“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Friday, February 13, 2015

Based on past history of US meddling in Iranian affairs, why would Iran trust the US?


Declassified diplomacy: Washington’s hesitant plans for a military coup in pre-revolution Iran

New documents about General Huyser’s secret mission to Iran reveal US plans after the shah’s departure


Andrew Scott Cooper for Tehran Bureau
Wednesday 11 February 2015 00.10 EST
The president’s man in Tehran was feeling the pressure and needed reassurance. On 12 January 1979, General Robert “Dutch” Huyser wrote to Harold Brown, US secretary of defense, and General David Jones, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to make sure he knew what they wanted him to do.
“In my conversation with Secretary Brown the night of January 11, 1979, there seemed to be some doubt in your mind as to my understanding of US policy and my instructions,” Huyser wrote in a cable. “I believe I thoroughly understand and I am following them to the letter.” Huyser then outlined point by point his terms of reference as he understood them.

The Huyser cable is part of a trove of declassified US government documents that relate to the so-called Huyser mission, undertaken by the Carter administration at the height of the Iranian revolution. Thirty-six years later, many Iranians still believe Huyser was sent to Tehran to neutralise the Iranian army as part of a deal to put Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in power. The Americans, they say, naively thought Khomeini, an anti-communist, would protect their interests in the Persian Gulf after the Shah’s departure.

US officials from the time insist no such plot existed. They deny allegations of undermining the shah or that Huyser’s mission constituted interference in Iran’s sovereign affairs. But the absence of evidence has encouraged conspiracy theories.

Now, release of the Huyser cable allows us to read in the general’s own words what he and his handlers believed were his orders. For the first time we can see what President Jimmy Carter and his national security team hoped to achieve. Far from showing evidence of a well-oiled conspiracy, the document reveals an astonishing lack of awareness on the part of US officials trying to manage events thousands of miles away that they had failed to understand from the start.


General Huyser arrived in Tehran on 7 January, four days after Carter decided to send an envoy. The president and his advisers had been shocked at the speed of events as a year of protests against the shah’s 37-year reign had exploded into revolution. The Americans accepted the shah was finished, and supported his decision to transfer power to a new civilian administration, led by Shapour Bakhtiar, before leaving for a long “vacation” likely to mean exile.

The White House was also aware of nervousness in the ranks of the Iranian military. The shah’s senior generals predicted the army would collapse in the absence of their commander-in-chief - so for many of them it seemed better to seize power quickly than wait for a revolutionary bloodbath.


President Carter had won election on a platform of support for human rights. Once in office he had pressed the shah to release political prisoners and liberalise his regime. With that in mind, he was hardly about to order a repeat of Operation Ajax, through which the CIA had in 1953 helped restore the shah to his throne after an earlier bout of civil unrest. But neither could Carter afford to “lose” the country that guarded the approaches to all the oil fields of the Persian Gulf.

As Huyser later put it in his memoir: “As long as there was a civilian government, President Carter felt it was urgently necessary to persuade the military to throw their whole weight behind that government after the Shah had left. How could this be done? It seemed that the President was thinking of dispatching a special emissary, and he was casting about for a senior military figure with diplomatic experience and extensive knowledge of Iran who could inspire the trust of Iran’s military leaders.”

Huyser, deputy commander of the Supreme Allied Command in Europe, was the obvious candidate. He had made several trips to Tehran over the previous year advising the shah and his generals on how to improve decision-making in the armed forces. Carter selected Huyser because he believed the general retained the confidence of both governments.

Such was the mission’s sensitivity that US officials were reluctant to give Huyser written orders. When he protested - Nato commander General Alexander Haig had warned him the White House would scapegoat him if his mission failed - Huyser was given only what he later described in his memoir as a “draft” text whose instructions “were basic and incomplete.” After four days in Iran, Huyser sought clarification.


In his 12 January cable, Huyser told Secretary Brown and General Jones he believed the president wanted him to relay six points to the Shah’s generals. First, it was vital for the US and Iran “to have strong and stable government ties”. Second, Carter was “deeply impressed” with the Imperial Iranian Armed Forces. Third, the president believed “the best interests of all can be realized by a strong and stable civilian government”.

Fourth, Bakhtiar’s new civilian government “must have the full support of the military”. Fifth, this support “can only be achieved if military leaders stick to their jobs”: they should not leave the country and they should “work as one team”. Sixth, the US government “from the president on down remain strongly behind them”.

But Huyser knew Carter and his advisers had not ruled out US support for a coup. Within the cabinet there had been a split between Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security advisor, who supported immediate action and Cyrus Vance, the secretary of state, who opposed a coup at all costs.

Carter split the difference in opposing a coup unless certain conditions were met. “Brzezinski wanted [his order] to convey to the Iranian military a green light to stage a military coup,” Huyser wrote in this memoir, “and considered that it did so. President Carter intended it to convey such a meaning only as a last resort.”

In his cable, Huyser explained to Brown and Jones that he had already reiterated to the generals that US support for a future coup was contingent on their prior support for Bakhtiar: “I have told them that I consider a military coup as an absolutely last resort. I have explained to them that there are degrees before that action...”

Support for a coup depended on three conditions. First, Bakhtiar had to be given a chance to exert his authority. Second, if the internal situation worsened he might declare martial law and call out the army to restore basic services like running the oil fields or maintaining the power grid.

Only if steps one and two failed would the US endorse a military takeover. Towards the end of his cable, Huyser summed up his instructions this way: “I’ll do my best to …give full support to Bakhtiar, and not jump into a military coup.”

Huyser’s mission was doomed, not least because the White House had failed to inform the shah that an American general had been dispatched to provide unsolicited advice to Iran’s senior command. This astonishing breach of protocol enraged Ardeshir Zahedi, Iran’s ambassador to the US, who told me in 2012 he urged the Shah to have Huyser arrested and deported.

The shah had good reason to be alarmed. He knew US ambassador William Sullivan had made discrete contact with Khomeini’s representatives in Tehran and was involved in negotiations for the ayatollah’s return from exile. Sullivan’s failure to consult the White House before taking this drastic step led to confusion among the Iranians over US goals.

The shah saw this not as evidence of incompetence but as proof of an American conspiracy to depose him. His senior officers wanted to put an end to the American games right away. “The generals came to me and offered to shoot Huyser,” Zahedi told me. “The fear was that the Americans were about to repeat their involvement in the 1967 coup in Greece against King Constantine.”

The Americans were oblivious to these concerns, just as they had missed the earlier signs of looming unrest. Just eight weeks before Huyser set out on his mission, but ten months after street protests first erupted in Iran, Brzezinski, the national security advisor, sent Carter a cheerful note that opened: “Good news! According to a CIA assessment, issued in August, Iran ‘is not in a revolutionary or even a pre-revolutionary situation. There is dissatisfaction with the Shah’s tight control of the political process, but this does not at present threaten the government.”

How close were the shah’s generals to taking action?

On 13 January 1979, Lieutenant General Amir Hossein Rabii, commander of the Imperial Iranian Air Force, met General Huyser to report on his meeting earlier in the day with the heads of the army, navy and gendarmerie. According to Huyser - who immediately briefed his superiors in Washington – Rabii said he had spoken in favour of a coup as soon as the shah’s plane would leave the ground because, as Brown put it in a memo for president Carter, “the military could come apart rapidly otherwise”.

Rabii and the other generals were distressed at the thought of what might happen to them if Khomeini took power. Unlike the Americans, they were well aware of Khomeini’s threats of vengeance.

At this critical moment, Huyser strongly advised Rabii not to proceed with his plan. As Brown told Carter, “[Huyser] held firmly to the line that the military must give Bakhtiar a chance to form an effective government and to try to get the country in order again. Rabii reluctantly indicated that they would follow this course.”

Even while the two generals were in conference, the shah telephoned Rabii to request that his plane be made ready for departure, though he gave no specific date. Rabii played for time, Brown’s account continued, telling the shah that “country clearance for the aircraft had not been arranged, but the Shah said he could if necessary fly out via Saudi Arabia.”

Brown assured Carter that the generals had backed down from their threat. With the shah’s departure looming, and no US support for a coup forthcoming, they felt they had no choice but to seek an accommodation with opposition groups to prevent a collapse of order. Rabii still held out. In his note to Carter, Brown explained that “there was extensive discussion of the military working more closely with some of the religious leadership, with Huyser pressing it and Rabii not inclined to do so.”

The end caught everyone by surprise. On 10 February fighting erupted at Tehran’s Doshan Tappeh air force base and within 24 hours the revolutionaries held important government installations around the capital. Royal resistance collapsed when the shah’s senior generals declared their neutrality and ordered their troops back to base.

At 1.10pm on 11 February the White House Situation Room received the shattering news that Tehran had fallen to a coalition of Muslim fundamentalists and left-wing guerrilla groups financed and armed by Libya, the PLO and the east bloc. The final communication sent out from the US embassy read: “Army surrenders Khomeini wins destroying all classified.”

The Americans realised they had left it too late. The delay proved fatal for General Rabii and his colleagues. They were seized, tortured and later shot.


Andrew Scott Cooper is writing a book on the fall of the Shah and the 1979 Iranian revolution. He is the author of The Oil Kings: How the US, Iran and Saudi Arabia Changed the Balance of Power in the Middle East. You can follow him on Twitter @aascooper

194 comments:

  1. We should have backed the women, the students, the workers in the last go round. They were getting close to kicking he mullahs out.

    Remember : Neda


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Neda_Agha-Soltan


    https://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A86.JyaHiN5UOg4AMZ0nnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTB0c2puYm1xBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2dxMQR2dGlkA1lIUzAwM18x?p=Name+of+the+girl+shot+in+the+street+in+Tehran&tnr=21&vid=44FC857E3EDF53A8003844FC857E3EDF53A80038&l=38&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DUN.608053084793473811%26pid%3D15.1&sigi=11rn49eun&rurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DbbdEf0QRsLM&sigr=11bfcleup&tt=b&tit=Iran%2C+Tehran%3A+wounded+girl+dying+in+front+of+camera%2C+Her+...&sigt=11s53hc4q&back=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.yahoo.com%2Fyhs%2Fsearch%3Fp%3DName%2Bof%2Bthe%2Bgirl%2Bshot%2Bin%2Bthe%2Bstreet%2Bin%2BTehran%26ei%3DUTF-8%26hsimp%3Dyhs-001%26hspart%3Dmozilla&sigb=13p47cfun&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-001

    ReplyDelete
  2. The French perhaps should not have let koookameini out of France in '79.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What is the US National Interest in Iran that would justify US meddling in the internal politics of that nation?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hmmmm, lets think about that one, Jack......


      How about nuclear weapons and the threat to wipe the Big Satan, and the little satan off the face of the earth with them.

      Passes my goal line....

      Delete
    2. Then why not be concerned with Pakistan?

      They are more radically Islamic, their Army dedicated to jihad.

      Delete
    3. Didn't say I wasn't concerned with Pakistan.

      Any Islamic country that possesses nuclear weapons should be felt to be a concern.

      Delete
    4. So, Robert, what should the US do about it?
      1.
      2.
      3.

      Delete
    5. "O"rdure would nuke them, if he considered them to be a threat, and he had the launch codes.

      Delete
    6. When the Taliban take over Afghanistan upon our final departure, which they will certainly do, they will join up with their pals in Northwest Pakistan and may be able to take over the entire Pakistani government, nukes and all....

      This should be a major 'cause of concern'.

      Delete
    7. Jack HawkinsFri Feb 13, 08:09:00 PM EST
      "O"rdure would nuke them, if he considered them to be a threat, and he had the launch codes.

      Don't speak for me, ratass

      Delete
    8. I will let you speak for yourself, then ...

      What is "Occupation"Sat Dec 26, 07:46:00 PM EST

      Rufus: Eventually, Every Nation on Earth will have "Nukes." That's just the way it is.


      Then all the more reason to nuke those without them that are a threat asap....


      {;-)

      Delete
  4. Back when I used to listen to Dr. Bill Wattenburg on my no longer working radio, back in the Bernie Ward Days, before Bernie got busted for kiddie porn, Dr. Bill, who helped develop our nuclear stockpile, said time and again he felt we would be hit first, before Israel.


    Five or six well placed nukes would pretty much destroy our county, Dr Bill made that clear enough.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have been wrong, for so long, one would think you would have learned something ...

      bob Mon Nov 16, 04:13:00 PM EST (2009)
      I have the feeling we're going to get hit again, and soon, and hard.


      http://2164th.blogspot.com/2009/11/american-workers-under-siege-from-china.html

      Delete
    2. Six years, surely cannot be considered "soon".

      Delete
    3. Oh. my GOD



      you are saying a




      county




      might be destroyed?

      Delete
  5. Was thinking Tahiti for a while, now I'm thinking the Himalayas......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why not back to Ohio, where your wife voted illegally, back in 2008.
      Back when voter fraud was all the rage, and your baby mamma took up Sarah's cause.

      Funny, how in October of 2008 all the dimwits saw Mrs Palin as a savior of the the GOP.
      And now, for the rest of the story ...

      Jeb Bush hands out cash to win allies ahead of 2016 election
      - Reuters

      The song remains the same.

      Delete
    2. Draft dodging and voter fraud, the hallmarks of the family Peterson.
      While the fella claims to be a conscientious citizen ...

      {;-)

      Delete
    3. ad hominem

      when you lack an ability to talk to issues. you attack the messenger...

      Delete
  6. Both accusations remain untrue, as they were yesterday and years ago. runt rat.

    Meanwhile you continue to slander, lie, are a War Criminal, Dead Beat Dad First Class,,,,,,,etetetcetcetc......

    No go way, shoo...

    No one finds reading the same rat garbage entertaining but you..................

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. out to Wal-Mart......

      Cheers !

      Delete
    2. Do you want to read the Draft Dodger quote or your wife committed voter fraud in 2008 story?
      There is more than one quote involved in the voter fraud story. It is a series of Bob quotes, and replies, from desert rat and Ash.

      Delete
    3. Do you wish to relive that Elephant Bar episode, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson?

      Want to watch the 'repeat'?

      Delete
    4. "repeat' or 'rerun', the show remains the same.
      Focusing upon residency and where the drivers license of the fraudulent voter was registered.
      the associated stories of other McCain supporters that did the same deed, were arrested, tried and convicted of voter fraud.

      It's all still there, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson.

      Delete
    5. ad hominem

      when you lack an ability to talk to issues. you attack the messenger...

      Delete
  7. Well, Bob, you were either lying then, or you're lying now; cause, you sure wrote it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. United States June 1, 2009 - 2009 Little Rock recruiting office shooting by Abdulhakim Muhajid Muhammad. 1 killed and 1 injured
    Somalia June 18, 2009 – 2009 Beledweyne bombing by Al-Shabaab. 35 dead.
    Indonesia July 17, 2009 – 2009 Marriott and Ritz-Carlton Hotels bombing in Mega Kuningan, South Jakarta, Indonesia; suicide bombers hit the Marriott and 5 minutes later the Ritz-Carlton. 9 killed and 53 injured
    United States November 5, 2009 – Fort Hood shooting, at Fort Hood near Killeen, Texas. 13 dead, 33 injured.

    2010–current

    Russia March 29, 2010 - Moscow Metro bombings. 40 dead, 102 injured. Caucasus Emirate claimed responsibility[29]
    Pakistan May 28, 2010 – Attacks on Ahmadi Mosques Lahore, Pakistan. Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan claimed attacks on two mosques simultaneously belonging to the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, killing nearly 100 and injuring many others.[30]
    India December 7, 2010 – 2010 Varanasi bombing, India. 2 dead, 37 injured.
    Sweden December 10, 2010 – 2010 Stockholm bombing, Sweden. killing the bomber and injuring two people.
    Russia January 21, 2011 - Domodedovo International Airport bombing. 37 killed, 173 wounded[31]
    Germany March 2, 2011 – 2011 Frankfurt Airport shooting, Frankfurt, Germany. 2 dead, 2 injured.
    China July 18, 2011 – 2011 Hotan attack, Hotan, China. A group of 18 young Uyghur men who opposed the local government's campaign against the full-face Islamic veil perpetrated a series of coordinated bomb and knife attacks and occupied a police station on Nuerbage Street, killing two security guards and taking eight hostages. The attackers yelled religious slogans, including ones associated with Jihadism, 4 killed, 4 wounded.
    China July 30, 2011 - A series of knife and bomb attacks occurred in Kashgar, China. Uyghur men hijacked a truck, killed its driver and drove into a crowd of pedestrians. They then got out of the vehicle and attacked pedestrians with knifes. On July 31, a chain of two explosions started a fire in a restaurant, 15 killed, 42 wounded.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nigeria December 25, 2011 - Christmas Day bombings were bomb blasts and shootings at churches in Madalla, Jos, Gadaka, and Damaturu. Over 41 people are reported dead.[32]
      Iraq 5 January 2012 Iraq bombings, Baghdad and Nasiriyah, Iraq by Islamic State of Iraq. 73 dead, 149 injured.
      Thailand February 14, 2012 - A series of explosions occurred in Bangkok, Thailand, 5 wounded.
      Iraq 23 February 2012 Iraq attacks, Baghdad, Iraq by Islamic State of Iraq. 83 dead, 250+ injured.
      Iraq 20 March 2012 Iraq attacks, Baghdad and at least 9 other cities, Iraq. 52 dead, ~ 250 injured.
      France March 20, 2012 – Toulouse and Montauban shootings in France. 7 dead, 5 injured.
      Russia May 3, 2012 - Makhachkala attack. 14 dead, including 2 suicide bombers, 130 wounded[33]
      Bulgaria July 18, 2012 - 2012 Burgas bus bombing - 7 dead, including the suicide bomber and 32 injured at Burgas Airport, Burgas, Bulgaria.
      LibyaUnited States September 11, 2012 – 2012 Benghazi attack on the U.S. Consulate. 4 dead, 11 injured.
      India February 21, 2013. – 2013 Hyderabad blasts, two bomb blasts killed 16 people and injured 119.
      United States April 15, 2013. – Boston Marathon bombings. Two brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnev, planted two bombs near the finish line of the Boston Marathon. The blast killed 3 and injured 183 others.[34]
      Turkey May 11, 2013 – Reyhanlı bombings, killed 52 people and wounded 140.
      United Kingdom May 22, 2013 – Two men with cleavers kill British soldier Lee Rigby in Woolwich.[35][36]
      France May 23, 2013 – 2013 La Défense attack. An Islamic extremist wielding a knife attacked and wounded a French soldier in the Paris suburb of La Défense. 1 wounded.

      Delete
    2. India July 7, 2013 - A series of ten bombs explode in and around the Mahabodhi Temple complex, in Bodh Gaya, India. 5 wounded.
      Kenya September 21, 2013 – Westgate shopping mall attack, 67 killed, 175 wounded.[37][38][39]
      Pakistan September 22, 2013 – Peshawar church attack, 80-83 killed, 250 wounded.
      Nigeria September 29, 2013. - Gujba college massacre. 44 students killed by Boko Haram
      China October 28, 2013 - A 4x4 vehicle crashed into a crowd and burst into flames in Tiananmen Square in Beijing, 5 killed, 38 wounded.

      Delete
  9. Czech Republic January 1, 2014. - Killed Palestinian ambassador “held explosive in his hands”. 1 dead terrorist.[40][41]
    Nigeria February 14, 2014. - Borno Massacre at least 200 killed by Boko Haram[42]
    China March 1, 2014 - A group of 8 individuals attacked civilians at Kunming Railway Station, 28 dead, 143 wounded.
    China April 30, 2014 - Two assailants attacked passengers and detonated explosives at the Ürümqi railway station, 3 dead, 79 wounded.
    Nigeria May 20, 2014. - Jos bombings at least 118 killed and over 56 injured[43]
    China May 22, 2014 - Two SUVs which carried 5 assailants were driven into a street market in Ürümqi and up to a dozen explosives were thrown at shoppers through the windows of the SUVs. The cars then crashed into shoppers and collided into each other and exploded, 39 dead, 90+ wounded.
    Belgium May 24, 2014. - Jewish Museum of Belgium shooting. Gunman opened fire at the Jewish Museum in Brussels killing 4 people.
    Syria August, 2014. - Islamic State fighters massacred some 700 people, mostly men, of the Shu'aytat tribe in Deir ez-Zor Governorate.[44]
    Australia September 23, 2014. – 2014 Endeavour Hills stabbings. Numan Haider, an Afghan Australian stabbed two counter terrorism officers in Melbourne, Australia. He was then shot dead.[45]
    Russia October 5, 2014 - 2014 Grozny bombing. 5 officers and the suicide bomber, were killed, while 12 others were wounded.[46]
    Canada October 20, 2014 - 2014 Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu ramming attack. Lone attacker used his car to run over two Canadian soldiers. 1 killed, 1 injured
    Canada October 22, 2014 – 2014 shootings at Parliament Hill, Ottawa. Lone attacker shot a soldier at a war memorial and attacked Parliament. 1 killed, 3 injured[47]

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. United States October 23, 2014. – Zale H. Thomson, also known as Zaim Farouq Abdul-Malik, attacked four New York policemen in the subway with a hatchet, severely injuring one in the back of the head and injuring another policeman in the arm before being shot to death by the remaining officers, who also shot a bystander.[48]
      Nigeria November 28, 2014. - Kano bombing. Around 120 people were killed and another 260 injured.[49][50][51][52]
      Russia December 4, 2014. - 2014 Grozny clashes. 26 total dead, including 14 policemen, 11 Jihadist from Caucasus Emirate, 1 civilian[53]
      Australia December 15, 2014. – 2014 Sydney hostage crisis. 2 dead, 4 injured.[54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62]
      Pakistan December 16, 2014. – 2014 Peshawar school attack. Over 140 people dead, including at least 132 children.[63]
      Yemen December 16, 2014. - Two suicide car bombers rammed their vehicles into a Shiite rebels' checkpoint killing 26, including 16 students.[64]
      Nigeria December 18, 2014. - 2014 Gumsuri kidnappings. Boko Haram insurgents killed 32 people and kidnapped at least 185 women and children.[65]
      Syria December 18, 2014. - Mass grave of 230 Tribesmen killed by Islamic State found in Eastern Syria.[66]
      France December 20, 2014 - 2014 Joué-lès-Tours stabbings. A man yelling Allahu Akbar attacked a police office with a knife. He was killed and 3 police officers were injured
      France December 21, 2014 - 2014 Dijon attack. A man yelling Allahu Akbar ran over 11 pedestrians with his vehicle. 11 injured
      Nigeria December 22, 2014. – Boko Haram insurgents bombed a bus station in the city of Gombe, killing at least twenty people.[67]
      Iraq December, 2014. - Islamic State militants execute 150 women Iraqi province of Al-Anbar, some of whom were pregnant at the time, who refuse to marry their fighters.[68]
      Iraq December 24, 2014. - A suicide bomber killed 33 people and wounded 55 others in Madaen, about 25 km (15 miles) south of Baghdad.[69]
      Somalia December 25, 2014. - Al-Shabaab (militant group) attack in Mogadishu leaves 9 dead.[70]
      Cameroon December 28, 2014. - Boko Haram attacks village in Cameroon leaving 30 dead.[71]
      France January 7-9, 2015. - A series of 5 attacks in and around Paris kill 17 people, plus 3 attackers, and leave 22 other people injured.
      Nigeria January 8, 2015. – 2015 Baga massacre. Boko Haram attacks town of Baga in northern Nigeria killing at least 200 people. Another 2000 are unaccounted for.[72]
      Pakistan January 30, 2015. - Suicide bomber kills at least 55, injuring at least 59 in a Shiite mosque in southern Pakistan. [73]

      Delete
  10. The rat crapper as he is popularly known here is just trying to use misdirection and lies and turn the topic away from the MASSIVE FAIL of his 'rat Doctrine' everywhere is has been tried with the possible exception of the Kobane area, where the issue still isn't really settled.

    It is a sad thing to watch our military being advised by the likes of Generals Ruf 'n rat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson and his acolytes want to post lists of gibberish, then make false claims about what the list means.

      That is the truthiness of it.

      Delete
    2. Islamic State attack on US base in Iraq fails

      WASHINGTON — Islamic State militants launched a suicide attack against a base in western Iraq where U.S. forces are stationed, but were defeated by Iraqi soldiers defending the facility, the Pentagon said Friday.

      Real world success of the Rat Doctrine, just today.

      The Rat Doctrine not having anything to do with police operations in Australia and France. Not being implemented in Pakistan, nor the Czech Republic or India. Not being employed in Nigeria.

      The acolyte of Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson is very confused, may even be cognitively disabled.,

      Delete
    3. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/02/13/asad-iraq-isil-isis-baghdadi-attack-us-base/23372755/

      The reference for the Rat Doctrine success.

      Delete
    4. U.S. aircraft joined in the fighting in the area, launching five airstrikes around the base, according to a statement from the U.S. military.

      {;-)

      Delete
  11. " truthiness"

    :):)

    hahahahaha

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a dumb fuck.

      Delete
    2. Think not Robert Draft Dodger" Peterson.

      You are just so far out of the cultural mainstream of the US that you illustrate ignorance.

      Delete
    3. But, to call you a dumb fuck would be a compliment, since you don't fuck.
      Sleeping apart from the wife, in separate rooms, as it is, and your daughter moved away.

      Gotta stay safe.

      {;-)

      Delete
    4. ad hominem

      when you lack an ability to talk to issues. you attack the messenger...

      Delete
  12. The Iraqis, and, or, Kurds have not lost a single battle in which U.S. Airpower was engaged.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But if we include murders in France, US airpower will be seen as ineffective, Rufus.

      If we include India, where no US force are deployed, US airpower will be seen as ineffective.

      Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson is grasping at straws, to discredit the United States.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, it's a pity - rooting that hard against your own country.

      Just because you're too racist to accept the President.

      Delete
  13. Why, then, do we see every night all those maps showing ISIL expanding into ever more countries? Libya, the Sinai, Lebanon, Afghanistan.....and the Kurds lost Kobane before getting some of it back, Six Bud Tongue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 6Bud Tongue got 'im wet whistle.

      Delete
    2. The US is not employing the Rat Doctrine in Libya, the Sinai or Lebanon, so it does not apply in any of those instances.

      When the Kurds were losing in Kobane, they did not have Coalition close air support. We the gained that tactical advantage, they won. As the Iraqi Army won, just today.

      Delete
    3. When they gained that tactical advantage, they won. As the Iraqi Army won, just today.

      Delete
    4. The Kurds lost 80% of Kobane, and then we started bombing. Since then, they've recaptured all of Kobane, and at least 100 of the surrounding villages.

      Just because some asshole is running around Libya, or Afghanistan, claiming to be the new Daesh Dandy doesn't have squat to do with the effectiveness of our air support in winning battles - where said air support is actually used.

      Go wash your robes, or something, asshole. You're stinking up the place.

      Delete
    5. Go wash your asshole, asshole, you are stinking up your robes.

      Delete
    6. The "Draft Dodger" speaks, but no one listens to his anti-US diatribes.

      He grasps at straws, since his dick disappeared. Now he's a pussy.

      Delete
    7. Even in Kobane, the strategic bombing the Coalition attempted was not successful. It was not until the coalition began to communicate and coordinate with the local forces on the ground, providing them with CAS, that the tide turned.

      When the Daesh broke, they abandoned the entire field, including the city itself and the villages surrounding it. The Rat Doctrine was so successfully implemented, there.

      Delete
    8. Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson does not want to acknowledge the successes.
      He wants to focus on the periphery, locales and countries where the US is not engaged, militarily.

      Then claim that limited US military intervention failed, even when it was not being utilized.

      He wants to spill US blood in the desert sands, even while denigrating the religion and culture of those Sunni Muslims he would have US spend blood and treasure defending.

      The discovery of widespread FGM in Iraqi Kurdistan suggests the assumption to be incorrect that FGM is primarily an African phenomenon with only marginal occurrence in the eastern Islamic world. FGM is practiced at a rate of nearly 60 percent by Iraqi Kurds, then how prevalent is the practice in neighboring Syria where living conditions and cultural and religious practices are comparable?

      Why should a single US soldier die to protect this horrid cultural practice,
      Answer US that Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson

      Delete
    9. ad hominem

      when you lack an ability to talk to issues. you attack the messenger...

      Delete
  14. That's an important distinction. The Kurds were still getting their clocks cleaned until we started coordinating with someone(s) on the ground. That might be a factor in the battle for Mosul.

    Also, of concern, is that no Iraqi General has ever been associated with winning a major battle. I hope our guys will be able to, somehow, maintain at least a modicum of control when the fight heats up.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "Walk" the Furusiyya FEI Nations Cup course in Ocala.

    A detailed look at today's Furusiyya FEI Nations Cup course in Ocala.

    'Walk the Course'

    Wonder if there will be an Israeli team that is going to "Win by Losing" again this year?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Including results for air strike against isis are failure

    Search only for Air strikes against ISIS are failing
    Search results

    Are U.S. Air Strikes Against ISIS in Syria Failing? -...
    blogs.rollcall.com/five-by-five/are-u-s-air-strikes... Cached
    Are U.S. Air Strikes Against ISIS in Syria Failing? ... “U.S. Airstrikes In Syria Are Based On Startlingly Little Intelligence.”
    UK Air Strikes Against Isis in Iraq: Will They Be a...
    www.ibtimes.co.uk › Society
    UK Air Strikes Against Isis in Iraq: Will They Be a Success or Failure? A minority of MPs opposed RAF air strikes against Isis, but there were concerns whether combat ...
    War against Isis: US air strategy in tatters as...
    www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/war-against-isis-us... Cached
    War against Isis: US air strategy in ... place air strikes are failing to stop Isis. ... than the inability so far of air strikes to stop Isis taking ...
    Air strikes against ISIS are failing - Yahoo Answers Results
    Do ISIS need outer sourced money or are they wealthy enough without it?
    8 answers

    When President Obama announced US airstrikes in Iraq, most observers understood that the US would be bombing members of ISIS. What many did not know was that, in a twist of such bitterly symbolic irony that it could only occur in the Middle...
    Why aren't the Russians helping Syrian Government to fight ISIS ?
    7 answers

    Well, the syrian army ( assad's army ) weapons come from russia ... so russia is helping assad, but they wont put russian troops in the field or even airplanes in the air, they are too smart for that :P And you have to remember that until...

    2 related questions
    Air Strikes Beginning to Fail Against ISIS «...
    www.darkgovernment.com/news/air-strikes...fail-against-isis Cached
    Air Strikes Beginning to Fail Against ISIS. ... attacks launched against Islamic State (also known as Isis) ... the only place air strikes are failing to stop Isis.
    Obama ISIS Strategy Failing: Despite Air Strikes ISIS...
    downtrend.com/jrc410/obama-isis-strategy-failing-despite... Cached
    So, what do YOU think? How well is the Obama coalition ‘air strike only’ plan working out? What will happen in order to actually take effective action against the ...
    Are US airstrikes against ISIS failing ? | On Air Videos...
    video.foxnews.com/.../are-us-airstrikes-against-isis-failing Cached
    Live Are US airstrikes against ISIS failing? Oct. 23, 2014 - 3:06 - Report: ISIS driving Yazidis up Mount Sinjar in Iraq again
    Syrian rebel leader: US-led attacks on Isis are...
    www.theguardian.com › World › Syria
    Hadi al-Bahra claims Syrians see US-led coalition turning a blind eye to Assad’s forces while failing to ... that air strikes against Isis by the ...
    US-led coalition carries out 12 air strikes against Isi...
    www.theguardian.com › World › Islamic State (Isis)
    Latest attacks followed 39 air strikes on ... “The jihadists are now using tunnels after failing in their ... The strikes followed 39 against Isis targets ...
    Why Air Strikes Against ISIS Will Fail » CounterPunch:...
    www.counterpunch.org/2014/...air-strikes-against-the...state Cached
    Why Air Strikes Against ISIS Will Fail. ... It enraptured Britain’s blood lusting Air Marshal Arthur “Bomber” Harris during ... the campaign was a failure. ...
    Air strikes alone will fail to stop Isis - Comment -...
    www.independent.co.uk/.../air-strikes...isis-9759913.html Cached
    READ MORE Iraq air strikes: Syria missions still an option says Defence Secretary as RAF jets fail to find targets Take the current Isis offensive against the Kurdish ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1 2 3 4 5 Next

      4,600,000 results

      https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=Air+strikes+against+ISIS+are+failing&ei=UTF-8&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-001

      Read away...............

      Delete
    2. Another anti-US diatribe by the "Draft Dodger".

      Airstrikes are not the center of US strategy, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, Close Air Support of local forces is.

      That the US will not provide CAS to the strongest military force in Syria battling Daesh is the crux of the problem, in Syria.

      Delete
    3. The Us should communicate and coordinate with Assad's security forces, and assist them as the US supported the Iraqi and Syrian forces in Kobane. The results of the US effort would then improve, greatly, just as occurred in Kobane.

      The US reluctance to support the Syrian Army is the policy point that should be debated, not the effectiveness of CAS of local forces.

      Delete
    4. Once again the Draft Dodger wants to compare apples to oranges and then complain that neither are prime rib.

      Kobane is the only locale in Syria where the Rat Doctrine of Close Air Support of local combat forces has been implemented.

      There is no argument that the strategic bombing campaign in Syria is not very effective. It was not effective in Kobane, but the Close Air Support of local combat forces was.

      Delete
  17. Providing close air support in fluid tactical situations is difficult, especially without trained observers on the ground — and this is especially true in urban combat. This problem limits the effectiveness of the air campaign, which is why some are calling for the deployment at least of American ground observers to call in and direct airstrikes. But that would expose Americans to capture and further hostage situations, which could create domestic political crises that would turn public opinion against the effort or compel escalation.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/defense/220985-air-campaign-against-isis-is-just-getting-off-the-ground

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to Pentagon briefings, the United States is going after strategic targets in Syria that will weaken ISIS in the long run, but it will take time to observe results in the form of gradually diminishing operational capability.

      Other sorties are targeting tactical targets to assist local defenders in Iraq, but not in Syria.
      Since the coalition opposes the current Syrian government, it will not provide air support to Syrian forces.

      http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/defense/220985-air-campaign-against-isis-is-just-getting-off-the-ground

      Delete
  18. So there it is, the crux of the challenge, in Syria.

    Since the coalition opposes the current Syrian government, it will not provide air support to Syrian forces.

    Outside of Kobane, the Rat Doctrine has not being employed in Syria.
    If it were to be, it would be successful and the Daesh would be beaten in a timely fashion, as they were in Kobane

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now, perhaps the "Draft Dodger" Peterson wants the US to invade Syria, as well as Iraq.
      Perhaps he desires to see US troops die, fighting the Daesh, rather than the Syrian troops, of the Assad regime, absorb the casualties. It would seem prudent and expedient to allow Assad's Army to bleed into the sand, rather than what the Draft Dodger Peterson once proposed, sending in the 1st Airborne Division, which does not even exist.

      Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson is behaving like a little Hitler, ordering nonexistent Armies into battle.

      Delete
    2. Outside of Kobane, the Rat Doctrine has not been employed in Syria.

      Delete
  19. There it is folks, the rat doctrine is a bunch of crap, by the crapper's own admission.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. By your admission, but no one else, Crapper.

      And who are you?

      Delete
    2. Are you the Bob that allen accused of raping his own daughter?

      Delete
    3. Based only upon the statistical reality that most rape victims knew their attacker and that often it was a family member that committed the rape.

      Then there was the lack of a police report ... in the original tales 'Bob' told.
      That was a key part of allen's allegation.

      Delete
    4. 2008 was an interesting year, at the Elephant Bar.

      Delete
  20. There are more ISIL fighters in Iraq and Syria now than when the rat crapper came up with his doctrine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And what is the importance of that?

      They control less ground in Iraq than they dd at the beginning of the campaign.
      The US is not utilizing the Rat Doctrine in Syria. Except in Kobane, where it was a smashing success.

      Delete
    2. The US had ground combat troops in Iraq for almost decade, lost over 4,000 troops KIA and never 'defeated' the predecessor of Daesh.

      Why would anyone advocate a repeat of that failed performance?

      Delete
    3. Oh, yeah, the US pissed a trillion dollars away in that sand box, too.

      Delete
  21. Yemen is also lost.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It never was 'had', to be 'lost'.

      That is why the British left Aden,the country presents a political challenge that is not solvable by foreign conventional military methods.

      Delete
    2. The British SAS could not stabilize the country, what makes you think the US could, or even could improve on the British experience?

      Where is the cost benefit analysis?

      Delete
    3. ... what makes you think the US could, or even should try to improve on the British experience?

      Delete
    4. It is neither Daesh nor it's cousin al-Qeada that staged a coup in Yemen.

      The US has no dog in that fight.

      Delete
  22. Organization for Security and Co- operation in Europe reports there are no Russian troops in Ukraine, although there are individual Russians there.

    http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150214/1018252288.html

    ReplyDelete
  23. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  24. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  25. rat, go to bed now. You've made a complete fool of yourself All Day Long.

    You need some winky, snorry time....

    The Dorm Manager

    ReplyDelete
  26. Obama adviser John Podesta's biggest regret: Keeping America in dark about UFOs
    By Caitlin Dickson 7 hours ago Yahoo News






    View photo
    .
    FILE - In this Nov. 19, 2014 file photo, Counselor to the President John Podesta speaks in Washington, Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2014. In the year that will...

    FILE - In this Nov. 19, 2014 file photo, Counselor to the President John Podesta speaks in Washington, Wednesday, …

    Outgoing senior Obama adviser John Podesta reflected on his latest White House stint Friday, listing his favorite moments and biggest regrets from the past year. Chief among them: depriving the American people of the truth about UFOs.

    Podesta’s longtime fascination with UFOs is well-documented, as his brief political hiatus following four years as President Bill Clinton’s chief of staff freed him up to pursue his otherworldly passion.

    At a 2002 press conference organized by the Coalition for Freedom of Information, Podesta spoke on the importance of disclosing government UFO investigations to the public.

    “It’s time to find out what the truth really is that’s out there,” he said. “We ought to do it, really, because it’s right. We ought to do it, quite frankly, because the American people can handle the truth. And we ought to do it because it’s the law.”



    Following Podesta’s tweet, Friday, the Washington Post recalled an exchange one of its reporters had with Podesta in 2007. Karen Tumulty had asked Podesta about reports that the Clinton Library in Little Rock, Arkansas, had been bombarded with Freedom of Information Act Requests specifically seeking email correspondence to and from the former chief of staff including terms like “X-Files” and “Area 51.” Podesta’s response, through a spokesperson, was “The truth is out there,” the tagline for the TV show “The X-Files” of which Podesta was known to be a fan.

    A 2010 editorial in Missouri’s Columbia Tribune disparaged reports that Podesta had asked an outspoken UFO photographer to stop discussing his knowledge of extraterrestrial activities in public.

    “One wonders why Podesta would do such a radical reversal, given his former plea for UFO disclosure,” the editorial implored.

    But contrary to the Columbia Tribune’s concerns, Podesta had clearly not abandoned the cause. He wrote an introduction to the 2010 book “UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Record.”

    Unfortunately, Podesta will likely have little time to fill out FOIA requests in his new job at Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Perhaps, as his tweet suggests, he’s passing the torch to New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://news.yahoo.com/outgoing-obama-adviser-john-podesta-s-biggest-regret-of-2014--keeping-america-in-the-dark-about-ufos-234149498.html

      Delete
  27. February 13, 2015
    Obama the fool
    By Ed Lasky

    When even the Washington Post realizes that we have a fool as president -- a man who has disgraced the office of the presidency -- we have crossed the Rubicon.

    Barack Obama sat down (well, not really as you will see) for an interview with Buzzfeed. This is one of the websites that Barack Obama has used to circumvent mainstream media, let alone conservative media, where he might actually be asked a challenging question every once in a while. Apparently, he could not resist letting his full narcissism be on display.

    The Washington Post’s Philip Bump performs a valuable public service in writing a column that reveals Obama reveling in the greatness of Barack Obama via a string of selfies, including videos that were shot during the Buzzfeed “show.” The title of the column says it all “Which image of Obama mugging for Buzzfeed’s cameras diminishes the presidency the most, ranked.”

    Bump writes:

    Someone somewhere -- someone who already doesn't like Obama -- is going to isolate some part of this as perfectly encapsulating How Obama is Diminishing the Presidency, just as he did in his Glozell interview and just as he did with Galifianakis and just as every presidency in the modern media era has done in some way, according to his opponents. (Yes, yes, this is worse; tell me all about it in the comments.)

    But which is the Most Diminishing Moment?

    To me, the most disgraceful moment is not even in the list; nor is it the interview with the Froot Loops in the bathtub of milk cereal girl. To me, it was his laughter as he went golfing right after announcing the beheading of an American by ISIS.

    Thousands of innocent people are being murdered around the world, Russia is advancing into Europe, Iran is developing nuclear weapons, ISIS is on a rampage. And this is how Obama deals with the duties of his office.

    That this is our Nobel Peace Prize-winning president. No wonder Vladimir Putin and Iranian Mullahs are having a field day at the expense of the West. The leader of the free world is clownish. They realized it years ago; maybe Americans will start getting a clue.

    But so it has been for 6 years.

    Count me speechless. We have a fool as president.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/02/obama_the_fool.html#ixzz3RhveZuvD
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

    ReplyDelete
  28. Zbigniew Brzezinski should have been shoot for failing in his duties of carrying out a coupl

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. coup

      He never got anything right from Iran to Afghanistan.

      Delete
    2. Then there was the stupid wheat boycott....

      Delete
    3. According to eminent agricultural historian R. Douglas Hurt,
      "the United States sold much of the grain initially reserved for the Soviets to other nations that would have purchased from countries now trading with the Russians.

      As a result, total U.S. grain exports rose during the embargo.

      In other words, while grain farmers complained, federal policy in effect simply redirected grain flows while maintaining price levels to the farmers' advantage."


      http://www.livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe70s/money_06.html

      Delete
    4. Some facts, for a change, about the embargo -

      Lessons of the Grain Embargo

      http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/34274/robert-l-paarlberg/lessons-of-the-grain-embargo

      Delete
  29. Bashar al-Assad 'part of the solution' in Syria, says UN envoy

    In first such acknowledgement to the UN, country's envoy says dictator must have a role in Syria's future in ensure peace

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Any resolution to the fighting in Syria must involve President Bashar al-Assad, the United Nations envoy to Syria has said in the first such acknowledgement by the UN.

      "President Assad is part of the solution," Staffan de Mistura told a joint press conference with Austrian Foreign Minister Sebastian Kurz in Vienna on Friday.

      "I will continue to have very important discussions with him," de Mistura added, noting: "The only solution is a political solution."

      This was the first time a UN envoy on Syria has explicitly named Assad as part of a peaceful solution after nearly four years of fighting between government forces and rebels seeking his overthrow.

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11412793/Bashar-al-Assad-part-of-the-solution-in-Syria-says-UN-envoy.html

      Delete
  30. U.S.-backed Iraqi forces will be able to retake cities under Islamic State control this year, Iraq's ambassador to the United States said Thursday.

    "We are confident that this year will be the determinant year," Ambassador Lukman Faily told USA TODAY's editorial board.

    Islamic State control of major towns such as Mosul, the country's second-largest city, "is something we can no longer tolerate," Faily said. The militants commit atrocities against Iraqi citizens every day, he said.

    Forcing the militants out of isolated desert hideaways throughout the country may take longer, he said.

    The Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, seized large swaths of Iraq last year. Since then, U.S. airstrikes in conjunction with Iraqi ground forces have blunted the militant group's expansion, and troops have retaken territory.

    "In a sense, we are winning," Faily said. "We no longer think of ISIS as a threat to the whole integrity of Iraq."

    Driving the militants out will require a substantial ground offensive — one U.S. ground forces will not participate in directly. The Pentagon said it would recommend that teams of advisers accompany Iraqi ground forces if required to help coordinate airstrikes when major ground offensives begin.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/02/12/iraq-ambassador-interview-lukman-faily/23288343/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Faily is fully full of shit.

      "In a sense, we are winning"

      There's a confidence builder......

      Delete
    2. "In a sense, we are winning"

      That's what the men of the 82nd Airborne were saying in Bastogne, as they blunted the German advance, while waiting for the skies to clear and the 3rd Army to arrive.

      But what would a draft dodger know about military history?

      Delete
    3. An amazing display of a sick mind....

      jack you should be committed...

      Delete
    4. You know, Draft Dodgers, and such, don't tend to know what happened at Bastogne before the 101st got there. Just like they forget (or never knew) how badly we did in N. Africa when we first arrived. Then, there was Bull Run.

      History is rife with disgraced armies that returned to fight their way to redemption.

      Delete
    5. Jack is committed to spreading the truth, "O"rdure.

      Delete
    6. As Rommel was driving towards the Cairo and the Suez Canal, Field Marshall Montgomery sent word to Winston Churchill ...

      "In a sense, we are winning"

      And then, after the Battle of El Alamein, even the draft dodgers could see he was correct.

      Delete
    7. As Rommel was driving towards the city of Cairo ...

      or delete 'the'

      Delete
    8. When Winston Churchill was staying in the White House, in 1942, he told FDR ...
      "In a sense, we are winning"

      Delete
    9. When GW Bush stood on the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, the banner behind him declared ...

      Mission Accomplished

      He should have said ...
      "In a sense, we are winning"

      Delete
    10. Because at that point the US was.
      Then came mission creep, and subsequent failure.

      Delete
  31. .

    Ash, yesterday I pointed out reasons Obama's latest AUMF request was strictly political and a bullshit document. The following article proceeds with the same thought but mentions one reason I didn't.

    ...Second, though the presidency had to be formidable to fulfill its national-security mandate, it could be checked in war-fighting just as it was checked in the domestic sphere: by making sure executive and legislative powers were kept separate. The latter were denied to the president: Only Congress has the power to declare war (which formally invokes the law of armed conflict that governs relations between belligerent nations), and only Congress can appropriate the public funds necessary to sustain military campaigns. But Congress was denied any executive power: Only the president is authorized to make command decisions, including those regarding deployment of the armed forces.

    Third, accountability was key. A president was far more likely to make reckless decisions if he knew he could shift the blame for them to Congress, a defense minister, or a privy council. The great trust reposed in the chief executive — and a president has no greater duty than national defense — would be exercised more responsibly and with due urgency if the buck stopped at his desk alone.

    In our constitutional system, therefore, Congress is not permitted to command the armed forces. It has no more power to direct the president to deploy or not deploy ground forces than it does to tell the president to “take that hill” or capture this enemy combatant.


    Congress has the power to authorize the use of force. It can cut off funding or repeal its authorization of force if the objectives of the war have been achieved or if the president is derelict in prosecuting the war. But the Constitution does not authorize Congress to tell the president and his subordinate military commanders that land, sea, or air power is off the table. If a threat to national interests is serious enough, it is Congress’s job to authorize a war. It is then the president’s job to fight it, using whatever military assets are appropriate, in his judgment, to meet war’s unpredictable twists and turns.

    I emphasize the president’s judgment because exercising it is precisely what being commander-in-chief entails...


    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/398597/obamas-unconstitutional-attempt-shift-blame-his-losing-isis-strategy-andrew-c


    Obama is trying to have it all ways, to cover his ass if things go wrong. Of course, it is so blatantly obvious he would never get away with it. And besides, as I stated yesterday, it is meaningless as he is still holding the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs in his back pocket.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  32. Mr Bush speaking in Feb'03:

    Success in Iraq could also begin a new stage for Middle Eastern peace, and set in motion progress towards a truly democratic Palestinian state. (Applause.) The passing of Saddam Hussein's regime will deprive terrorist networks of a wealthy patron that pays for terrorist training, and offers rewards to families of suicide bombers. And other regimes will be given a clear warning that support for terror will not be tolerated. (Applause.)

    Without this outside support for terrorism, Palestinians who are working for reform and long for democracy will be in a better position to choose new leaders. (Applause.) True leaders who strive for peace; true leaders who faithfully serve the people. A Palestinian state must be a reformed and peaceful state that abandons forever the use of terror. (Applause.)


    That was the definition of success, that was the Goal.
    How did that work out, 4,000 US troops KIA and a trillion dollars later?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Invade and occupy Iraq to provide security for the state of Israel.

      "In no sense are we winning"

      Israel is now supporting and providing strategic and tactical airstrikes for those the US was fighting in Iraq, back in '03.

      Delete
    2. Little wonder, then, that US policy in the Middle East appears to be 'conflicted'.

      Delete
    3. .

      .

      Our problems are self-inflicted. Bush/Obama, brothers from different mothers.

      And today we are confronted with the same foolishness.

      Obama has defined success as 'degrading and destroying ISIS, a Quixotic objective on its face given the nature of the enemy, similar to his claim he had 'defeated' al-Queda. However, he then goes on to try to implement a strategy that guarantees failure. Worse, he then tries to have the self-imposed limitations he has created for himself written into law.

      Luckily, he lives in that fairy-tale land named OZ where any president can at any time can define victory as anything he chooses and merely 'declare victory and go home'.

      .

      Delete
    4. The US policy being pursued now is not guaranteed to fail.
      It will not provide satisfaction to those that demand Instant Gratification

      Iraqi security forces and allied militiamen fought Islamic State (IS) militants and recaptured large parts of a town located near the major air base of Ain al-Asad which houses hundreds of US troops in Iraq's western province of Anbar, a provincial security source said Saturday.

      The security forces and Sunni tribesmen backed by US and Iraqi aircraft launched an offensive
      in the early morning hours on the town of al-Baghdadi, some 200 km northwest of Iraq's capital Baghdad, and seized the central part of the town, including the town hall and its police station, after hours of heavy fighting with the extremists, the source told Xinhua news agency on condition of anonymity.

      The troops engaged the IS militants in several pockets in the northern and northeastern parts of the town, the source said.

      "The town is almost under the control of the security forces and the battles are under way to push back the militants with the support from the US Apache helicopters," the source added.


      http://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/iraqi-forces-retake-large-parts-of-town-from-is-115021401197_1.html

      Delete
  33. Fifty million Americans were braced for another punishing winter blast Saturday -
    even as the Northeast was digging out from three major storms in as many weeks.

    It'll be 82 degrees in Scottsdale, AZ., today.

    ReplyDelete
  34. ... the US campaign against the Yemen-based Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) – which US intelligence officials consider to be the terrorist organization’s most potent branch – won’t necessarily suffer a staggering blow, regional and national security experts say.

    “It’s not going to make things easier, for sure, but consider how our counterterrorism activities continued in Pakistan despite the problems and disruptions in bilateral relations there,” says Lawrence Korb, a former Pentagon official and now national security expert at the Center for American Progress (CAP) in Washington. “The reality is that the political chaos doesn’t stop us from taking action [against AQAP].”

    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2015/0214/What-does-Yemen-turmoil-mean-for-US-partnership

    ReplyDelete
  35. It is wonderful to know, as blabbermouth says above, that:

    Jack HawkinsSat Feb 14, 10:48:00 AM EST

    The US policy being pursued now is not guaranteed to fail.


    hoot hoot hoot

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well the truth of it Sunni militia men have joined the Iraqi Security Forces ...
      As have the Kurds and the Shia.

      A situation that Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson said would not occur.
      And now it has.

      Another sign of success, for the US policy being pursued, in Iraq.

      Delete
    2. .

      The US policy being pursued now is not guaranteed to fail.

      IMO, it is. The current policy as enunciated by President Obama is to degrade and destroy ISIS. It is not to degrade and destroy ISIS in Iraq. It is to degrade and destroy ISIS. Period.

      We currently have a policy of containment. You can't say you have 'defeated' ISIS while they have safe haven in Syria. Well, you can say it and some day someone likely will say it but it will carry the same weight as the words of those who used to say we already defeated al Qaeda or that we won Bush's Iraq war.

      As for Syria, we are currently working at cross purposes. We bomb ISIS assets there at the same time we refuse to assault Assad or put up a no-fly zone. Therefore, the people we hope to train to take on ISIS are being systematically eradicated by Assad. In the process, we piss off Turkey, perhaps the one country that could actually help our efforts there.

      On the other hand, we refuse to work with Assad for various reasons including Israel, Turkey, SA, UAE, Qatar, et al, politics, optics, oh, and of course, because Assad is a prick.

      There are some here who talk about one group or another there being better than the other and willing to cooperate with each other or us.

      Bull titty.

      Is there anyone who thinks that when the US finishes training and arming the 'Syrian moderates' that those same moderates won't be using the training and weapons to attack Assad, something we said we wouldn't do. All of the various groups in Syria/Iraq have their own goals in this war and those take precedent for them over any other concerns. They may fight together against a common enemy when needs demand but as soon as that need disappears they will be back at each others throats. Calling Iran our 'ally' in Iraq is a joke. They are merely pursuing what they view are in their national interests. That those aims currently align with ours is less intent than serendipity. The same applies to the Kurds, maybe more so. They are a large group made up of numerous factions all of which have their own goals and objectives.

      Kobane was a huge success from a psychological and public relations standpoint. It was a huge mistake on the part of ISIS. However, at the same time ISIS was failing to take Kobane it was expanding its presence throughout the rest of Syria.

      We may 'defeat' ISIS in the future (well as far as any terrorist group can be said to be defeated while they are still employing asymmetrical warfare). However, we won't do it without either a change in strategy or dumbing down our objective.

      .

      Delete
    3. All goals are achieved, one step at a time, Legionnaire.
      First Daesh will be defeated in Iraq, that is the lower hanging fruit.

      Then the US will have to evaluate the situation in Syria.
      If the true objective is the degradation and destruction of the Islamic State, then the US will have to cooperate with the Assad regime, or invade Syria.

      But that is a bridge the US has not gotten to, yet.

      Delete
    4. .

      Blah. Blah. Blah.

      All very interesting, rat, but it doesn't address the issue we were talking about, can ISIS be defeated given the Strategy 'currently articulated' by the president. It will be the issue we will see discussed in detail as Congress discusses the new AUMF Obama has presented to them.

      .

      .

      Delete
  36. "It will not provide satisfaction to those that demand Instant Gratification."

    That would be General 'Doofus' Rufus.

    Satisfaction demanded by the 4th of July, 2015 or he's an alligators mother, and father too.................

    Hoot hoot hothoothoot

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your misinterpretation of Rufus's position, symptomatic of your mental incapacity, Robert.

      That is a hoot, ain't it.

      Delete
    2. There will be no delayed gratification for the doof.....

      Delete
    3. Not one ISIS member left in Iraq by July 4th, 2015.

      No misrepresentation there.

      Just a fool, 6BudTongue, gurgling his morning liquid, with you, another fool, right behind.

      Delete
  37. Optimism is a virtue, unless one's life depends on it.

    Catallyst

    ReplyDelete
  38. Nightmare ScenarioSat Feb 14, 01:17:00 PM EST

    February 14, 2015
    Nightmare scenario unfolding for Obama at Ayn al-Assad Air base
    By Thomas Lifson

    The massive air base at Ayn al-Assad in Iraq’s Anbar Province hosts 400 US Service members, who are training Iraq Air Force personnel. They now are in danger of serving as hostages to ISIS, which has conquered the nearby city of Al Baghdadi and already threatened the perimeter of the base.

    As a result, US helicopters have been brought in to provide close ground support for the Iraqi boots on the ground. CNN:

    Robert Baer, a former CIA officer, said the battles may indicate a deepening involvement of U.S. troops in the fight against ISIS.

    "I think what we're seeing here is mission creep," he said Friday night. "The Iraqi army is not up to the task. And without the United States Air Force and the military on the ground, a lot of these ... bases would be overrun."

    President Obama’s dream of US withdrawal from Iraq was realized, only to turn into a nightmare, as it became clear that without US support, the Iraqi military would crumble before the ISIS threat. Now, that support is in danger:

    Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby described the battle at the air base, saying, "It looks like they at least got to the outer base limits. We're still looking at this and it's hard to say whether they breached the perimeter or not. But they certainly got to the perimeter level at the very least."

    He said 20-25 people led by suicide bombers made the attack. Most, if not all, of the attackers were wearing Iraqi military uniforms, Kirby said.

    Obama’s ultimate nightmare is a US pilot being shot down and falling into the hands of ISIS. Helicopters, for all their armor, are vulneable to ground fire. God forbid such a thing happen, for the pilot would undoubtedly be exploited on video and subjected to a hideously cruel death. In such an instance, public opinion in the United States would demand serious military engagement.

    Under the half-hearted leadership of Obama, such engagement could lead to a major disaster. It all seemed so simple under the illusion that if only the malign US presence were ended, peace, love and happiness would result.

    We are living in perilous times.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/02/nightmare_scenario_unfolding_for_obama_at_ayn_alassad_air_base.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nightmare ScenarioSat Feb 14, 01:20:00 PM EST

      "The Iraqi army is not up to the task"

      Delete
    2. If at first they don't succeed, try, try again.

      There is lots of time, more than a decade, for them to get the skill sets required.
      The US took a decade and failed at the task, the Iraqi can't do worse.

      Delete
    3. .

      It's really quite amazing how quickly some here have become comfortable with the idea of the 'long war'. It seems like only yesterday they were complaining about our extended interventions in the ME.

      .

      Delete
    4. I'm very comfortable with the idea of a "long war," if it's the Iraqis, et al, fighting it.

      Delete
    5. if the Iraqi fight a long war, and there are no US ground troops involved, who really cares?
      It is their country, their war.

      The government the US installed needs both logistical and tactical air support, the US can deliver those with little 'downside risk'.

      Delete
    6. To not deliver the support the Iraqi need, well the US did that to the Shah, did that to President Diem of Vietnam ...

      The Iraqi government does not want nor do they need US troops on the ground.

      Delete
  39. On Friday, however, Isis fighters led a suicide attack on an airbase in Iraq where US and coalition troops are training Iraqi forces. Isis launched the attack after taking the nearby town of al-Baghdadi, their first territorial gain in months, the Pentagon said.

    Most of the Isis fighters died in the attack, killed either by Iraqi government forces or by detonating their suicide vests, said Navy Rear Admiral John Kirby, the Pentagon spokesman, who added that no Iraqi or US troops were killed or wounded, and no US troops were involved in the gunfight.

    More Dead Men - Not Walking, Not Talking, Just Daid

    It was also reported on Saturday that the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has responded to overtures from President Barack Obama amid nuclear talks by sending the US president a secret letter.

    Co-operation against Isis, in the event of a nuclear deal being secured, was reported to be at issue.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Nightmare ScenarioSat Feb 14, 02:38:00 PM EST

    Rufus IISat Feb 14, 02:16:00 PM EST

    I'm very comfortable with the idea of a "long war," if it's the Iraqis, et al, fighting it.



    BwabwBWBbwBWBbwBWBWBbWBQbwa gag gag gag hahahahahhahahahaqhhaha

    NOW he tells us

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nightmare ScenarioSat Feb 14, 02:48:00 PM EST

      NOW we're looking at July 4th, 2025.....

      Most of won't still be around this veil of tears then......

      Bwahahaha -

      Generals Rufus and rat are frauds.....

      Delete
  41. We might as well be comfortable with the "long war."

    The world has been pretty much at war every since that one retarded little ape swung down from the trees.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Nightmare ScenarioSat Feb 14, 02:54:00 PM EST

    Might as well go ahead and make it July 4th 2055..........

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. if that is what it takes, then that is what the US should do.
      We have a commitment to the Iraqi government, we should fulfill it.

      But the US should heed the Iraqi government's requests to not invade their country, again.

      Delete
    2. Chances are, in Iraq, the fighting will be over by Summer.
      Especially now that the Sunni tribesmen are fighting along side the Shia in the Iraqi Army.

      That is an indication of the 'Plan Coming Together'

      Delete
    3. Yesterday's news from Iraq, very encouraging in that regard.

      Delete
  43. Rumsfeld said that the United States is "engaged in what could be a generational conflict akin to the Cold War, the kind of struggle that might last decades as allies work to root out terrorists across the globe and battle extremists who want to rule the world,"

    ... allies work ...
    Being the operative phrase, from Mr Rumsfeld.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From the DoD transcript:

      Q: Mr. Secretary, when you and Admiral Giambastiani use the phrase, as the president did, "the long war", are you preparing -- trying to prepare the American public for the idea that U.S. troops are going to be deployed in significant numbers overseas, fighting in a combat situation for an indefinite amount of time?

      SEC. RUMSFELD: No.

      The -- quite the contrary. I think what we're trying to do is to just simply tell the truth. And the truth is that just as the Cold War lasted a long time, this war is something that is not going to go away. It's not going to be settled with a signing ceremony on the USS Missouri. It is of a different nature. And it does not have to do with deployment of U.S. military forces, necessarily.

      Delete
    2. .

      We hardly needed Rumsfeld to state the obvious for us.

      The question is not whether we will be fighting terrorists for a long time but rather how we go about fighting them. Hell, we have been fighting them for much of our history, long before Sept.11.

      .

      Delete
    3. I think it is vitally important for a President to know when to use military force.

      I think it is also very important for him to know when not to commit U.S. military force.
      And it’s my view that the President got it right both times, that it would have been a mistake for us to get bogged down in the quagmire inside Iraq.

      Source: Speech at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy Apr 29, 1991

      Delete
    4. Exactly, Legionnaire, it is 'best' for US allies to take the fight to the terrorists, the insurgents, each in their own country.
      No need for US troops to get involved in these local battles.

      Mr Rumsfeld and Mr Cheney were right, before they forgot what their operating principles were.

      Delete
  44. .

    Speaking of Rumsfeld and 'long wars' wasn't he the guy who estimated the cost of Iraq II would come in south of $50 billion depending on how much of the tab our 'allies' picked up?

    The Fiscal Times has estimated the cost of the Iraq/Syrian war at the levels Obama is currently talking will be around $15 billion per year. That number doesn't match Adm. Kirby's estimate from last September that the cost would be about $10 million plus per day but it does seem to kind of fall in the range of other estimates I saw ranging from $5 billion to $20 billion per year. Most of the costs are associated with the weapons and ammunition the US will be expending and supplying to other allied forces.

    Obviously, if circumstances and strategies change costs could balloon.

    In 5 years, we are talking $75 billion. In a 10 year 'long-war' we could be talking $150 billion. A drop in the bucket when compared to Iraq II or Afghanistan but of course we are not really invading a country. At least, not yet.

    On the other hand, for those who worry more about things here than there the following link provides an exercise in measuring the lost opportunity costs associated with war.

    https://www.nationalpriorities.org/cost-of/

    An interesting factoid,

    In Libya, where we employed basically the same tactics we are using in Iraq/Syria, the military estimates the cost to the US was about $1.1 billion.

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeppers, he and his posse told US it would be weeks, months in Iraq, not years.
      That the Iraqi oil would pay the US tab.
      But then, after Saddam went down, the goal posts moved.

      The US would not allow for quick elections in Iraq, that was when the Mission changed.
      When Cheney and Rumsfeld forgot their principles and got US into the quagmire.

      Delete
    2. .

      But mission creep has been the history of are participation in these little tussles. Always has been. Will this time be any different? Some, including me, doubt it.

      .

      Delete
    3. Didn't happen in Grenada.

      Delete
    4. .

      Of course, it happened in Libya.

      The initial excuse for going in was 'humanitarian reasons'.

      It morphed to regime change and eventually to taking out Gaddafi.

      Hillary thought it was funny as hell, "We came, we saw, he died." Yuck. Yuck.

      .

      Delete
    5. .

      Didn't happen in Grenada.

      The operation took 3 days. They were still typing the memo changing the mission when it was over.

      .

      Delete
  45. More Dick Cheney, back in the day when he was right ...


    I think everybody has preconceived notions. I am a great believer that you have to be very cautious when you deploy US troops--that you should not do it when you can't think of anything else to do. You need to do it when there is some purpose that can be achieved by the application of military force. You need to do it when there is a strategically vital issue at stake that affects the United States.

    You don't do it simply because there are terrible pictures running on CNN of bad things happening to people in some part of the globe. That may indeed be a great tragedy, but it may not lend itself to the commitment of American military force.

    In recent years, we have not had that kind of consideration with respect to our deployments. That's one of the reasons we're in difficulty today--we've over-committed the force. And we've put ourselves in several situations around the world where we now have no concept of how we're going to get out, how we're going to end that deployment, and what would constitute victory in that scenario. And those are important questions to ask.

    ReplyDelete
  46. You guys pass gas by the minute.

    rat hole was at Labor Day '15 for a while, or was it Memorial Day '15, not to matter now he's the Long War guy.

    Rufus is finally seeing the light that he has made an abject fool of himself and is now, too, talking 'Long War'

    No one yet has made a good argument why we ought to be there at all, other that to help the Kurds.

    What are we really trying to do put Iraq back TOGETHER again?

    If you think this is really feasible you are really passing gas.....risible gas....

    ReplyDelete
  47. I don't think it was Rumsfeld that was the short war easy prediction guy, the Rufus of his day.

    I think it was that other guy that went to the World Bank, or somewhere like that......what was his name ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That you do not think, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, that's par for the course.

      Read the quotes, Draft Dodger, he was sure it would not be more than months, in Iraq.

      Delete
    2. "It is unknowable how long that conflict [the war in Iraq] will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."
      - Donald Rumsfeld in Feb. 2003

      Delete
    3. Fuck off War Criminal, Dead Beat Dad, Liar, Coward, Stalker, Self professed professional asshole, and self confessed moron.

      They were all singing from the same songbook at the time anyway.......I recall Wolf, you recall Rummy.........

      So, Fuck Off, Dead Beat Dad.....

      Stalk Ash for awhile, or Quirt.....

      Delete
    4. ad hominem

      when you lack an ability to talk to issues. you attack the messenger...

      Delete
  48. Wolfowitz?

    Anyway these 'long wars' are ready made for 'strategic patience' so we can all rest easy that our idiot President is on the right track.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 11/15/2002, Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
      “Five days or five months, but it certainly isn’t going to last longer.”

      01/10/2003, Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
      “… something under $50 billion for the cost. How much of that would be the U.S. burden, and how much would be other countries, is an open question.”

      Delete
    2. 3/27/2003, Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary
      “There’s a lot of money to pay for this … the oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years…We’re dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.”

      Delete
    3. 06/29/2005, Dick Cheney, Vice President
      I think they’re in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency.


      03/18/2006, Dick Cheney, Vice President,
      “Q: About a year ago, you said that the insurgency in Iraq was in its final throes. Do you still believe this?
      Cheney: Yes.“

      Delete
    4. 11/15/1999, Dick Cheney, CEO of Halliburton (later, Vice President)
      “Oil remains fundamentally a government business.
      While many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two-thirds of the world’s oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies, even though companies are anxious for greater access there, progress continues to be slow.”
      (at the London Institute of Petroleum)


      9/9/2008, Alan Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal Reserve through 2005. (from The Age of Turbulence, p.463)
      “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.”

      Delete
    5. 10/11/2000, George W. Bush, Candidate for President
      “I don’t think our troops ought to be used for what’s called nation building.”


      There you go, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, the truth of the matter.

      Delete

    6. The Republicans, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, lied and better men than you died.

      Delete
    7. I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today would last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that.
      - Donald Rumsfeld - Interview with Steve Croft, Infinity CBS Radio Connect, November 14, 2002

      Delete
    8. And it is not knowable if force will be used, but if it is to be used, it is not knowable how long that conflict would last. It could last, you know, six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.

      Donald Rumsfeld - TownHall Meeting At Aviano Air Base in Italy, February 7, 2003

      Delete
    9. >>>In the first emergency meeting of the National Security Council on the day of the attacks, Rumsfeld asked, "Why shouldn’t we go against Iraq, not just al-Qaeda?" with Wolfowitz adding that Iraq was a "brittle, oppressive regime that might break easily—it was doable," and, according to John Kampfner, "from that moment on, he and Wolfowitz used every available opportunity to press the case."[34] The idea was initially rejected, at the behest of Secretary of State Colin Powell, but, according to Kampfner, "Undeterred Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz held secret meetings about opening up a second front—against Saddam. Powell was excluded." In such meetings they created a policy that would later be dubbed the Bush Doctrine, centering on "pre-emption" and the war on Iraq, which the PNAC had advocated in their earlier letters.[35]<<<

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wolfowitz

      Rummy and Wolf - not much light between the two of them.

      Delete
    10. Jack HawkinsSat Feb 14, 06:22:00 PM EST

      10/11/2000, George W. Bush, Candidate for President
      “I don’t think our troops ought to be used for what’s called nation building.”


      What's the point of this shit ? Bush was extremely clear that the Trade Center attacks changed his views on many things.

      Nothing odd in that. Trouble is we have not done a good job of nation building, and Afghanistan will soon, after our Boy Genius takes the last of the troops out, be a big training ground for terrorism once again.

      Why not quote O'bozo, Mr rat Quotes, as to how Afghanistan 'is the important war, the war we must win' ?

      The upshot is we've lost both places and are reducing to having some opportunity of helping the Kurds. That's all, folks.

      Delete
    11. The discovery of widespread FGM in Iraqi Kurdistan suggests the assumption to be incorrect that FGM is primarily an African phenomenon with only marginal occurrence in the eastern Islamic world. FGM is practiced at a rate of nearly 60 percent by Iraqi Kurds, then how prevalent is the practice in neighboring Syria where living conditions and cultural and religious practices are comparable?

      Why should a single US soldier die to protect this horrid cultural practice,
      Answer US that Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson

      Delete
    12. ad hominem

      when you lack an ability to talk to issues. you attack the messenger...

      Delete
  49. rat, you should take Warfarin for your high blood pressure. Available at Wal-Mart it is in your priced range. If mom won't let you out of the basement maybe she can pick some up for you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, you still do not think and there are no drugs that will help that condition.

      Delete
    2. Try Warfarin, rat.

      It will work wonders for you.

      Trust me.

      Delete
    3. I trust you to not think, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson.

      Beyond that, I trust you are a coward, a moral morass.

      Delete
    4. ad hominem

      when you lack an ability to talk to issues. you attack the messenger...

      Delete
  50. If you find Warfarin ineffective, you can always switch to brodifacoum, or a combo of the two.

    ReplyDelete
  51. KANO: Nigeria's President Goodluck Jonathan appealed for more US help in fighting Boko Haram, as the rebels struck again on Saturday and called for a boycott of upcoming general elections.

    The head of state for the first time claimed direct links between the Sunni radicals who have been waging a six-year insurgency in Nigeria and the Islamic State group in Syria and Iraq.

    He told the Wall Street Journal in an interview: "Are they (the United States) not fighting ISIS? Why can't they come to Nigeria?

    "They are our friends. If Nigeria has a problem, then I expect the US to come and assist us."

    But Pentagon spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby said there are no plans to send US troops to Nigeria.

    "I can tell you that there are no plans as I speak here to send unilaterally, to send or to add US troops into Nigeria. There are no US troops operating in Nigeria," he told reporters.

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/Nigerian-president-calls-for-US-help-as-Boko-Haram-invade-city/articleshow/46248506.cms

    ReplyDelete
  52. (CNN)

    An Iraqi tribal leader said Saturday that ISIS militants are gaining ground in Anbar province, predicting a "collapse within hours" of Iraqi army forces there if tribal forces withdraw.

    Sheikh Naim al-Gaoud, a Sunni Muslim leader of the Albu Nimr tribe, called for more U.S. intervention -- including ground troops, arming tribes directly or at least pressuring the Iraqi government to give the tribes more firepower.

    While U.S. officials have said that ISIS, which calls itself the Islamic State, is on the defensive in Iraq and Syria, al-Gaoud says that's definitely not the case where he is.

    "In Anbar, we are losing ground, not gaining," he said.

    Thousands of families had been under siege in the town of Jubbat al-Shamiya until getting help Friday from U.S.-led coalition airstrikes and Iraqi forces, according to al-Gaoud.

    But he said Iraqi troops had pulled out of Jubbat al-Shamiya on Saturday, at which time ISIS was shelling the town.

    If the Islamist extremist group's fighters go in, al-Gaoud predicted a massacre.............

    http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/14/middleeast/isis-iraq-syria/index.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Second time today you posted that agitprop from the Sunni tribal spokesman, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson.

      At least try to think.

      Delete
    2. Have you decided, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, on whether you want the draft dodger quote or the wife's voter fraud episode to be posted?

      You get to decide, or you'll get 'em both.

      {;-)

      Delete
    3. ad hominem

      when you lack an ability to talk to issues. you attack the messenger...

      Delete
    4. Sorry. Slipped into using your technique I guess.

      Say the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over day after day year after year.............

      Drink it up, Clown, Warfarin chaser.

      Delete
    5. Not at all, Anonymous, I am giving Robert 'draft Dodger" Peterson some editorial choices.

      Delete
    6. Yepper, Robert "Draft Dodger" Peterson, as long as you are in denial, living in your delusional state, the song remains the same.
      If you were to make amends, we could move on.

      Delete
  53. Anbar province could 'collapse within hours'...

    ISIS prisoners paraded in cages 'to be burned alive'...

    4,000 American troops headed to Kuwait for possible showdown...

    Islamic State Sprouting Limbs Beyond Mideast..........drudge

    Had been wondering about Kuwait.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'Could' is a big word, Robert.

      Means maybe, maybe not

      Which do you think will it be?

      Delete
    2. As for the troops from Fort Carson, the deployment has been planned for over a year.

      In its most recent deployment to Kuwait, a combat team from Fort Carson conducted training missions with allies including Jordan and the United Arab Emirates, which have joined the coalition against Islamic State fighters.

      The unit headed to Kuwait is Fort Carson's heaviest force, armed with tanks and Bradley Fighting Vehicles. Many of its soldiers are veterans of one or more of the brigade's previous combat tours in Iraq.

      "We're no strangers to deployment," said the brigade's ..

      The brigade has trained more than a year for the Kuwait mission.



      http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/46248630.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

      Delete
    3. Possible 'showdown', what a crock of shit you are peddling.
      The deployment has been scheduled for over a year, well before Daesh started their campaign.

      Still grasping at straws, Draft Dodger.

      Delete
  54. Jerusalem Post -

    Lapid: Netanyahu has 'lost touch with reality,' should no longer be Israel's PM

    ReplyDelete
  55. You all may recall that I referred to the GOP victory in November as inconsequential

    At least some of the GOP members in the House seem to agree.

    "I suppose elections have consequences, except in the United States Senate,"
    complained GOP Rep. Mick Mulvaney of South Carolina.
    "Tell me how it would be different” if Nevada Democratic Sen. Harry Reid was still the Senate majority leader.


    Hate to say "I told you so", but I did.
    And, truth be told, I do not hate saying it ...

    {;-)
    Reality strikes, again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02/14/budget-stalemate-house-sticks-senate-republicans-with-stalled-dhs-bill/

      Delete