Posted on Sep 19, 2014
President Obama moves to counter ISIS with free Syrian Army
9.3K
169
83
5
5
0
Just last week, President Barack Obama made an announcement on expanding the military campaign against ISIS, the Islamic State extremist group. About 40 countries have already agreed to provide military support to the U.S. in this campaign in Iraq and Syria. He hasn’t named the countries yet. Obama has stressed he is not looking to put troops on the ground. Our soldiers in Iraq will soon amass to 1,600, but were not sent to fight. Announcements will continue into the next week in New York at the United Nations General Assembly.
We will see how other countries’ support will move the military campaign forward. What’s concerning as the president moves forward with announcements is the divide between him and some lawmakers and military leaders.
The Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, says he might eventually recommend deploying ground troops in Syria if airstrikes were not sufficient to defeat the Islamic State extremists. But Obama clearly does not want to deploy combat troops. General Dempsey may have been talking about a possible contingency plan and some leaders may think the U.S. needs to be more aggressive with strategy, but the lack of alignment is an issue. Obama seems to be focusing on avoiding putting troops on the ground, and some are concerned the focus on eliminating the enemy isn’t strong enough.
Recently, the Senate authorized arming and training Syrian rebels to combat the Islamic State group. Obama says the vote shows the country is united in fighting ISIS and Americans don’t give in to fear.
No one can deny our country being united on fighting terrorism, but the president and some leaders still don’t quite see eye to eye on how to destroy our enemies. Obama says U.S. airstrikes against Islamic State targets will continue, but he stands strong at not allowing U.S. troops to have a combat role on the ground in Iraq or Syria.
Before the vote, the proposal faced two points of criticism. One was concerns with arming a group whose loyalties are uncertain. It could add to the conflict. Two was the group may not be aggressive enough to counter ISIS. Plus, the public in general is skeptical and afraid of another long conflict in the Middle East.
What do you expect to come from the recent approval? Will training and equipping the Free Syrian Army be an aggressive enough strategy? How can the president, lawmakers, and military leaders move forward and become aligned?
We will see how other countries’ support will move the military campaign forward. What’s concerning as the president moves forward with announcements is the divide between him and some lawmakers and military leaders.
The Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, says he might eventually recommend deploying ground troops in Syria if airstrikes were not sufficient to defeat the Islamic State extremists. But Obama clearly does not want to deploy combat troops. General Dempsey may have been talking about a possible contingency plan and some leaders may think the U.S. needs to be more aggressive with strategy, but the lack of alignment is an issue. Obama seems to be focusing on avoiding putting troops on the ground, and some are concerned the focus on eliminating the enemy isn’t strong enough.
Recently, the Senate authorized arming and training Syrian rebels to combat the Islamic State group. Obama says the vote shows the country is united in fighting ISIS and Americans don’t give in to fear.
No one can deny our country being united on fighting terrorism, but the president and some leaders still don’t quite see eye to eye on how to destroy our enemies. Obama says U.S. airstrikes against Islamic State targets will continue, but he stands strong at not allowing U.S. troops to have a combat role on the ground in Iraq or Syria.
Before the vote, the proposal faced two points of criticism. One was concerns with arming a group whose loyalties are uncertain. It could add to the conflict. Two was the group may not be aggressive enough to counter ISIS. Plus, the public in general is skeptical and afraid of another long conflict in the Middle East.
What do you expect to come from the recent approval? Will training and equipping the Free Syrian Army be an aggressive enough strategy? How can the president, lawmakers, and military leaders move forward and become aligned?
ISIS
Barack Obama
Command Post
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 21
9
9
0
ISIS; What's In A Name?
They aren't new, they have gone by various names over the past decade plus. Very few people heard of that acronym until a few months ago. We have heard of AQI, IS, ISIL, et als......and those are just some of our names. They go by many other names that are started by one faction and then when that leader gets killed, it gets rolled up into a different faction with different goals. The common goal is that it is awesome to kill anyone who doesn't think like they do, and anyone who believes something different than they do. When Americans and other infidels are present, they have a common enemy. When infidels are not obvious, they inflict their insanity on their own kind. These are the kinds of people that God wanted stomped out in the Old Testament.
Lets talk finances........
In mid-2014, Iraqi intelligence extracted information from an ISIS operative which revealed that the organization had assets worth US$2 billion,making it the richest jihadist group in the world. About three quarters of this sum is said to be represented by assets seized after the group captured Mosul in June 2014; this includes possibly up to US$429 million looted from Mosul's central bank, along with additional millions and a large quantity of gold bullion stolen from a number of other banks in Mosul. However, doubt was later cast on whether ISIS was able to retrieve anywhere near that sum from the central bank,and even on whether the bank robberies had actually occurred. "Show Me The Money!!!"
We are now raising a coalition to destroy ISIS. How do we determine victory when we have been down this road once or twice before? Do we just kill anyone who hides their face like the true cowards that they are? I understand that 100 militants peeking through a slit in their covered faces holding RPG's and RPK's, PKM's, AK's, and cruising around in Bongo trucks is a tasty target for a drone, but sooner or later, the spooky face wraps aregoing to be around their necks and the AK's will be under the floor mats in the "neighbors" hut. Is that a victory? When it is no longer cool to be called ISIS and the mentality remains the same, do they just change the name 4 years later? I didn't study Middle East political affairs so I learn my names and get my theories from the media. The uncorruptable, unbiased, uninfluenced media. I wore a uniform with pride and did everything my country asked of me. I'd put it right back on if they would let me and join the coalition. As a veteran, who is allowed to engage in free speech, I only ask the question of how we will determine victory this time?.?. Just because someone tells me that combat operations are over, that doesn't mean that we accomplished the mission. In no way do I mean this rant to be construed as not engaging in a course of action. These insane people are the bain of humanity. They are incredibly funded, battle hardened, and threaten all humanity, not just American interests. We get spooled up by the media into wanting to "Kill Em All!' and then the same media shows the "Attrocities" of military intervention and leaders are pressured into having scapegoats (and no, I won't go into specifics). Again, for the clarification of my own ignorant ass, what will we do differently THIS time? I wish I was in military intellignce or studied political science. I am of typical intellect of those who must fight in my stead. God help us all.
They aren't new, they have gone by various names over the past decade plus. Very few people heard of that acronym until a few months ago. We have heard of AQI, IS, ISIL, et als......and those are just some of our names. They go by many other names that are started by one faction and then when that leader gets killed, it gets rolled up into a different faction with different goals. The common goal is that it is awesome to kill anyone who doesn't think like they do, and anyone who believes something different than they do. When Americans and other infidels are present, they have a common enemy. When infidels are not obvious, they inflict their insanity on their own kind. These are the kinds of people that God wanted stomped out in the Old Testament.
Lets talk finances........
In mid-2014, Iraqi intelligence extracted information from an ISIS operative which revealed that the organization had assets worth US$2 billion,making it the richest jihadist group in the world. About three quarters of this sum is said to be represented by assets seized after the group captured Mosul in June 2014; this includes possibly up to US$429 million looted from Mosul's central bank, along with additional millions and a large quantity of gold bullion stolen from a number of other banks in Mosul. However, doubt was later cast on whether ISIS was able to retrieve anywhere near that sum from the central bank,and even on whether the bank robberies had actually occurred. "Show Me The Money!!!"
We are now raising a coalition to destroy ISIS. How do we determine victory when we have been down this road once or twice before? Do we just kill anyone who hides their face like the true cowards that they are? I understand that 100 militants peeking through a slit in their covered faces holding RPG's and RPK's, PKM's, AK's, and cruising around in Bongo trucks is a tasty target for a drone, but sooner or later, the spooky face wraps aregoing to be around their necks and the AK's will be under the floor mats in the "neighbors" hut. Is that a victory? When it is no longer cool to be called ISIS and the mentality remains the same, do they just change the name 4 years later? I didn't study Middle East political affairs so I learn my names and get my theories from the media. The uncorruptable, unbiased, uninfluenced media. I wore a uniform with pride and did everything my country asked of me. I'd put it right back on if they would let me and join the coalition. As a veteran, who is allowed to engage in free speech, I only ask the question of how we will determine victory this time?.?. Just because someone tells me that combat operations are over, that doesn't mean that we accomplished the mission. In no way do I mean this rant to be construed as not engaging in a course of action. These insane people are the bain of humanity. They are incredibly funded, battle hardened, and threaten all humanity, not just American interests. We get spooled up by the media into wanting to "Kill Em All!' and then the same media shows the "Attrocities" of military intervention and leaders are pressured into having scapegoats (and no, I won't go into specifics). Again, for the clarification of my own ignorant ass, what will we do differently THIS time? I wish I was in military intellignce or studied political science. I am of typical intellect of those who must fight in my stead. God help us all.
(9)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
MSG Kent Holmes, it'll be interesting to see how those progress and the impact it has on Assad's hold in Syria...
V/R
SGT Mullet
V/R
SGT Mullet
(1)
(0)
SSG Jacob Wiley
SFC Mark Merino Very, very well written. I quoted you and shared else where. Wish there was more people choosing to live without their heads in the sand.
(0)
(0)
SFC Mark Merino
SSG Jacob Wiley You just stay safe, hero. If my time in the 101st taught me anything, it's that they don't know what dwell time is. God bless our military past, present, and future.
(2)
(0)
SGT Mark Sullivan
Isis was worshipped as the ideal mother and wife as well as the patroness of nature and magic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isis
Isis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Isis (/ˈaɪsɪs/; AncientGreek: Ἶσις IPA:[îː.sis]; original Egyptian pronunciation more likely "Aset" or "Iset"[1]) is a goddess from the polytheistic pantheon of Egypt. She was first worshiped in Ancient Egyptian religion, and later her worship spread throughout the Roman empire and the greater Greco-Roman world. Isis is still widely worshiped by many pagans today in diverse religious contexts; including a number of distinct pagan religions,...
(0)
(0)
8
8
0
PEOPLE IM NOT A MILITARY TACTICIAN IM A HIGH SCHOOL DROP OUT WITH SOME COLLEGE BUT I THINK IN MY HUMBLE UNEDUCATED SELF THAT WE THE UNITED STATES MILITARY OUGHT TO HIT ISIS JUST LIKE THE MARINES AND ARMY DID IN THE PACIFIC AND AT NORMANDY IN WORLD WAR 2 ASSAULT FROM THE DESERT BY TANKS AND AIRBORNE AND REGULAR INFANTRY EVERYTHING IN FRONT OF US WE KILL AND MAKE A PARKING LOT OUT OF IT SO WE NEED BOOTS ON GROUND AND TAKE THE GLOVES OFF...
(8)
(0)
SGT Steve Oakes
"It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it." Gen. Robert E. Lee. We have forgotten this basic truth. We strive to completely avoid collateral damage, so we pass up targets we should hammer. Our politicians worry more about the political fallout of a course of action. Instead of it tactical necessity. We bind the hands of our Generals and field commandeers, then blame them for not getting the job done. Others here have said it and I agree. If we are to wage war. We need to wage war in all its terrible, bloody, horrific splendor. Those who would harm us need a reminder of what this country is capable of!
(0)
(0)
SSG Maurice P.
MAJ Young you hit the nail on the head (we our leadership civillian mostly and military dont wont to win)the terrorists want not only to win
he wants to kill you what doesnt the leadership understand...
he wants to kill you what doesnt the leadership understand...
(0)
(0)
SGT Mark Sullivan
What we have in DC is not leadership, it's cut and run, it's the popular kids in school on steroids. The leaders from our recent past, The Pattons, The Nimitz's, The Halsey's, the Wainright's, the Bradley's, The Burkes. All understood what needs to be done, those are the leaders that lived the True Spartan Life and Warriors Creed. They knew to give our enemies such an ass kicking they would lose their taste for battle. Such as Leonidas did, ironically, to the Persians at Thermopylae.
(1)
(0)
SSG Maurice P.
Thank you SGT SULLIVAN for mentioning majgen wainright HE WAS A TRUE BONAFIDE WARRIOR......
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
Just unleash Mad Dog Mattis and lets do this right. We had Marshal Law 2003-2006 in that shit hole and unleashed the hounds of hell. The streets got real quite real fast. I know I witnessed it first hand. These pansy ass Americans we fight for need a reminder of how this great nation became a super power in the first place. And these cowards we have been fighting the last 13 years have been exploiting our weakness (known as the liberal party).
I do not want to go to any more memorial services over a weak government who will not let us do what we are trained to do.
That is all.
I do not want to go to any more memorial services over a weak government who will not let us do what we are trained to do.
That is all.
(6)
(0)
5
5
0
Arming a group of rebels to do our fighting for us...Sounds like a sure-fire plan. This policy has NEVER bitten us in the ass before.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
Go to 26:10 in the below video. Congressman Duncan Hunter sums it up and explains why arming the Free Syrian Army is a bad idea.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/17/politics/pelosi-isis-congress/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/17/politics/pelosi-isis-congress/index.html
House approves plan to assist Syrian rebels - CNNPolitics.com
The House on Wednesday approved President Obama's request to arm and train Syrian rebels in the fight against ISIS.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
Didn't the U.S. train Sadam Husein an Osama Bin Laden? That didn't end well.
(5)
(0)
MSG John Wirts
Yes the U.S. did train Osama Ben Laden and the Mushahadeen, and armed them with the latest anti-aircraft missiles.
(2)
(0)
SSG Charles Coats
Yes, then, just as with all operations concerning the MIC, when he no longer was useful to that group, he became the newest boogeyman...
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
Too little too late. Additionally, no troops on the ground just means no troops on the ground yet.
(5)
(0)
A1C Tamir Robinson
The LT gets it. Contrary to what the ruling class would like everyone to believe, this continued war effort will have bipartisan support. Obama is not the driving force behind this, the plan for war in Syria and Iran was written long before he even took office. Of course, he will continue to follow this path of destruction.
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
MAJ Keith Young
I think recent history shows us that when the 'takers' are unhappy they riot in their own neighborhoods...even a dog knows not to poop where you eat?
Of course your comment remind me of the satire of Juvena
'Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions — everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things: bread and circuses'
I think we are now a culture of bread and circuses. On a happy note, it still took another 300 years for Rome to collapse in upon itself?
I think recent history shows us that when the 'takers' are unhappy they riot in their own neighborhoods...even a dog knows not to poop where you eat?
Of course your comment remind me of the satire of Juvena
'Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions — everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things: bread and circuses'
I think we are now a culture of bread and circuses. On a happy note, it still took another 300 years for Rome to collapse in upon itself?
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
Arming middle-eastern groups has a fantastic record of going well for the US down the road....the arms always seem to either end up in the hands of extremists or we end up fighting the group we just armed.
(4)
(0)
Capt Chris McVeigh
MAJ Keith Young I would disagree on the third party comment. I think additional electable parties would improve the current political climate we have. Right now it is so much about toeing the party line that very little gets done and no compromises are made (see the ridiculousness of being unable to even pass a budget). I could see a multi-party system improving this a great deal.
(1)
(0)
Capt Chris McVeigh
There are points on both sides sir, I just think it would be interesting to see what would happen and how our political system would adjust. I see it more like competition vs a monopoly. Monopolies are never good for the consumer, so why wouldn't political diversity be better for the voters? But that's just my personal thinking, nothing really to do with the article.
(0)
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
We have diversity. The Left serves as a gadfly to keep the GOP in check; however, their policies suck. So it's not good to have too many of them actually governing. The Left today is not the same Left that we had when JFK was President. Today's Left would be the Far Left fringe back then. Back then we actually had Left and Right that were more centrist instead of so polarized.
Look what happens when today's Left has the Executive AND both House and Chamber in the Legislative Branch... They stack the Judicial Branch with justices that have Progressive/Socialist/LGBT/minority agendas and whose interpretation of the Constitution comes from a Social Justice perspective. Unfortunately, we see time and time again where those seeking Social Justice exempt themselves from legislation, apply double standards to others, and trample on others' rights to get it. Ruth Bader Ginsberg (appointed by Clinton) believes our Constitution is outdated and in need of revision. HOW can she do her job interpreting our Constitution if she doesn't even believe in it?!!! We are one Supreme Court justice away from having a Socialist majority on the bench.
The Left is so far Left that it makes the Right look further Right, but everything has shifted Left and with exception of a few todays right is more center than people give it credit for. The RINO's in the Republican Party would be considered Left Wing a few decades ago. We actually have Republicans voting with Democrats on Gun Control, which ANY Conservative who knows the Constitution would be aghast at the suggestion that We The People allow the government to disarm us. That is our last defense against government tyranny.
The Left is Far Left. The Democratic Party has been hijacked by Progressive Socialists. The GOP is split with GOP Progressives (like Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain) voting Left of Center to Center and the Tea Party GOP (like Senators Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and Congressmen Louie Gohmert and Trey Gowdy) voting Center to Right of Center.
Given that our country is so financially strapped, I honestly believe that the ONLY solutions that are going to work will necessarily come from the GOP or a 3rd Party. The Democrats simply can't control their spending nor can they stop pandering to minority interests trying to import more people of color to stack the country with voters who support them. If their ideas were good and benefitted ALL Americans, they wouldn't need to do that.
Look what happens when today's Left has the Executive AND both House and Chamber in the Legislative Branch... They stack the Judicial Branch with justices that have Progressive/Socialist/LGBT/minority agendas and whose interpretation of the Constitution comes from a Social Justice perspective. Unfortunately, we see time and time again where those seeking Social Justice exempt themselves from legislation, apply double standards to others, and trample on others' rights to get it. Ruth Bader Ginsberg (appointed by Clinton) believes our Constitution is outdated and in need of revision. HOW can she do her job interpreting our Constitution if she doesn't even believe in it?!!! We are one Supreme Court justice away from having a Socialist majority on the bench.
The Left is so far Left that it makes the Right look further Right, but everything has shifted Left and with exception of a few todays right is more center than people give it credit for. The RINO's in the Republican Party would be considered Left Wing a few decades ago. We actually have Republicans voting with Democrats on Gun Control, which ANY Conservative who knows the Constitution would be aghast at the suggestion that We The People allow the government to disarm us. That is our last defense against government tyranny.
The Left is Far Left. The Democratic Party has been hijacked by Progressive Socialists. The GOP is split with GOP Progressives (like Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain) voting Left of Center to Center and the Tea Party GOP (like Senators Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and Congressmen Louie Gohmert and Trey Gowdy) voting Center to Right of Center.
Given that our country is so financially strapped, I honestly believe that the ONLY solutions that are going to work will necessarily come from the GOP or a 3rd Party. The Democrats simply can't control their spending nor can they stop pandering to minority interests trying to import more people of color to stack the country with voters who support them. If their ideas were good and benefitted ALL Americans, they wouldn't need to do that.
(0)
(0)
Capt Chris McVeigh
Good lord, are you incapable of making a comment that is not politically biased or outright insulting? You post in every thread and every single comment has exactly the same message. Seriously, if you don't have anything new or useful to contribute to this community please leave. I'm not even going to go into how much of your comment is completely wrong, please stop polluting what is supposed to be a semi-professional forum.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Maybe it's time to just side with Assad and let him deal with ISIS and the rebels. If we help with the rebels they would eventually turn on us. With Assad at least we know where we stand with his regime.
(3)
(0)
CPT Ahmed Faried
but you see that is not politically viable. Even though on face value it'd be the move to make. We have already declared Assad our enemy and that is that.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google