minimum wage. That's the fight you want, so you pretend it is the biggest thing going.

Then a crisis erupts on the border or in the ME. You get to treat it as a crisis and do a half-baked job responding because you pretend nobody saw it coming.

it's like hiring someone to put a sump pump in your basement before there's a problem. You are going to notice his shoddy work and insist he does a good job. You aren't going to pay him if he leaves the basement trashed and the pump not working well.

But if you wait until your basement is flooded, you have to hire someone to come pump out your basement. And you are happy for whatever it is he can do. If he can get the water down from 12" to 1", you are happy. If he punches holes in your drywall, you are happy because you are just grateful he did *something*.

That's how Obama works. No ounce of prevention for him.; 9/11/14, 7:32 AM
Tibore said...: "We will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are."

We'll even give up by leaving a place so that we'll know where they are!; 9/11/14, 7:41 AM
DanTheMan said...: "We will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are."

Sorry, Mr. President, but your actions speak so loudly I can't hear what you are saying.

Terrorists bombed the NYPD, the US Capitol, and the Pentagon. You hunted them down, and launched your campaign from their apartment.; 9/11/14, 7:57 AM
Anonymous said...: ISIL is not Islamic

----------------------

..and we will keep killing them until they convert.; 9/11/14, 8:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Obama's white half DNA must contain a lot of George B. McClellan genes.; 9/11/14, 8:12 AM
Peter said...: In the good ol' days of Bush 1, Iran and Iraq were fully involved fighting each other. And we had little to do other than bemoan the brutality of it all.

IF our CIA were truly clever, perhaps it could engineer something like this again?; 9/11/14, 8:29 AM
Drago said...: Blacks invented demographics.

And sweet and sour sauce.; 9/11/14, 8:31 AM
Rusty said...: Revenant said...
Armed Forces & materiel are being gutted.

Yeah, now we're only spending twice as much as all of our enemies put together. However will we survive.Revenant said...
Maybe we will survive.

There was no point in our history when we were less threatened, militarily, than we are now.

No country can attack us without being annihilated, and no country that wishes to attack us is capable of destroying us.

The biggest threat we face is bankruptcy. Good luck paying for *any* kind of real military twenty years from now when half the money's going to interest payments and the other half's going to Baby Boomer Medicare.

Which one of those things is our government constitutionally obligated to do.; 9/11/14, 8:36 AM
Rusty said...: Another red line drawn. To be equivocated and ignored.
An unserious small mined man in a seat of great power doing unserious and small minded things.; 9/11/14, 8:40 AM
Rusty said...: Titus said...
Can u turds never rely on other pube sites for your talking points?

Perhaps a voice of your own?

You dumb old white fucks.

tits.

You just stick to being FABULOUS! it's what your good at.; 9/11/14, 8:58 AM
Skeptical Voter said...: To paraphrase Outlaw Ned in True Grit:

"I call that bold talk from a skinny halfwit weakling."; 9/11/14, 9:53 AM
cubanbob said...: The Crack Emcee said...
cubanbob,

"Now you know the excuse that Holder will use to pardon Lois Lerner. TEA Partiers beware, he has a different concept and definition of terrorism and terrorists."

That's right - because he includes crazy right-wingers, who see enemies without, enemies within, enemies in the spirit world,...

Watch out, nutjobs,..

9/11/14, 4:04 AM"

I hundred on Holder getting pardoned as Obama walks out the door. Now speaking of hallucinations….; 9/11/14, 9:57 AM
Curious George said...: After watching Mr. Tough guy last night if I was a hostage I'd be prepared for the ole orange jump suit.; 9/11/14, 10:34 AM
lgv said...: Brando, nice work.

1) On point. That is the real threat.

2) and 3) destroying them would greatly reduce the threat but you accurately note that the current plan has no hope of destroying them.

4) We don't know what would have happened if we toppled Assad or if we had backed the moderates. No one does. Just like toppling Saddam. Assad has not gotten rid of all his chemical weapons.

Even if I believe that ISIS is a long term threat to us here in America, I'm not seeing an effective strategy coming out of anyone...yet.; 9/11/14, 10:59 AM
Kirk Parker said...: That's right, Crack.

None of us are unhappy about "I Won", or the disaster that is the PPACA, or premature and unwarranted drawdown of our military forces, the galloping megalomania exhibited by "We are the ones we've been waiting for" or "This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal".

Yep, we're totally cool with all that. If only Obama weren't half-black, he'd be getting same kind of adulation from whites that John Kerry is.; 9/11/14, 11:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Other than the fact that President Obama considers the only "terrorists" within his definition of that term to be his domestic political opponents, what's the problem?; 9/11/14, 12:26 PM
Brando said...: "Yep, we're totally cool with all that. If only Obama weren't half-black, he'd be getting same kind of adulation from whites that John Kerry is."

It's pretty widely agreed in mainstream society that one of the worst things you can accuse someone of is racism. Considering that, any accusation that a critic of the president is racist--whether that critic is being unfair or idiotic or is totally justified--that accusation has to be backed up with something. Not "this is a dog whistle, it means they hate black people". Not "I've never seen this sort of criticism made towards a white president". It has to be backed up with some evidence and reason that indicate that the critic is actually racist and there's no other explanation.

Otherwise, you're just creating a world where the president's race is a shield against criticism--which is a dangerous implication, as it means we can't have black presidents or else they cannot be restrained by a citizenry afraid of being considered racist. I would not want to live in that world, and anyone willing to accept that for short term partisan gain is an enabler of tyranny and should find some seedier country to move to, a nation of men, not laws.

Do some bigots despise Obama? I'm sure they do! I can't imagine anyone who hates black people to make an exception for one particular black man who happens to be president. But most people who despise the man do so out of politics, culture, or a visceral disgust for what he says and does--some of it fair, some of it not. But only an irresponsible fool would jump to an accusation of racism short of any real evidence of such.; 9/11/14, 12:54 PM
DanTheMan said...: In the future, everyone will be racist for 15 minutes.
Except Democrats.; 9/11/14, 1:14 PM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: Liberals are already providing Blacks "reparations" in the form of free abortions.; 9/11/14, 1:26 PM
Brando said...: Maybe in a weird way the Obama years will actually purge this country of racism. When everyone and everything (e.g., "microaggressions", "race matters", "nation of cowards") is considered racist, then nothing really is, and everyone can innoculate themselves from such accusations to the point where it really means nothing. Then we can get on to quaint notions like judging people for the content of their character.

Maybe Andrew Sullivan was right, and this Obama guy is playing three dimensional chess and it was his intention all along!

(Though in fairness to Sully he seems to be souring on Obama with this latest episode); 9/11/14, 1:41 PM