Posted on 09/15/2014 11:52:38 AM PDT by mojito
Let’s just say the name of the group is up in the air. I actually think ISIL is more menacing than ISIS, because it means they want to take over the entire Mediterranean. And now they’ve moved on to IS, meaning they want to take over the world.
In any case, the use of the name in English probably doesn’t mean that much at the moment because it has morphed. They’re currently calling themselves the Islamic State (IS in English, EI in Spanish), however, so that should be the term.
Kerry now choosing the military commanders to fight ISIS.
What could possibly go wrong ?
Kerry selects? Since when does the SecState appoint military leaders?
This is why he was selected. He is controllable. They have him on a short leash and a barbed choker collar. There will be no off-script acting out.
Obama distancing himself from his inevitable failure. "Kerry picked the guy. It's his fault."
Can you see the bus yet, John?
We need those high heels on the ground!
If they were desperate enough to ask Gen. John Allen back in to advise the president, this after ruining his career in a trumped up ‘scandal’, that means they probably also asked Petraus to step in and were turned down. I can’t blame Petraus for staying clear of this train wreck administration. Meanwhile, you say ISIL, I say ISIS, let’s call the whole thing off!
Is there going to be a DoD element to this Not-War against Not-Islamists?
I agree. A few days ago, Obama had another one of his Big Speeches on TV. Any other President would use that opportunity to make an impression worldwide before he spoke that evening. I was sure Obama would have Slam-Bam-Bombed multiple ISIS targets earlier that afternoon, maybe even killed a, ISIS commander or two. This would have made his ‘speech’ worth listing to, even for me. They should not discuss this until AFTER the operation has begun in ‘earnest’ (no pun intended). Just shut up and shoot!
Plumbing?
Brookings...great, just great.
/sarc/
ooooooohhhhhhh... I bet you ISIS is scared </sarc> Seriously these a-hole terrorists know they have two more years of weak leadership to hit the US and face little to no consequence from this feckless administration.
My thoughts exactly.
this may not be the answer but it is clear that the obozo will not do anything that puts him in a position of responsibility as to escape culpability, just like the night of Sept. 11, 2012 during the Benghazi murders. He was no where to be found according to record. Just like when he was a senator voting on controversial issues that the democrats would not like, he would vote present. Additionally, obozo is a muslim and does not want to be responsible for the US military killing thousands of his terrorist muslim brothers. Obozo is derelict in his duty and the US military needs to remove the traitor.
An insight into the failure or Bengahzi. Hillary or Val, maybe even Barry gave a stand-down order without regard to following the chain of command.
Some good “dot-connecting” going on here:
It’s long, but it hits the spot!!
Your comments in #10 and #11 about sum this up, IMHO.
Petraeus and Allen are both useful because the spying on them yielded bribery material. They’ve got career bona fides so it has the appearance of a wise choice, but in reality they are compromised because the regime has dirt on them so they can be controlled.
I wonder whose idea it was to have Paula Broadwell write a biographyh of Petraeus, and when that idea came up...
As Willi Cicci said, in The Godfather: "The Family has a lot of buffers".
If someone besides Obama makes the call, then someone besides Obama gets the blame when it goes sideways.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.