Isis taking control of Syria

[Guest]

Now Isis took control of 1/2 of Syria they certainly are not a jv team, are they. Now they own 1/2 the oil wells. I am so frightened of what is to come for our grandchildren. We are losing to these Islamic terrorists at a rapid speed and the president still does Nothing

[Guest]

Now Isis took control of 1/2 of Syria they certainly are not a jv team, are they. Now they own 1/2 the oil wells. I am so frightened of what is to come for our grandchildren. We are losing to these Islamic terrorists at a rapid speed and the president still does Nothing

What's amazing to me is ... he literally just does not seem to care. He gets an intell briefing on how things are falling apart, and then the next thing he does is go play golf.

Maybe there is a psychiatrist here on TOTV who can explain Obama's thinking for us all?

[Guest]

Oh wait. He was busy. He was telling the coast guard that global warming is the biggest threat to our military instead of Isis to our country . talk about A__ backwards

[Guest]

What would you do IF you were in charge?

Would you send 20,000 - 30,000 ground troops to Syria to take on ISIS forces and recapture some of the captured cities? How many US troops would be captured and beheaded on camera would you be willing to accept? How many US lives would you be willing to lose to recapture Iraq or Syria cities?

We know that the US trained Iraqui forces are not worth a thing. They throw down their US supplied weapons and run. Training and arming them is a waste of money.

Don't say a residual US force would have stopped ISIS. That is looking backward. What do we do - looking forward?

Americans, as a whole, are not willing to waste more American soldiers lives or Billions more dollars throwing them down that mid-east rathole.

Concentrate on national security of antiterrorist activities of all kinds.

[Guest]

What would you do IF you were in charge?

Would you send 20,000 - 30,000 ground troops to Syria to take on ISIS forces and recapture some of the captured cities? How many US troops would be captured and beheaded on camera would you be willing to accept? How many US lives would you be willing to lose to recapture Iraq or Syria cities?

We know that the US trained Iraqui forces are not worth a thing. They throw down their US supplied weapons and run. Training and arming them is a waste of money.

Don't say a residual US force would have stopped ISIS. That is looking backward. What do we do - looking forward?

Americans, as a whole, are not willing to waste more American soldiers lives or Billions more dollars throwing them down that mid-east rathole.

Concentrate on national security of antiterrorist activities of all kinds.

I didn't run for President, and I didn't convince the majority of electorate that I was up to the task of leading the country. I also don't have the daily intel to made an informed decision. So how can you expect me to come up with the solution to Obama's incompetence?

As I see it, ground troops ground is probably the only solution. How many troops? I have no idea, I am not a strategic planner. But how long does Obama allow this cancer to spread before he takes meaningful action? Surely even he will come to the realization that ground troops are needed, the only question is how long will it take? My guess is he will be out off office before this happens and it will become the next Presidents problem.



Yet, at every opportunity Democrats "look backward" and deamonize President Bush. Why don't they look forward?

[Guest]

Whether any of us like it or not, including those who voted for him, he is accomplishing HIS agenda.

What I find as concerning is of the multitude of people in Washington who know and understand the error of Obama's ways yet nobody does anything.

Have we by default degenerated to a monarch form of rule? Must be as that is how we are behaving.

Obama has no election to lose confronting him......this makes him all the more of a threat to our America as we KNEW it.

[Guest]

What would you do IF you were in charge?

Would you send 20,000 - 30,000 ground troops to Syria to take on ISIS forces and recapture some of the captured cities? How many US troops would be captured and beheaded on camera would you be willing to accept? How many US lives would you be willing to lose to recapture Iraq or Syria cities?

We know that the US trained Iraqui forces are not worth a thing. They throw down their US supplied weapons and run. Training and arming them is a waste of money.

Don't say a residual US force would have stopped ISIS. That is looking backward. What do we do - looking forward?

Americans, as a whole, are not willing to waste more American soldiers lives or Billions more dollars throwing them down that mid-east rathole.

Concentrate on national security of antiterrorist activities of all kinds.

First, and I realize this is looking in the rear view mirror a bit, but I would not have totally ignored this situation for so long, would not have drawn a redline I did not intend to enforce, and would not have allowed Russia to control the use of gas warfare, WHICH HAS RETURNED.

We now have very little choice except to get involved. We use our drones sparingly in Syria.....we are arming the wrong tribes...ie, we favor the Shia which is basically Iran and ignore the other tribes who from historical perspective will actually fight.

Please read how we choose to arm....only Iran backed tribes. What are we creating here ?

[Guest]

Whether any of us like it or not, including those who voted for him, he is accomplishing HIS agenda.

What I find as concerning is of the multitude of people in Washington who know and understand the error of Obama's ways yet nobody does anything.

Have we by default degenerated to a monarch form of rule? Must be as that is how we are behaving.

Obama has no election to lose confronting him......this makes him all the more of a threat to our America as we KNEW it.

Posts like this say nothing about how to solve or resolve the situation.

As the one poster stated, Americans are tired of throwing money down this rathole. Americans, as a whole, would not waste anymore American lives in that rathole.

The training by Americans of Iraqi or other forces has been a disaster as they throw down their weapons and run.

Strengthen our borders, monitor Internet chat and social media for threats, maintain good intel, and some covert activities to undermine ISIS might be useful things to do.

[Guest]

Don't say a residual US force would have stopped ISIS. That is looking backward. What do we do - looking forward?



Interesting, as the previous poster said - okay to look backward to President Bush all these years, but now looking backward is not allowed as far as our current President is concerned. Hmmmm.......could it be because in doing so it would now be very obvious how many mistakes President Obama has made and how incompetent he really is? Asking someone on this board what would you do looking forward is only a bait question when no one here has the knowledge to properly answer it as the previous poster also stated. Now if you want to talk ideas/suggestions that's another matter, but I don't get from the tone of your post that is what you are looking for.

[Guest]

Strengthen our borders, monitor Internet chat and social media for threats, maintain good intel, and some covert activities to undermine ISIS might be useful things to do.

Your ideas above are all good and necessary. However, I'm not sure we can wait until they are at our front door. It may be too late by then, and many of our allies may already be overrun by ISIS. I admit, I don't have the answers, but I'm not comfortable with an administration that sits on its hands. And one that acts so nonchalant about it just angers me.

[Guest]

What's amazing to me is ... he literally just does not seem to care. He gets an intell briefing on how things are falling apart, and then the next thing he does is go play golf.

Maybe there is a psychiatrist here on TOTV who can explain Obama's thinking for us all?

The president won two elections on ending wars, not escalating them, so why is anyone surprised? As Obama said yesterday, Iraq has to defend its own country. We can't do it for them. (paraphrasing here)

And BTW: congress has never gotten around to debating the war against ISSL authorization that the president requested several months ago.

[Guest]

Interesting, as the previous poster said - okay to look backward to President Bush all these years, but now looking backward is not allowed as far as our current President is concerned. Hmmmm.......could it be because in doing so it would now be very obvious how many mistakes President Obama has made and how incompetent he really is? Asking someone on this board what would you do looking forward is only a bait question when no one here has the knowledge to properly answer it as the previous poster also stated. Now if you want to talk ideas/suggestions that's another matter, but I don't get from the tone of your post that is what you are looking for.

Looking backward at Bush or Obama does not do anything good. They both made big mistakes.

No, mine was not a bait question at all. I was hoping to hear comment from others about solutions they think might work.

Mine is to cut our huge losses over there. Concentrate on securing borders from possible terrorists, government increasing intel from terrorist countries as well as increasing monitoring of known social media and other internet sites that have been used to recruit for and to spread terrorist information. Also, another possibility would be for the US to use fake web sites to tell horror stories of recruits who have gone to be terrorists and engage in counter-propaganda.

[Guest]

The president won two elections on ending wars, not escalating them, so why is anyone surprised? As Obama said yesterday, Iraq has to defend its own country. We can't do it for them. (paraphrasing here)

And BTW: congress has never gotten around to debating the war against ISSL authorization that the president requested several months ago.

Your vision of this is very shortsighted and basically, no TOTALLY, political in nature.

The hearings on his AUMF were heard right away, and not many in congress believe in the wallowing plan presented to them by Secy Kerry or JCS Dempsey.

The authorization proposal forwarded to congress was and is political. It served to do just what you are doing and what the CINC wanted...see, you asked for one and I gave it to you. Again, he plays the politics of it and is perhaps the fuzziness proposal of all time, not even strongly defended by Kerry.

This from THE HILL......

"
From the day the ISIL AUMF draft was delivered to Capitol Hill through the Foreign Relations Committee hearing that was held on March 11, President Obama has simply failed to persuade any lawmaker in a position of seniority that his approach is the right one. The “intentionally fuzzy” language in the resolution, as White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest has referred to it, has created far more questions for members of Congress than answers. In fact, the draft is not only getting picked apart by lawmakers, but trashed as insufficient to the monumental task at hand or so vague to render any limits on military force irrelevant."

The AUMF: Obama fails to get Congress on his side | TheHill (http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/homeland-security/235825-the-aumf-obama-fails-to-get-congress-on-his-side)

The debate still continues, while this President tries to con people who know better that his plan is working.

He played politics again, as he does always on important issues.

As always, he feels he is supreme and he alone knows the answers.

From the same article...

"In a way, you have to feel sorry for Obama and his staff. After delaying for the first six months of the military campaign, the administration finally decided to do the right thing — submit a formal AUMF proposal over to the Hill. Yet, in doing so, the administration has opened up a debate that has once again devolved in a partisan fight about whether the White House truly understands the threat that ISIL poses, and whether the executive branch sincerely wants the peoples’ representatives to weight in.

Under questioning, Kerry intimated that passing a resolution along party lines would be “absolutely” worse than passing no resolution at all. If yesterday’s hearing is any guide, Kerry may get his wish."

Our President is a superb, masterful politician. I am looking for statesmanship and leadership.

[Guest]

What would you do IF you were in charge?

Would you send 20,000 - 30,000 ground troops to Syria to take on ISIS forces and recapture some of the captured cities? How many US troops would be captured and beheaded on camera would you be willing to accept? How many US lives would you be willing to lose to recapture Iraq or Syria cities?

We know that the US trained Iraqui forces are not worth a thing. They throw down their US supplied weapons and run. Training and arming them is a waste of money.

Don't say a residual US force would have stopped ISIS. That is looking backward. What do we do - looking forward?

Americans, as a whole, are not willing to waste more American soldiers lives or Billions more dollars throwing them down that mid-east rathole.

Concentrate on national security of antiterrorist activities of all kinds.

If I was in charge the first thing I would do is assess the threat to the US. Answer: large, and only ot get bigger over time.

The next question I’d ask is … do I want to actually solve the problem or just talk and pretend to solve it like Obama is doing. More accurately, he is just punting and letting the next president deal with it … most likely after a severe 9/11 attack here at home.

So, assuming we want to solve the problem YES, we need to send in ground troops. Sorry if that scares you. We can't win by playing total defense at home but I would certainly secure our borders and use all other means at our disposal ... cyber, psychological etc. But, when all is said and done, the infantry makes it real.

The right thing to do is a) accurately describe the enemy as Radical Islam b) a leader / President (currently not applicable) explains to the people what's at stake, c) mobilize for Desert Storm II and 4) change the Rules of Engagement to approximate what we did in WWII when faced with a fascist enemy. We need to destroy ISIS totally, and that means use of tactical nukes if need be to destroy their cities. We also need to make sure Iran does not end up as the hegemon in the Middle East ... and DSII would help with that as well.

Radical Islam uses terror to make us afraid (ie your comment about what ISIS would do to a US captive). Historically, we have to make them more afraid while simultaneously exterminating them as we did the Nazis and Imperial Japanese.

The alternative to victory is to slowly watch the spread of Muhammad's writ and see your grandkids terrorized, and eventually in burhkas and using prayer rugs. Think about it ...

Oh, by the way, bring back the draft. Everyone needs to be in this, including you.

[Guest]

If I was in charge the first thing I would do is assess the threat to the US. Answer: large, and only ot get bigger over time.

The next question I’d ask is … do I want to actually solve the problem or just talk and pretend to solve it like Obama is doing. More accurately, he is just punting and letting the next president deal with it … most likely after a severe 9/11 attack here at home.

So, assuming we want to solve the problem YES, we need to send in ground troops. Sorry if that scares you. We can't win by playing total defense at home but I would certainly secure our borders and use all other means at our disposal ... cyber, psychological etc. But, when all is said and done, the infantry makes it real.

The right thing to do is a) accurately describe the enemy as Radical Islam b) a leader / President (currently not applicable) explains to the people what's at stake, c) mobilize for Desert Storm II and 4) change the Rules of Engagement to approximate what we did in WWII when faced with a fascist enemy. We need to destroy ISIS totally, and that means use of tactical nukes if need be to destroy their cities. We also need to make sure Iran does not end up as the hegemon in the Middle East ... and DSII would help with that as well.

Radical Islam uses terror to make us afraid (ie your comment about what ISIS would do to a US captive). Historically, we have to make them more afraid while simultaneously exterminating them as we did the Nazis and Imperial Japanese

Oh, by the way, bring back the draft. Everyone needs to be in this, including you.

You are suggesting we should do worse things to captured ISIS than to video them being beheaded or burnt alive in cages? I hope I misintrepted you.

[Guest]

You are suggesting we should do worse things to captured ISIS than to video them being beheaded or burnt alive in cages? I hope I misinterpret you.

No, that's not even close to what I said. I basically said change the ROE to whereby we can win the war. That will involve, if need be, leveling some cities the same way we did in WWII. But, I would rather see that occur than have more US troops die .. .wouldn't you agree?

The key word is "exterminate" ISIS. That's what needs to occur. We also need to use enhanced interrogation on prisoners, vs simply killing them with drones. Good intel would help end the war more quickly and with a US victory.

[Guest]

Looking backward at Bush or Obama does not do anything good. They both made big mistakes.

No, mine was not a bait question at all. I was hoping to hear comment from others about solutions they think might work.

Mine is to cut our huge losses over there. Concentrate on securing borders from possible terrorists, government increasing intel from terrorist countries as well as increasing monitoring of known social media and other internet sites that have been used to recruit for and to spread terrorist information. Also, another possibility would be for the US to use fake web sites to tell horror stories of recruits who have gone to be terrorists and engage in counter-propaganda.

I apologize for taking your post the wrong way. Thank you for your thoughtful response. Your ideas are good ones. I guess where I am stuck in my thinking about the situation is - how far do we let ISIS go, how many countries do we sit back and watch them take over before stepping in, especially if they are countries that we have allied with in the past, or do we wait until they are right at our doorstep? This is where I am at a loss for a plan/idea, but I know that if up to me, I wouldn't want to wait that long because then I would fear it would be too late.

[Guest]

I didn't run for President, and I didn't convince the majority of electorate that I was up to the task of leading the country. I also don't have the daily intel to made an informed decision. So how can you expect me to come up with the solution to Obama's incompetence?

As I see it, ground troops ground is probably the only solution. How many troops? I have no idea, I am not a strategic planner. But how long does Obama allow this cancer to spread before he takes meaningful action? Surely even he will come to the realization that ground troops are needed, the only question is how long will it take? My guess is he will be out off office before this happens and it will become the next Presidents problem.



Yet, at every opportunity Democrats "look backward" and deamonize President Bush. Why don't they look forward?
Would you be willing to give up half your monthly pension to paid for this? I suspect if you had to you might not be quite as agressive. In 12 years US tax payers have not paid a single cent for these wars, that is why a lot of people want to get back in as soon as possible. When we start paying real time these opinions might mean something.

[Guest]

Would you be willing to give up half your monthly pension to paid for this? I suspect if you had to you might not be quite as agressive. In 12 years US tax payers have not paid a single cent for these wars, that is why a lot of people want to get back in as soon as possible. When we start paying real time these opinions might mean something.

I would be willing to give up just about anything for my children and grandchildren and this falls in that catagory.

This questions phrased as this one is are simply a diversion and often asked by certain posters almost always related to pensions and social security. It is just a word game.

We need to do whatever it takes, as soon as we can to stop this stuff. You folks just talk about Iraq.....you ignored Syria for years in this conversation and now it is something to consider. Yemen was a "victory and not you need to consider it...Libya is really in trouble with this ISIL threat. Read about Africa...ISIS just got a "pledge of allegiance" from Boko Haram in Africa....ISIS Expands Into West Africa, Welcoming Boko Haram Allegiance - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/isis-expands-west-africa-welcoming-boko-haram-allegiance-n322511)

If somehow you think that this is being contained in anyway, you are not paying close attention.

NOBODY AND I MEAN NOBODY wants a war of any kind...NOBODY wants more body counts, BUT if we love our kids and grandkids, you gotta take a long hard look.

This group will not simply bring down twin towers and try to take the Pentagon, etc. NO....what they will do, if allowed, will resonate for a long time.

And the next hypothetical question will be something bout living in fear, etc. Just wake up....stop defending on political lines. The threat is REAL, not imagined

[Guest]

Just a reminder on who exactly this Boko Haram is....

They are the ones who kidnapped 100's of small school girls in Nigeria last year. They are the ones who massacred as many as 2,000 people near the Chad border a few months ago.

Look at your map and enjoy the fact that they are not here but growing in numbers and geographically.

[Guest]

What would you do IF you were in charge?

Would you send 20,000 - 30,000 ground troops to Syria to take on ISIS forces and recapture some of the captured cities? How many US troops would be captured and beheaded on camera would you be willing to accept? How many US lives would you be willing to lose to recapture Iraq or Syria cities?

We know that the US trained Iraqui forces are not worth a thing. They throw down their US supplied weapons and run. Training and arming them is a waste of money.

Don't say a residual US force would have stopped ISIS. That is looking backward. What do we do - looking forward?

Americans, as a whole, are not willing to waste more American soldiers lives or Billions more dollars throwing them down that mid-east rathole.

Concentrate on national security of antiterrorist activities of all kinds.

I would do whatever it took to wipe Isis off the face of the earth. I would build up our military and use them. I would not tie their hands behind their backs. I would listen to the military generals and experts and not fire them or let them go. I would go to the end of the earth to protect my children and grandchildren from the evil that is trying to destroy us. Then I would tell every American why we need to destroy them. I would have the media broadcast the be headings so every American would understand what evil is. And lastly I would call them exactly what they are Evil Islamic terrorists. If I could not do any of the above I would resign knowing that protecting America is my No 1 responsibility

[Guest]

Would you be willing to give up half your monthly pension to paid for this? I suspect if you had to you might not be quite as agressive. In 12 years US tax payers have not paid a single cent for these wars, that is why a lot of people want to get back in as soon as possible. When we start paying real time these opinions might mean something.


We're potentially talking about our longer term survival as a nation, and you ask about how much of one's pension each of us are willing to give up?

First of all, it wouldn't take 1/2 but it would take something. I'm good with it.

Second, if we ignore the issue longer term there won't be a pension ... especially if DC or NYC is nuked or otherwise contaminated.

Third .. I like the idea of each of us paying something to support a dedicated effort to win the war. I supported aspects of Bush's strategy but I was completely turned off by "let's go shopping" as our contribution.

Fourth ... we need to take action and, this time, get everyone involved to win it.

So my thanks to you for raising this aspect for people to think about. How much is it worth to ones Villages lifestyle to defeat a civilizational menace ...ie Radical Islam? How much is it worth to each of us to make sure our kids grow up in a Judeo-Christin (even if polluted at times by hedonism) vs an Islamic culture. My answer, and those of most ... a LOT.

[Guest]

I would do whatever it took to wipe Isis off the face of the earth. I would build up our military and use them. I would not tie their hands behind their backs. I would listen to the military generals and experts and not fire them or let them go. I would go to the end of the earth to protect my children and grandchildren from the evil that is trying to destroy us. Then I would tell every American why we need to destroy them. I would have the media broadcast the be headings so every American would understand what evil is. And lastly I would call them exactly what they are Evil Islamic terrorists. If I could not do any of the above I would resign knowing that protecting America is my No 1 responsibility

Excellent reply and analysis. I'm with you.

[Guest]

I would do all the above mentioned to protect my kids and in addition I would have closed the borders to anyone from terrorist sponsoring nations a long time ago so we would not have them living and plotting how to kill us in our country now.

[Guest]

How do you differentiate between the good Muslims in the USA and those who are plotting to do damage to us? We have Muslims as Villagers and there is an Islamic Center only around 30 miles from here.

[Guest]

How do you differentiate between the good Muslims in the USA and those who are plotting to do damage to us? We have Muslims as Villagers and there is an Islamic Center only around 30 miles from here.

Curious how you arrived at this question.

I see no comment referring to anyone but radical terrorists doing bad things in the name of Muslim, and NO reference to anything in the USA. Fact is the question that allowed all the comments never mentioned this country.

Why the question ?

[Guest]

How do you differentiate between the good Muslims in the USA and those who are plotting to do damage to us? We have Muslims as Villagers and there is an Islamic Center only around 30 miles from here.

I think they will become self-differentiating based on their actions, vs words.

Fact is we have plenty of Muslim allies already ... Jordan comes to mind. The President of Egypt has been courageous, at great risk to his personal safety, about calling for a "Reformation" of Islam.

The test for US Muslims is this ... if they support the war to defeat Radical Islam, they are our friends and allies. If they don't they are our enemies, and thus part of the problem. Keep our friends here, and deport our enemies. Common sense.

[Guest]

Question is though how many U.S. Muslims have spoken up Against Islam? I don't recall any? mosques are breeding grounds for terrorists, as are our prisons

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1064006]Curious how you arrived at this question.

I see no comment referring to anyone but radical terrorists doing bad things in the name of Muslim, and NO reference to anything in the USA. Fact is the question that allowed all the comments never mentioned this country./QUOTE]

Look at post 24, 27, and 28.

We certainly do not want to get the same fear that our parent's had during WWII and have anything like the internment camps that Japanese-Americans were forced to endure.

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1064006]

We certainly do not want to get the same fear that our parent's had during WWII and have anything like the internment camps that Japanese-Americans were forced to endure.

I think you need to worry more about the main problem (Radical Islam, especially when they get nukes) , and not the one you mention

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1064006]Curious how you arrived at this question.

I see no comment referring to anyone but radical terrorists doing bad things in the name of Muslim, and NO reference to anything in the USA. Fact is the question that allowed all the comments never mentioned this country./QUOTE]

Look at post 24, 27, and 28.

We certainly do not want to get the same fear that our parent's had during WWII and have anything like the internment camps that Japanese-Americans were forced to endure.

Posts 27 and 28 were made AFTER yours and in response to yours...COME ON !!!

Post 24 mentioned the borders and nothing else.....still not sure of your intent here.

[Guest]

Allow me first to introduce the author of this piece because some of the sources of information on here are doubtful at best.

"J.M. Berger is a researcher, analyst and writer covering extremism, with a special focus on extremist activities in the U.S. and extremist use of social media. He is the author of the critically acclaimed "Jihad Joe: Americans Who Go to War in the Name of Islam," the only definitive history of the U.S. jihadist movement, and co-author of the forthcoming "ISIS: The State of Terror."

His work has appeared in The New York Times, The Atlantic, The Daily Beast, Foreign Policy, the CTC Sentinel, the New York Daily News and the Boston Globe, and on National Public Radio, Public Radio International and the National Geographic Channel. Berger has discussed terrorism and extremism on CNN, Fox News and many other radio and television outlets."

This introduction is from AMAZON where you can buy his books.

Amazon.com: J. M. Berger: Books, Biography, Blog, Audiobooks, Kindle (http://www.amazon.com/J.-M.-Berger/e/B004D79QH4)

He published this article on POLITICO today. The title is "Barack Obama Still Misunderestimates ISIL"

I am not going to cut and paste from the article but it is pretty much non political and speaks to our total lack of ANY strategy and makes suggestions. It is not a call to war at all, but written by someone who has studied this problem it is a worthwhile read.




Read more: Barack Obama Still Misunderestimates ISIL - POLITICO Magazine (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/05/barack-obama-still-misunderestimates-isil-118204.html#ixzz3axyXEZLu)

[Guest]

And if you do not have the time to read the article do one thing for yourself.

Just study the picture atop the article. Now imagine the families running away from where they live are your children and their children leaving where they live so as to not be murdered by those who just took over their tow/city.

Make it personal and perhaps more will see the horror of what is happening.
Put the politics away.

Study the picture and make it personal!

Then read the article.

[Guest]

That is why we should all be required to watch beheadings, burning people alive in cages, rapes, etc everything these monsters do. Imagine your child in the cage screaming and ask yourself should we still be doing Nothing? Islam uses woman to produce sons to turn them into monsters. And guess what the fastest growing religion has become the last several years in the good old USA?

[Guest]

That is why we should all be required to watch beheadings, burning people alive in cages, rapes, etc everything these monsters do. Imagine your child in the cage screaming and ask yourself should we still be doing Nothing? Islam uses woman to produce sons to turn them into monsters. And guess what the fastest growing religion has become the last several years in the good old USA?
Based on all the posts criticizing our policy regarding our Mexican border and Central American refugees I'm going to guess Catholicism.

[Guest]

Heck no. Islam has become the fastest growing and I won't even call it a religion but an ideology. More mosques being built than catholic churches. How frightening is that

[Guest]

The Strategy on ISIS since its initial assessment has changed that now experts predict the fighting could go on beyond three years Josh Ernest White House Press secretary said, "Two years from now, the situation on the ground may have changed in a way that strategy is carried out". "But that's something that we'll leave to the next president."

Can you imagine anyone , let alone the Commander and Chief shifting his burden to someone else? I'm glad Obama is not a doctor treating some patient will a fatal disease. Obama created this mess refused to clean it up and now is going to let someone else clean up his mess

Obama is shameless, shiftless, arrogant, ignorant and selfish. Anyone who believes climate change is a bigger threat than ISIS is either really dumb or is preparing his entry into the green industry when his term ends

Those who side with Obama are complicit in his actions that are diminishing our society, our educational system and our form of government

Where is the moral outrage? Where is the cry for impeachment? Richard Nixon was a piker next to Obama, and the Clintons .

Meantime veterans and their families are left to wonder if they were just chumps to lied down their lives to keep America free


Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

Heck no. Islam has become the fastest growing and I won't even call it a religion but an ideology. More mosques being built than catholic churches. How frightening is that

Rational people will agree ... this is very bad news. Islam is an imperial religion which means it expands by force of arms where needed. We need to put a freeze on building more mosques and start deporting the radical Islamic types now

[Guest]

The Strategy on ISIS since its initial assessment has changed that now experts predict the fighting could go on beyond three years Josh Ernest White House Press secretary said, "Two years from now, the situation on the ground may have changed in a way that strategy is carried out". "But that's something that we'll leave to the next president."

Can you imagine anyone , let alone the Commander and Chief shifting his burden to someone else? I'm glad Obama is not a doctor treating some patient will a fatal disease. Obama created this mess refused to clean it up and now is going to let someone else clean up his mess

Obama is shameless, shiftless, arrogant, ignorant and selfish. Anyone who believes climate change is a bigger threat than ISIS is either really dumb or is preparing his entry into the green industry when his term ends

Those who side with Obama are complicit in his actions that are diminishing our society, our educational system and our form of government

Where is the moral outrage? Where is the cry for impeachment? Richard Nixon was a piker next to Obama, and the Clintons .

Meantime veterans and their families are left to wonder if they were just chumps to lied down their lives to keep America free


Personal Best Regards:

Obama ... living large while in over his head and so totally out of his league...

His "presidency" is apparently some form of divine punishment ??

[Guest]

Rational people will agree ... this is very bad news. Islam is an imperial religion which means it expands by force of arms where needed. We need to put a freeze on building more mosques and start deporting the radical Islamic types now

...and we, the people, have to re-write the Constitution of the United States of America to throw out that Freedom of Religion bull.

[Guest]

...and we, the people, have to re-write the Constitution of the United States of America to throw out that Freedom of Religion bull.

No need, the country's freedom of religion is being narrowed by edicts and proclamations.

[Guest]

No need, the country's freedom of religion is being narrowed by edicts and proclamations.

I do not understand what you mean. Would you explain, please?

[Guest]

...and we, the people, have to re-write the Constitution of the United States of America to throw out that Freedom of Religion bull.

No, yet again but not surprisingly, you get it wrong. As a famous justice once said, the Constitution is not a suicide pact. We have plenty of statutory authority already on the books to defend ourselves from an external, and internal, violent threat.

Keep on whistling past the graveyard in the meantime ...

[Guest]

No, yet again but not surprisingly, you get it wrong. As a famous justice once said, the Constitution is not a suicide pact. We have plenty of statutory authority already on the books to defend ourselves from an external, and internal, violent threat.

Keep on whistling past the graveyard in the meantime ...



As you know, when the Constitution was written, there was only Christians here in our new country and the idea was to get freedom of the Church of England. There was no Jewish, no Muslim, no Wicca, no Hindu that we had to include. We need to get back to those basics of our rootstocks.

[Guest]

While we discuss Iraq, this ISIS has extended into Africa, and as of today are threatening to take Syria. The continue to creep all over.

"ISIS' conquest of the ancient city of Palmyra marked the latest in a series of setbacks for the Syrian regime, but analysts say not to count out President Bashar Assad just yet.

This week's capture of the so-called "Venice of the Sands" and its Roman-era ruins marked what appeared to be the first time ISIS directly seized a city from Syrian military and allied forces."

Analysis: ISIS Gains Momentum With Palmyra, Assad Squeezed on Multiple Fronts - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/analysis-isis-gains-momentum-palmyra-assad-squeezed-multiple-fronts-n363066)

[Guest]

As you know, when the Constitution was written, there was only Christians here in our new country and the idea was to get freedom of the Church of England. There was no Jewish, no Muslim, no Wicca, no Hindu that we had to include. We need to get back to those basics of our rootstocks.

You sincerely do not get the point or even understand the threat being discussed.

[Guest]

As you know, when the Constitution was written, there was only Christians here in our new country and the idea was to get freedom of the Church of England. There was no Jewish, no Muslim, no Wicca, no Hindu that we had to include. We need to get back to those basics of our rootstocks.

Dear Guest: You make an assumption when you write when the Constitution was written there was only Christians........ In fact there were Jews, atheist, mysticism, etc. And as the country progressed and more immigrants entered the country from foreign lands and worshiping in different manners the Constitution defended their right to worship freely.

Today, Christianity is under attack not only from abroad but right here in the good ol USA. It is being attacked by the Obama Administration, atheists group like Freedom From Religion (Wisconsin organization) and from the gay movement which sees religion and religious people as enemies.

The founding fathers when writing our Charters of Freedom had religion in mind in that religion caused people to examine their relationship with God ( or if you prefer something greater than themselves) respect for one another and dignity. With the tenets of the Judeo-Christians belief establishing a civilized society and one that reached internationally would not have been possible. A secular nation's god is government....need I go any further

I really do not know what life truths are but I do know that Christianity has done much more good and that its enemies intentionally focus on the negatives. whether people wish to admit it or not they are better human beings because of Christianity.

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

As you know, when the Constitution was written, there was only Christians here in our new country and the idea was to get freedom of the Church of England. There was no Jewish, no Muslim, no Wicca, no Hindu that we had to include. We need to get back to those basics of our rootstocks.

Yes, I know you long (not) for those days. :)

And, as the person who currently occupies the Office of President famously said, Muslims have a long history in America, and built the very fabric of our country. For example, the Muslims otherwise known as the Barbary Pirates raided our shipping and cut the heads off our people ... much as they do today in fact. This went on until Thomas Jefferson declared war on theme and defeated them.

[Guest]

You sincerely do not get the point or even understand the threat being discussed.

Yes, the person who you are referring too in fact almost never gets it ... but he does like to lash out with periodic, irrational statements and his awkward attempts at humor that somehow always misses a beat

[Guest]

Dear Guest: You make an assumption when you write when the Constitution was written there was only Christians........ In fact there were Jews, atheist, mysticism, etc. And as the country progressed and more immigrants entered the country from foreign lands and worshiping in different manners the Constitution defended their right to worship freely.

Today, Christianity is under attack not only from abroad but right here in the good ol USA. It is being attacked by the Obama Administration, atheists group like Freedom From Religion (Wisconsin organization) and from the gay movement which sees religion and religious people as enemies.

The founding fathers when writing our Charters of Freedom had religion in mind in that religion caused people to examine their relationship with God ( or if you prefer something greater than themselves) respect for one another and dignity. With the tenets of the Judeo-Christians belief establishing a civilized society and one that reached internationally would not have been possible. A secular nation's god is government....need I go any further

I really do not know what life truths are but I do know that Christianity has done much more good and that its enemies intentionally focus on the negatives. whether people wish to admit it or not they are better human beings because of Christianity.

Personal Best Regards:

Judeo Christian theological beliefs were at the root of what built this country, including respect for the individual, political liberty and free speech. Most of the world for millennia has lived under the yoke of the strong man oppressor where authoritarian regimes ruled the day. Our liberal friends should look around the world and think about how lucky they are to have America to trash ... without being sent to the gallows.

[Guest]

Here is how I am seeing this thing playing out.

Iran, who I must repeat is the largest supporter of terrorism, if not in the world...certainly in the ME, whatever that constitutes Tright now, will come to an agreement with the US and those with the US. It will happen because the USA wants no part of doing anything but bombing from afar and hoping and Iran will help fight ISIS on the ground.

So then we have the US and IRAN as allies, one supposedly the biggest defender of Israel and the other the sworn enemy of Israel who actually prays for them to just die...literally.

We are negotiating NOT to stop Iran from nukes, but to DELAY them. At the same time in the past week the USA is responding to Iran's demand that Israel is not allowed to have any nukes either by going to Israel to ask them to stop and probably apply a lot of pressure.

Meanwhile, the UN...the UN who we never spoke to about the atrocities in Syria and who has said little or nothing about ISIS is being asked by the US to insist that Israel give up the only thing they have to defend themselves (remember, they are surrounded by sworn enemies).

We don't have any intention of doing the same thing with Pakistan who also has these nukes, nor North Korea....just our "ally" Israel.

So, our President will stand tall and all of his followers will bow to him as the man who got this deal with Iran. Iran will defeat ISIS which also makes Obama look good.

Then we have Iran on a timetable to get nukes....we have disarmed Israel....and they are surrounded by nuclear weapons owned by people who want them eliminated and our President has his precious legacy.

Just think for a moment before you come after me....if you do not read or know, I will supply links to validate that what I am saying this country is doing, the are really doing.

OVERREACTING YOU SAY....same thing you would have said maybe three short months ago, if I told you that ISIS would now have a presence with allies in Africa, are pillaging Iraq, and are putting Syria back on their hills as they take that over.

[Guest]

As mentioned in my first few sentences, a major offensive taking place, backed by USA.

Big deal is, and it is MAJOR....it is, as I said it would be led by Iran and their Shia troops. This is going to divide the country even more, which is to the benefit of Iran.

I stand by my original post. Only winners will be Iran

[Guest]

Keep in mind, Iran will become even richer once the frozen assets go back to them, although there seems to be enough around to finance a military.

Then there is them trying a U.S. Reporter


Spy trial of 'Washington Post' reporter opens in Iran (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/05/26/iran-washington-post-reporter-jason-rezaian-trial/27947075/)

Just keep this all in mind, along with all the newer threats to the U.S. and Israel as you are asked to support an agreement, not to stop nukes, but simply delay

[Guest]

Keep in mind, Iran will become even richer once the frozen assets go back to them, although there seems to be enough around to finance a military.

Then there is them trying a U.S. Reporter


Spy trial of 'Washington Post' reporter opens in Iran (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/05/26/iran-washington-post-reporter-jason-rezaian-trial/27947075/)

Just keep this all in mind, along with all the newer threats to the U.S. and Israel as you are asked to support an agreement, not to stop nukes, but simply delay

If the proverbial Martian landed in the US today, looked and analyzed what he saw, he could only conclude the President of the US apparently wants the Iranians "to win" and the US to lose.

[Guest]

China has a 25year deal with Iran for $100 billion for LNG. Other trade agreements make China, Iran's number one trading partner. I'd say our desire to buy cheap manufactured goods from China has saved U.S. consumers a few bucks and help weaken our global influence. This transition occurred under Presidents from both political parties.