The Obama administration has often been compared to celebrity status. Now it goes one step further in looking like a television show. Oh, and highlighting that they do not actually have a strategy
(The Hill) A senior State Department official urged critics of President Obama to “stay tuned†for the administration’s plans against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
“We are putting the features in place, developing a broader regional coalition, a broad international coalition, working to get a new Iraqi government stood up, working to get our plans in place,” Brett McGurk, the deputy assistant Secretary of State for Iraq and Iran, told CNN. “So stay tuned.”
During a press conference last week, Obama conceded that “we don’t have a strategy yet” to counter Islamist militants operating in Syria.
In other words, Team Obama had nothing, despite Mr. Obama having been briefed on the danger of ISIS for over a year. And it sounds eerily like yet another “leading from behind” strategy. Too bad Obama has spent very little time engaging world leaders and developing alliances. Taking selfies at funerals does not count.
McGurk said that the U.S. military could not “just go in militarily and start dropping bombs and hope that it’s going to work out” and called such a go-it-alone mission “counterproductive.”
“You have to have a very sophisticated approach to this,” McGurk said.
It sounds more like they are putting together a romantic sitcom rather than a plan to decimate ISIS.
On the positive side, there have been over 100 airstrikes. On the minus side, this is the same administration that couldn’t put together a website. Also, they do not seem to realize that they should talk to the Pentagon, which certainly has a plan. of course, that plan probably doesn’t include “leading from behind”.
Meanwhile, Dems are putting together an authorization
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) said Tuesday he is filing legislation that would give President Obama clear authority to order airstrikes against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.
The move came after ISIS released a new video showing the purported beheading of a second American journalist, Steven Joel Sotloff, on Tuesday.
“This will ensure there’s no question that the president has the legal authority he needs to use airstrikes in Syria,†Nelson, a senior member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a statement Tuesday.
Good for him. Of course, nothing can be done till Congress returns next week. Too bad Congress hasn’t joined the 21st Century and go use something like Go To Meeting to take a vote.
Also, just to be clear, Obama talked tough last night after arrival in Estonia. Will he match the talk with action? Stay tuned.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
It took us 18 months to invade Iraq after 9/11. And we still got it wrong strategically and tactically. (No WMDs, destabilized region, not enough troops, etc). bin laden goaded the US into invading and we fell for it. al Qaeda proved they were a threat to the US by murdering 3000 innocent Americans. ISIL/ISIS is a minor threat to the US, if at all, and they are goading us into another disastrous misadventure, and once again Islamist radicals are making fools out of American conservatives who still support the “Bomb something, even if it’s wrong!” strategy.
You’re afraid of ISIS. (Conservatives live in fear). When the media (wrongly) tell you ISIS is the “greatest threat to the US since 9/11” it feeds your innate fears. Republican leaders want you to be afraid to change the tenor of the 2014 elections. ISIS is the best thing for Republicans since superPACs.
Once we eliminate ISIS (which resulted from the installation of the hated al-Maliki)
[…] Obama administration is still struggling to come up with a strategy to deal with the Islamic State. According to The Hill, when asked about a strategy a State […]
Hey Jeffery….. the Daily Kos called and wants their false talking points back.
Jeff,
I have a question. Exactly what makes you think that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction? After all, they had been using them for 20 years prior to our war. In addition, there were 100,000 syringes of atropine found at the front line. Saddam was asked if he had weapons and would not reply in a negative manner or allow inspections. You do realize that we allow inspections of our weapons? But, Saddam could not acknowledge the lack of such weapons at that would embolden his enemies, so he was in a tough spot (no sympathy, but I do wish we had him back).
Now to get your language right. We succeeded tactically, that is the immediate movement of forces. The way we moved them was fairly stupid and shows that incompetence of our military leaders. We were just lucky that we were not fighting a major power. But we did fail strategically. In that, we have the Democrats to blame as they did they same turn and run policy as in Vietnam. Also, we were to squeamish to enact those policies necessary to counter insurgency. Now, was Bush’s call the right one? That depends on what they were trying to do and we don’t have that information, even now. I would have seized the oil production, built up a permanent presence in the region and encouraged as much instability as possible in the region so they could kill each other. That is what we have done in the past. But then people like you, with your high IQ can’t understand these things. Instead, Obama allowed the CIA to destabilize the whole region of North Africa and Mid East (Arab Spring) without a clear strategy. Further showing he is a fool.
dave,
No one denies that Saddam had and used poison gas in the past.
No significant WMDs were found after our invasion.
Do you have a reliable reference for the “100,000 syringes of atropine” which I assume were found after 2003.
Jefferey went from this:
To this:
Jeffery has to move his own goalposts of “no weapons” to “no significant amount.”
I wonder why?
Could it be this:
or this:
Or even this using the UNSCOM final report on WMD’s in Iraq as a source:
No “significant amount” indeed.
gc,
I didn’t say “no significant amount”. You lied about that. Why?
There were no significant WMDs found. Chemical contaminants are not the same as weapons.
BZZZT! Worng, but thank you for playing.
The UN classifies the militarization of chemicals such as mustard gas, sarin, etc as WMD’s independent of delivery systems.
Why did you lie about what I said? Reading comprehension problems?
You win. Mr. Bush invaded for all the right reasons. To destroy the remnants of 15 yr old chemical munitions.
I didn’t.
The very things you say aren’t WMDs are in fact classified as WMD’s.
Why did you lie about chemical weapons not being WMD’s?
Yes, I would say that you have those problems.
Facts never seem to dissuade you of your follies.
Reading comprehension problems again? Memory going? Forget the facts? Forget the history?
There was more to the Iraq War than WMD’s and an honest person knows that.
If you doubt the existence of the WMD’s in Iraq, take the time to look at the last UNSCOM report before the effort started. I doubt that you ever read it because like the above resolution, you would have to deal with facts rather than your delusions.
However, while you still want to blame Bush for everything, that still doesn’t change the fact that after a year Obama doesn’t have a strategy for dealing with ISIL (and in fact today gave two goals that are not the same).
The man can’t lead and the only people who can’t see that are people like yourself.
Whereas, a group of deranged Saudis flew airplanes into the WTC, killing 3000 Americans, the United States of America, will wait almost 2 years before invading Iraq, based on false claims of WMDs, false claims of Iraq’s involvement in 9/11 and imminent “mushroom clouds”.
The clear vision of hindsight confirms that our invasion and occupation of Iraq was a catastrophe. The simple and emotional conservatives want to repeat this debacle.
Conservatives are simple folk. Of late, they’ve lionized Vladimir Putin’s leadership aura for invading a neighboring sovereign nation, Ukraine. Let that sink in.
Conservatives are simple folk. They favor and respond more to swagger than deliberation, especially swagger that supports their xenophobia. Conservatives exist in a state of chronic fear and anxiety and require a strong daddy figure to protect them, so it’s perfectly natural and predictable that they would despise President Obama and worship the KGB thug, Putin.
Conservatives are simple folk. To them, thoughtful deliberation represents weakness. Rather than putting together a coalition of stakeholders (UAE, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, NATO… ) to combat the virulent murderers in Iraq and Syria, conservatives have been goaded into a knee-jerk rage by the depravity of ISIL, which is exactly what ISIL wants. You’re being outwitted by a bunch of bronze-age radicals. ISIL understands your motivations more than you understand yourselves.
Just as Osama bin laden outwitted the Bush administration by goading them into a regional war, ISIL is goading you now.
And you claim Obama isn’t a leader because he isn’t doing what ISIL wants. Classic conservativism.
And…
Here’s what I typed: “No significant WMDs were found after our invasion.”
Here’s what you claimed I typed: “Jeffery has to move his own goalposts of “no weapons†to “no significant amount.â€
See the difference? I wasn’t talking about the amount, but rather the quality.
Either you made a mistake and misunderstood what I was saying or you deliberately wished to change my intent. In any event, it’s there in black and white.
You are either sloppy or a liar. Since you tend to be a careful typist, we’re forced to conclude that you are a liar, once again.
See the difference? I wasn’t talking about the amount, but rather the quality.
But that is a lie, Jeffery.
So instead of addressing your own lie, you decided to make an issue where there is none.
You either are person who won’t take responsibility for your own words, or one that is dishonest.
Or both.
You are such a twit.
You lied about what I said. It’s in black and white.
We can chat again when you have something to add.
I repeat that I did not lie.
You keep trying to push that because you know the facts contradict what you have said and what you continue to say.
Okey dokey.
That’s fine.
Like a little child who won’t admit to their mistakes and wants people to look at what others did, you won’t act like and adult.
Like a little child, you want to blame others for your failings.
Like a typical liberal, you blame Bush for Obama not being a leader.
Keep trying to stay on those talking points. Jeffery.
It shows how totally clueless you really are.