Obama apparently doesn't learn: boots on the ground

[JD Barleycorn]

A year ago Obama pronounced his "red line" which nearly any expert would have said was a bad idea unless you are able AND WILLING to back it up. Look at the shit storm because of those words. It didn't take a year this time. The repeated claims of "no boots on the ground" (whatever exactly that means) has come back to bite Obama after only a week. The Defense Department is now saying that it may take US soldiers in Syria to control the chemical weapons. You know, boots on the ground.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...3317828&rank=1

[LexusLover]

So, it is ok with Putin if we send in troops, but not missiles?

Even itsy-bitsy missiles that are unbelievably small?

[Guest040616]

Invasion? Now that's what I'm talking about. It is time for Obama to ratchet it up a notch!

Now that there is a commitment for UN Weapons Inspectors in Syria, perhaps it is time for the US to consider a full scale invasion of Syria. To hell with the 'mamby-pamby' weapons inspecting bullshit. Let's get down to the nitty gritty and use the highly successful "Dubya" model, that was effectively implemented in Iraq.

I believe Obama should immediately authorize a full scale invasion of Syria by no later than mid November. He should follow the invasion with a January 1, 2014, "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" Photo Op, errrrr Press Conference on the deck of the Aircraft Carrier Abraham Lincoln.

I believe it would also be a great idea to have Obama land on the Abe wearing a Naval Aviator's flight suit! Geez, just think of the possibilities! The entire world will watch as the President of the United States struts his stuff across the deck of an American Aircraft Carrier! That will show those Russians who the "Decider in Chief" is.

Cost factor? Don't worry about it! Even if the price tag reaches $1 Trillion and 5000 American lives. We can just consider it "the cost of doing bidness!"

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

[Doove]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

The repeated claims of "no boots on the ground" (whatever exactly that means) has come back to bite Obama after only a week. The Defense Department is now saying that it may take US soldiers in Syria to control the chemical weapons. You know, boots on the ground.

Take it up with Hankerin'.

[JD Barleycorn]

I wonder if anyone else noticed that everytime someone asked about troops, Kerry, Carney, Biden, and Obama have used the phrase "boots on the ground". Can't they say troops, soldiers, or commandos? Sounds like they are guilding the lily and not telling truth about something. Does "boots on the ground" cover CIA assets or navy seals since that phrase is usually reserved for infantry. Does anyone here understand how you get those pinpricks (not yours Tex)? You either have an aircraft or drone with someone aiming the weapons to the point of impact or you have a spotter on the ground with a targeting designator. We are talking about missiles and not drones or aircraft so we are talking about assets on the ground.

[JCM800]

it sounds like their involvement in helping secure chemical weapons is undetermined.

"I'm not going to speculate on who may or may not be participating in a process that may or may not take place," Little said. "We've got to see where the process goes" before the U.S. military considers involvement, he said.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by JCM800

it sounds like their involvement in helping secure chemical weapons is undetermined.

JD Idiot and LexiLiar love to play the speculation game!

Unless a Republican is in the White House. And then it's considered the cost of doing 'bidness'.

And if that is not enough, LexiLiar will then lie and call himself a Democrat!

[Guest123018-4]

Syria should have no problems in giving up Iraqs WMDs, I mean they were just holding them for Sadam till the storm blew over.

I say let them keep them and use them as much as possible. The fewer of those cockroaches that remain the better off we all are..

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

I say let them keep them and use them as much as possible. The fewer of those cockroaches that remain the better off we all are..

I like this idea much better!

Now that there is a commitment for UN Weapons Inspectors in Syria, perhaps it is time for the US to consider a full scale invasion of Syria. To hell with the 'mamby-pamby' weapons inspecting bullshit. Let's get down to the nitty gritty and use the highly successful "Dubya" model, that was effectively implemented in Iraq.

I believe Obama should immediately authorize a full scale invasion of Syria by no later than mid November. He should follow the invasion with a January 1, 2014, "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" Photo Op, errrrr Press Conference on the deck of the Aircraft Carrier Abraham Lincoln.

I believe it would also be a great idea to have Obama land on the Abe wearing a Naval Aviator's flight suit! Geez, just think of the possibilities! The entire world will watch as the President of the United States struts his stuff across the deck of an American Aircraft Carrier! That will show those Russians who the "Decider in Chief" is.

Cost factor? Don't worry about it! Even if the price tag reaches $1 Trillion and 5000 American lives. We can just write it off as "the cost of doing bidness!"

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by bigtex

I like this idea much better!

Now that there is a commitment for UN Weapons Inspectors in Syria, perhaps it is time for the US to consider a full scale invasion of Syria. To hell with the 'mamby-pamby' weapons inspecting bullshit. Let's get down to the nitty gritty and use the highly successful "Dubya" model, that was effectively implemented in Iraq.

I believe Obama should immediately authorize a full scale invasion of Syria by no later than mid November. He should follow the invasion with a January 1, 2014, "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" Photo Op, errrrr Press Conference on the deck of the Aircraft Carrier Abraham Lincoln.

I believe it would also be a great idea to have Obama land on the Abe wearing a Naval Aviator's flight suit! Geez, just think of the possibilities! The entire world will watch as the President of the United States struts his stuff across the deck of an American Aircraft Carrier! That will show those Russians who the "Decider in Chief" is.

Cost factor? Don't worry about it! Even if the price tag reaches $1 Trillion and 5000 American lives. We can just write it off as "the cost of doing bidness!"

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

Why don't you re-enlist and lead the charge, BigKoTex: the BUTTer Bar Asshat. You know the Army, it can always use a few Second Lieuies for cannon fodder.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Why don't you re-enlist and lead the charge, BigKoTex: the BUTTer Bar Asshat. You know the Army, it can always use a few Second Lieuies for cannon fodder.

JD Idiot's twin brother IB's, foolproof 3 step posting plan:

Step 1: Bitch!

Step 2: Moan!

Step 3: Repeat!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by bigtex

JD Idiot's twin brother IB's, foolproof 3 step posting plan:

Step 1: Bitch!

Step 2: Moan!

Step 3: Repeat!

Back up your blathering with action, BigKoTex: the BUTTer Bar Asshat. There's an Army recruiter near you:

Army Recruiters

6969 Gulf Fwy #160
Houston
(713) 649-7074


12300 North Fwy #32a
Houston
(281) 872-0184


19710 Northwest Fwy
Jersey Village
(281) 477-6793

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Back up your blathering with action, BigKoTex: the BUTTer Bar Asshat. There's an Army recruiter near you:

JD Idiot's twin brother IB's, foolproof 3 step posting plan:

Step 1: Bitch

Step 2: Moan

Step 3: Repeat

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by bigtex

JD Idiot's twin brother IB's, foolproof 3 step posting plan:

Step 1: Bitch

Step 2: Moan

Step 3: Repeat

Have you called your recruiter yet, BigKoTex: the BUTTer Bar Asshat. Here are those numbers again:


Army Recruiters

6969 Gulf Fwy #160
Houston
(713) 649-7074


12300 North Fwy #32a
Houston
(281) 872-0184


19710 Northwest Fwy
Jersey Village
(281) 477-6793

[Jackie S]

Well, in the early '60's, they used the term "advisers" in Vietnam, we would not be sending in troops.

I guess I was an "adviser" over there in '68.

When will we learn? We make these fine distinctions, but in the end we get involved in places we should not be, fighting people who do not want us there, and loosing American Lives trying to change people who do not want to be changed.

I am sitting here listening to George Stephanopolis interview President Obama. The President uses terms like "no military intervention", like dropping bombs on anybody is not classed as a "military intervention".

The President also stated that he was against the so called weapons that did not distinguish between a combat soldier and a child, such as chemical weapons.

I wonder if the drones that we use know the difference?