Threat Of Homeland Terror Attack while Obama Twiddles His Thumbs, He Is The Reason IS Still Breat

a reply to: Grimpachi

Thank you for your patience. I should have provided link in the beginning.....I was just being lazy I think. I apologize
for all the confusion and appreciate you hanging in there with me...

I don't know why Pres drug his feet and is doing the same thing, AGAIN!! Its baffling to me it really is!

Pax

a reply to: paxnatus

So it is one man that heard from his 'inside" not to be named source...
Just cause he is a lt.col doesn't mean he can't and won't twist things.

a reply to: paxnatus

Well I appreciate you catching me up and giving the link.

One question though. That SF friend was he just confirming what you had already read?

a reply to: Grimpachi

No the info was told to me after it had been made public...I just had not read about it yet......

Hope that clears that up for you..

Pax

originally posted by: paxnatus
I feel the need to clarify something, No classified info was shared with me period....It is all public knowledge...I know better than to put myself or him and buddies in that situation....As a highly trained soldier so does he!

Please do not think he broke any rules of OPSEC he didn't nor did I...Here are the public details ........maybe this will make you feel better....

hursday morning, Shaffer appeared on WMAL radio in Washington, D.C., to discuss the ISIS execution of American journalist James Foley earlier this week. He told me and co-host Brian Wilson that the recently revealed rescue attempt led by Special Forces earlier this summer failed because President Obama was slow to give the go-ahead:

I’m hearing from my friends in the Pentagon, they are giving him every single option way ahead of time. And let me give you a little secret here: The reason that raid into Syria failed to get Foley and those guys was because the president drug his feet. He waited too long, the intel got stale, and by the time we actually gave the “go” word it failed because we just didn’t react quick enough.

link

Thank you for all you replies.

pax

From your OP:

"according to my inside information"

I have to call BS on your entire OP.

Why? Because inside unnamed sources have informed me.

Also, you keep correcting yourself. Here at ATS, if we believe, we Stand. But you seem to keep shifting your story to suit the Doubters.

Shame on you.

Peace

originally posted by: paxnatus

John Kerry sez:

In an op ed for the New York Times that was released online on Friday night and in print on Saturday, Kerry wrote: “In a polarised region and a complicated world, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria presents a unifying threat to a broad array of countries, including the United States. What’s needed to confront its nihilistic vision and genocidal agenda is a global coalition using political, humanitarian, economic, law enforcement and intelligence tools to support military force.”

Kerry’s call was foreshadowed this week by briefings to the press about moves by the US to seek such a global effort .

End quote.

Sweet Jesus in a sidecar!

This man was in a WAR at some time in his life? It doesn't show. "Global coalitions" are what got us dropped in the grease in Afghanistan - all those "global coalitions" come with generals attached, leg Generals who like collecting confetti to accessorize their uniforms with. ISIS cares nary a lick about "political, humanitarian, and economic tools". "law enforcement" is, well, LAW enforcement. They should be writing tickets, not involved in warfare. That can only lead to heartache. In the matter of ISIS, "courts" and "trials" only need a bit of 5.56x45, and his bigger brothers. The legal profession has no place on this battlefield - they're only of use if there are any survivors after the mop-up. That was ANOTHER misguided effort courtesy of Afghanistan.

That leaves intel and "military force", both of which ought to be applied judiciously. All they need are weapons, training, support and direction for the boots that are ALREADY on the ground there - i.e. the locals. let THEM fight the fight and carry the water, with just our SpecOps guys to provide the assistance, not our conventional forces, and DAMN SURE not our "law enforcement".

That actually accomplishes a lot. It gives the locals a sense of shaping their own destiny. It allays their fears of yet more US overlordship in the region. They're a bit touchy about that, and it is in fact one of the factors which is giving more steam to ISIS and their ilk. It's a recruiting tool to say "The Yankees are coming! The Yankees are coming!" - or, in ISIS terms, "The Crusaders are coming!" It allays fears on the home front of getting embroiled in yet another expensive war with boots on the ground in quantity. Sure, there will still be hardcore whiners and complainers, but they'll get less traction when no one can see billy down the block coming home in a box just because some dumbass general didn't have enough shiny gear for his chest. Let Billy down the block do his soldier thing, preparing for wars that OUGHT to be fought conventionally, and let the guerrilla professionals do the guerrilla war thing against ISIS, assisting the locals to retake their own lands and eradicate the threat.

The conventional generals can go drink some damned tea or something.

What's needed is a regional coalition rather than a global one, and the Obama administration has spent way too much time trying to destabilize the very people it needs a allies this time around, the very people who are in the most danger, and with the most to lose from ISIS. Egypt. Syria. Iraq. Libya. Iran. yes, Iran. These are some of the people with the most to lose from ISIS, and we've spent way too much effort in earning their distrust just when we need them the most.

Globally, we need Specops from the US, UK, Australia, perhaps Canada and Germany, and maybe even Russia - there's a reason I've always called Spetznaz the "Spetz-nasties" - they're a mean and capable bunch. In this case we have common ground, and there is no reason to exclude them from the equation other than politics. That's pretty much it as far as a "global coalition" goes... and even then just their specialists, not their conventional forces. I have more reason than most, perhaps, to despise Spetznaz, but in this instance I'd worry nary a bit with Ivan at my back. Hell, I'd rub elbows with "former" KGB Putin himself if our guns were pointed in the same direction.

So Kerry as bumbling as he is sees the need for more than airstrikes.

yeah, but he's looking at the wrong battlefield if his odd notions of how to fight this war are any indication. His political goals are not meshing well with the intent of an ISIS defeat - meshes pretty well with more subjugation of a people already resentful of being subjugated, though. I don't see that working out very well in the long run.

And yet here is Obama's response to this Clear and Present Danger!

Obama told White House reporters on Thursday: “We don’t have a strategy yet.”

theguardian.com

I've got a strategy, Barry. Little old me, all by my lonesome - perhaps. No political advisors, no cabinet, no endless meetings. Gimme a call, I'll help you out with some strategy. Check your political goals of domination at the door, though - they won't help you.

My question is, why is Obama blatantly lying?? There is a clear, precise plan in place and he knows this yet is refusing to give the military the go ahead!! WHY? Why is he stalling, AGAIN? IS HE IN ON IT? Perhaps this is the way for the terrorists to hit us and be successful killing thousands? I mean, what better time for IS to attack us! Our boys are half way around the world WAITING for our lame duck President to give the light up command! But that command is not coming.......This is very suspect to me......

What do you guys think? Is there a rational reason behind the stall tactics?

As always, thank you for your time...

Pax

As I said above, his administration has spent the last several years destabilizing the very people he needs for help if he means to defeat ISIS. that might be something to think more deeply upon in the matter of complicity...

Item: The US has ushered in several victories for the Muslim Brotherhood with their "Arab Spring" efforts. The only real reversal has been in Egypt, who are now, thanks to the "Arab Spring", more suspicious of us and our motives than ever.

Item: The Muslim Brotherhood has always dreamt in their literature of a "new Caliphate", stretching in it's inception from Andalusia to Indonesia. they've made no secret of it as their goal, with the capitol to be in Baghdad.

Item: ISIS has now declared a caliphate, and are trying to take Baghdad.

Things that make you go "hmmm..."

originally posted by: NonsensicalUserName
a reply to: paxnatus

I think its a good thing our president is waiting to act.

Waiting to act, waiting to actually have a strategy and a plan in place is a better way to go about things than just jumping into a conflict in a gung-ho manner.

A good plan, violently executed NOW, is better than a perfect plan executed half-assed next week. Some famous general said something to that effect.

Seize the initiative, and keep them off balance. NEVER give them time to regroup and prepare a reception.

originally posted by: ThichHeaded
Meanwhile in a class room in FL a republican president read a goat book while planes crash into buildings..

Your point?

I think the point is that playing your silly-assed political games is likely to give you the opportunity to dicuss your politics with some fundamentalist "muslims" - maybe while your waiting on your turn to be on the camera.

But yeah, go ahead and play politics while your house burns down. I've never seen the reasoning behind trying to justify one dumbass by citing the actions of another dumbass, a dumbass who hasn't been in the driver's seat for a long while, and who flubbed his turn at the wheel when he WAS there.

SO - you seriously believe that because Bush was a dumbass, that justifies Obama to be one, too?

a reply to: nenothtu

Maybe it's just me, we all know I'm not the brightest knife in the shower, but every time I read or see something from Kerry, I'm reminded of Neville Chaimberlain.

originally posted by: whatnext21
I think the problem of where to begin is the problem. For one your POTUS doesn't even call them by the same name everyone else does. Why does he still refer to them as ISIL??

Even the Muslims I know (I'm married to one) refuse to call them "The Islamic State". They say that it legitimizes the claims of Gomer's Boys to be the leadership of the Islamic world, and they refuse to grant that to them.

For one to think that this problem is only 'over there' is wishful thinking.
My feeling is that they are everywhere and ready to do some serious damage when they are ready. These are serious times ahead and at no time in my life have I ever felt that we are all one day away from an attack and we won't even see it coming. I don't think this group is going to announce their plans to anyone they are too ruthless for that. God help us all...

They ARE announcing their plans - and daring us to try and stop them. You just have to know where to look, and they're trying to make it as public as they can, for maximum scare factor on the US population. That sort of defines "terrorism", and for some odd reason the US is trying to take down the threats as fast as they can.

I'd feel better if they were tracking down and liquidating the threats instead of just trying to hide them.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: nenothtu

Maybe it's just me, we all know I'm not the brightest knife in the shower, but every time I read or see something from Kerry, I'm reminded of Neville Chaimberlain.

WHY did you do that to me?

WHY did you give me a mental image of you with a knife...

... in the SHOWER?

My EYES!

MY EYES!

Somebody gimme a fork!

Obama makes Carter look like a friggin genius...

And Kerry makes Chamberlain look like Conan the barbarian!

originally posted by: Variable


I don't think he is lying -technically. Until he approves the plan there is no plan. Depends on what your definition of "is" is i guess. No doubt these types of actions are pretty common, we just don't hear about most of them. Obama is a indecisive hand-wringer with a penchant for distrust of the "Military option." No doubt he pondered long and hard about the Osama mission, but luckily Osama stayed put.

A plan doesn't require approval from on high to be a plan - only to be an action. It's still a plan.

Unnamed sources told you the intel was good but acted upon too late. How many times have we heard this? I don't doubt it one bit, i just think we won't know the truth for years until all the books are written about the Obama admin. I think we can safely assume Obama will go down as one of the worst US presidents in history. We shall see. He certainly has the feel of a Nero playing a fiddle while Rome burned. Probably did not really happen but the metaphor works for me.


V

I've got the same story from sources independent of hers, which corroborate.

originally posted by: Bassago
a reply to: paxnatus

Two possible reasons I can think of. First he's trying to hold off anything major until after NATO meets in a few days in the UK. I don't remember what day that is exactly but pretty soon. The bombing raids have been continuing in Iraq to a limited degree but he may want another UN "coalition of the willing" before stepping into that hornets nest again.

The second is that by doing nothing major at this point perhaps something will happen that will benefit him or his position. That could be anything, bad or good but I'll not speculate. Note I didn't say our position because I don't really believe he cares about that.

That's his mistake, right there. TWO mistakes, in fact. One, NATO should have been disbanded when the Soviet Union fell, because it had outlived it's usefulness and it's remit, and two, the "UN Coalition of the Willing" was the same mistake that the last dumbass made.

originally posted by: sheepslayer247
I still fail to see why IS, ISIS, ISIL.....whatever, is any concern of ours. Why are we falling for all this fear and propaganda, making us think we have to do something, when the Middle East nations should rally to take care of the problem? But they are being lazy and asking us to do it for them?

I'm glad Obama is not doing anything. Well, he should pull all the troops back home if ISIS is a real threat to American soil. But methinks they are not a threat at all.

That's my opinion anyway.

get back to us about that "no threat here" thingy in a month or so, ok?

What I wouldn't give for a leader in the white house... (leading form behind is not being a leader)

I had a lot of issues with Bush Jr... but at least he had a plan and ran with it come hell or high water. ( yea may have been a plan for the destruction of the USA, but a bad plan executed with force and conviction is better than no plan)

I am coming up on the end of my 20 in the service, and I am afraid... the world seems to be teetering and while the middle east burns, and the russain bear awakens from hibernation nero plays golf.

originally posted by: Kukri
There's 180+ other countries on this rock what makes Obama the be all end all solution to a problem half way around the planet? Or is thisone of those American exceptionalism threads?

Why don't we let the Arabs clean up their own yard for once and keepour noses out of everyone elses business. I for one can think of better things to spend my tax dollars on, not to mention wasting the lives of friends and loved ones.

P.S. Good thing I'm not NCIS because it seems you and your friend are violating OPSEC. I recommend he keeps the pillowtalk to sweet nothings in the future.

There is no violation of OPSEC here - maybe you watch too much NCIS on TV. Nothing has been disclosed that isn't already public record, and no ongoing operations have been harmed in the creation of this thread.

Protip: convince your friends and loved ones not to go to war - until it comes to them. They probably ought not to be there anyhow.

As far as "half way around the world" goes, I personally don't wait for the hornets to move their nest out of the tree in the yard and into my bedroom - first hornet i see in the house, out comes the flame thrower.

You do as you see fit - but don't ask to borrow my flame thrower.

I saw the conference where Obama admits he has no plan and that all this damn stuff is interfering with his holidays,Niccolo Machieveli talks of 'dementure of the military', through excessive interference in his art of war,I really wouldn't want any great war at the moment if I was American because with your current leadership you would probably loose,Australia is once again there for our ally we will provide air logistics and special forces help,but it is about time Egypt,Saudi Arabia,Jordan,Qatar et al did something.In any event America is now portrayed as weak,with no strategic planning and with a vacillating possibly even schizoprenic foreign policy....now what does that suggest to an enemy?

a reply to: nenothtu

there might not actually be a good plan, heck there might be nothing we can really do, without making the situation worse or making merely a token effort.

a reply to: khnum

america has been a stumbling drunk since it "won" the cold war and the USSR collapsed.

we didn't have a plan, there hasn't really been anyone at the wheel since George H.W. Bush; at least not anyone who knows how to actually control the darn thing.

originally posted by: buster2010

What is your first hand information? Can we have names so we can check on these people?

No, but thanks for asking - that actually WOULD violate OPSEC, since some of these guys are still "in the field".

What cost Foley his life was his job he knew the risks and accepted them.

While i agree that intentionally placing one's self in harms way carries inherenet risk, the fact still remains that had not the CiC dragged his feet in the matter long enough for the head's up to go out and the prisoners to be moved, Foley would likely still be alive, in spite of himself. passing the buck to the victim only gets so much mileage when you are in a position to fix the problem, and utterly, willfully, fail to do so.

Why is it that the people who aren't in harms way keep saying we need to act now and always follow up with "I don't want to see that happen".

Why is it that people who have never BEEN in harm's way always err on the side of inaction until they can GET in harm's way?

The US and UK face very little threat from ISIS or ISIL or whatever they are calling themselves this week. They are only attacking places they know will give little resistance.

can you define what you mean by "very little" for me?

terrorist "chatter" has been elevated for a little while now, and is accelerating. Direct threats have been made against New York (Times Square, I believe it was), Chicago (the Old Republic Building on North Michigan Avenue), Las Vegas (several points) and the White House in DC (probably a feint or attempt at misdirection). The threat in Chicago included the words (in Arabic) "soldiers of the Islamic state of Iraq and Syria will pass from here soon". General threats by ISIS against the US have included "we are in your state/ we are in your cities / we are in your streets. You are our goals anywhere" and "we are here #america near our #target sooooooooooooon."

There is a new English language publication from al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), called "Palestine - Betrayal of the Guilty Conscience" which details a few bomb-making instructions (car bombs and pressure cooker bombs) which urges so-called "lone wolf" attacks, suggests targets and a timeline, and an admonition to set the bombs off in crowded venues for maximum effect. The article is prefaced with "My Muslim brother, before you start reading the instructions, remember that this type of operation if prepared well and an appropriate target is chosen and Allah decrees success for you, history will never forget it. It will be recorded as a crushing defeat on the enemies of Islam,"

So can you please define what you mean by "very little" for me? I personally think one is more than ought to be simply ignored, but that's probably just me...

As far as attacking places that give "very little resistance", just how much resistance to Gomer's Boys has the US given again?

It is up to the nations that ISIS has attacked to deal with ISIS we should worry about fixing our own nation before solving other nations problems.

That's the spirit! Throw them bastards to the wolves! After all, they're just a bunch of "raghead" women and kids, and so they probably had it coming to 'em anyhow, now didn't they?

For someone who claims to champion the oppressed, you sure seem not to have a problem leaving them to their own devices...