Obama Admits He Has ‘(No) Strategy’ To Deal With ISIS As Terror Chatter Increases On Eve Of 9/11

Loading

Ben Barrack:

When asked about how he plans to confront ISIS in Syria, President Barack Obama made a stunning admission saying, “We don’t have a strategy yet”. He said this at a time when the intelligence community is reporting a “significant increase” in terror chatter as the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks approaches.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/JePNVyW4Oeg[/youtube]

Reasons why Obama has no strategy for dealing with ISIS are varied but as Shoebat.com has reported, chief among them likely involves Turkey. As evidence becomes increasingly overwhelming that Turkey has a lot riding on the ISIS horse in Syria, the U.S. is in a bigger and bigger pinch.

Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan wants Bashar al-Assad gone. The best way to ensure that happens is for the U.S. to let ISIS make that happen. A defeat of ISIS by the U.S. would be a defeat for NATO ‘ally’ Turkey.

Reports also suggest that Erdogan is increasingly angry with the Obama administration and that the two haven’t spoken since February as Shoebat.com reported. In the minds of the neo-Ottomanists like Erdogan, Assad should have been removed a long time ago and it’s the U.S. which hasn’t been able to make that happen. Erdogan would see any successful Obama ‘strategy’ to deal with ISIS as another thumb in the eye to Turkey.

The Benghazi attack two years ago reportedly ended a covert weapons trafficking operation that shipped weapons to the Syrian rebels; this is said to have angered Erdogan. Then after attempts by Turkey to get Obama to declare Assad had crossed the ‘red line’, the best opportunity to get Obama to take the bait came last August with the chemical attack in Ghouta.

That didn’t work either. Credible reports suggest Turkey was behind it in an attempt to frame Assad and create the political appetite for finishing him off; that didn’t happen.

Seymour Hersh put it this way:

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
105 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

@Randy #97:

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I have flown maybe a dozen times in the past two years, and photo ID was always demanded. My 87-year-old mother wasn’t allowed to take a booked flight last year because she arrived at the airport without her driver’s license or passport. I incorrectly assumed that these rules that were being applied to me and mine were also being applied to all travelers, and evidently they are not. I support your argument that this security breach should be eliminated at once.

On a different note, I find some disquieting illogic in the demand to punish ISIS for their recent beheadings, and I am hoping that you will enlighten me.

We have already discussed here at Flopping Aces the ineffectiveness of handling with kid gloves the propensity toward terrorism shown by radical Islam. Bobachek, in #1 of “ISIS beheads another American” refers to this problem rather effectively. The problem, however, is that there isn’t much difference between actions that would deter terrorism and actions that would be regarded as genocide. Unfortunately for us, the threshold for genocide is lower than the threshold for effective deterrence in ISIS’s case. This presents a predicament for which there is no simple solution.

One of the problems we face is that ISIS first killed ONE reporter, and a week or so later killed another ONE reporter. The lack of multiple corpses (at least on our account) makes aggressive retaliation problematic. We can point to ISIS’s other brutalities to justify a brutally punishing response, but going that route loses some of the support for what is otherwise an “eye-for-an-eye” exercise. Bush had the ethical justification to invade Iraq thanks to the perceived threat of WMDs, and the anticipated number of deaths attributable to the invasion would presumably be compensated by the number of lives saved from finding and eliminating the presumed WMD’s. (The West requires a measure of proportionality to be exercised in the pursuit of justice, a need not recognized by the Muslim World.) ISIS HAS brutally killed two Americans, but so far, it has failed to provide us a target to aim at if we intend to rain massive death upon ISIS in particular, and as yet we don’t have a compelling reason to simply begin executing Muslims in large numbers.

Probably just as well. There are about 1.6 billion Muslims World-wide. The vast majority of them are not working in concert with ISIS to establish the holy caliphate. While the Ft. Hood shooter and the Boston Marathon bombers are or were Muslims, their actions were NOT part of any large conspiracy. They were lone wolves, and there are about 1.6 billion potential lone wolves out there. What exactly IS the rational way of dealing with THEM?

ISIS beheaded a reporter, and Obama shot up a couple of trucks, one of which may have had a machine gun mounted on it. Proportional responses won’t deter beheadings. But beyond shooting up a few trucks, what exactly are the effective targets? There is no ISIS city, no ISIS Pentagon. Nobody lines up in a row to shoot at us anymore. Just what options do you think that we have that are not already being pursued?

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/u-s-fears-isil-smuggling-nuclear-and-radioactive-materials/
Well, it looks like there may be a serious issue with terrorists here in the US. (Maybe Europe) With nuclear materials, a dirty bomb is a reality. Any dummy can make one of those.

@Randy #102:

“With nuclear materials, a dirty bomb is a reality. Any dummy can make one of those.”

That’s right, Randy. Sealing the border with Mexico wouldn’t stop the threat. Deporting 20 million illegal aliens wouldn’t stop the threat. A lone individual can transport and detonate a dirty bomb, and there is practically no corner of this vast country where such a device COULDN’T be secreted to and exploded.

ISIS could do it.
But just about anyone else could also do it.
Chechen separatists could do it.
An American could do it. (The Oklahoma City bomber)
Virtually ANYONE with a bone to pick with ANYONE could do it.

So what’s your point, Randy?

@FMB42: #8

Meanwhile, his tactically meaningless “airstrikes” against ISIS are nothing more than dog and pony shows designed to satisfy those that worship him.

As I have mentioned before, I haven’t seen any air strike against any MILITARY vehicle. The only vehicles I have seen blown up were civilian type vehicles. If military type vehicles were blown up, I haven’t seen a video of it. I can’t believe we can’t find ANY military type targets to blow up.

This reminds me of a military saying: If things are blowing up all around you, it’s probably us.

@Randy: #59

How would you classify FA trolls? Low information voters, just hired dunces, just plain ignorant or ones who haven’t a clue?

Most of them are probably professions at getting votes for democrats. That is probably what they do all day long. I kept track of some, and they were posting all day long, and into the night. They couldn’t have a job, except to try to get votes for democrats. They are TRULY professional trolls.