Obama meets with National Security Council at the Pentagon.

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 13:29:52 -0500

POTUS has a rare meeting with his National Security Council at the Pentagon. Following the meeting in POTUS' speech concerning the fight in Syria and Iraq, he referred to ISIS and ISIL interchangeably. This is different than previous speeches in which he clearly stated ISIL repeatedly. Should we mark this as a going to be a change for future operations?
Is this change going to pull Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE back into action? Why? Could it be these ME powers see striking ISIS as being helpful to Iran and counter productive to their foreign policy?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/14/politics/obama-pentagon-isis-strategy/index.html

Obama: ISIS strategy 'moving forward with a great sense of urgency' - CNNPolitics.com

The U.S. military battle against ISIS is "moving forward with a great sense of urgency," President Barack Obama said at the Pentagon on Monday, admitting that progress against the terrorists in Iraq and Syria remains slow-going.

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Dec 14 at 2015 1:35 PM

SCPO David Lockwood — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 13:35:44 -0500

And discussed what?

Response by SGT David T. made Dec 14 at 2015 1:37 PM

SGT David T. — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 13:37:26 -0500

Seems to me that meetings with the NSC shouldn't be a rare thing. I don't think the speech changes anything. We are going to keep doing the same things we were before. I just don't get why we don't drop the hammer and wipe them out once and for all. I don't want to see another war but fact is we already have one on our hands regardless if they want to admit it or not.

Response by MSgt Curtis Ellis made Dec 14 at 2015 2:06 PM

MSgt Curtis Ellis — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 14:06:38 -0500

I think the meeting, and his brief to the nation, more or less, is to show that something is being done, looked at, considered and to further "justify?" our current stance and operations while intentionally not mentioning Russia and Chinese forces, as if it's only US Led Forces in this AO. Nothing changes, and won't unless we are given the order to kick other nation players out and begin a US Led seek and destroy mission, which we know will not happen for obvious reasons. So? In a couple of months, we'll do it all again...

Response by Sgt Kelli Mays made Dec 14 at 2015 2:11 PM

Sgt Kelli Mays — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 14:11:44 -0500

He's just trying to protect his legacy and scrambling to change his "usual way" to satisfy the citizens of the United States and their/our concerns....and so his legacy will live on and his hope of trying to get another Democrat elected to office. His MOVE today at the Pentagon is PURELY POLITICAL.

Further more it seems to me that this strategy of his will take years and is NOT the solution....he's just making it seem like he's really doing something about it......and his comment "we're going to get you" is just RHETORIC.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Dec 14 at 2015 4:17 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 16:17:19 -0500

"Obama has been under pressure to reassure Americans that his strategy against ISIS is working following terror attacks linked to the group in Paris and California"...how can he reassure anyone when there are others in positions of power who decry every word that comes out of his mouth? How can he reassure anyone when you have a retired Army "officer" who's working hard to get brownie points calling him a "pussy" on national tv? Obama cannot and did not reply to that outburst, being it would be demeaning to him to stoop that low. Congress came into this year talking about how they needed to be kept in the loop in regards to military force and a vote was needed to move things forward in regards to war. Well par the course in DC, a lot of lip service from all involved, but the finger pointing goes back to Obama. It's one thing when he makes a mistake and gets called out on it, it's a different case when he didn't and yet still takes the brunt of it as if his finger was on the button. Everyone and their mother can say he's the worst this or that, but have you really looked at how crappy the reps from your individual state has performed in congress? Can you say your rep is any better than the man you call out on a regular basis?

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Dec 14 at 2015 4:27 PM

SMSgt Thor Merich — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 16:27:44 -0500

So if I understand this correctly, the Commander in Chief just a had a rare meeting with the NSC? Shouldn't these meetings be a regular type of thing? After all, he is the CiC. It shows me that he has little respect or use for the military.