Obama prepared to authorize air strikes in Syria against Islamic State

a reply to: keenasbro

I been jumping up and down railing against any US involvement overseas. But no one listens - and the majority of the populous want to go back over there to get ISIS. Which is actually very understandable.

I am resigned as there seems nothing I can do or say. All we can do is hope and pray for a more positive outcome. ISIS does need gone, and if we pray hard enough, maybe they will have the sense to do things right for a change.

We can only hope. Nothing else to do anyway... because if we do it wrong, it's the end.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You certainly are a smart person, You figure it out.
Of course expensive sick study like these are made to send them to the garbage can.

Obama has no right to do that without permission of Syria's government. However John Kerry was in the land of Saud tribe and they agreed to fund and help opposition in Syria except ISIL.
Whenever Obama says "International" he means USA, Europe and Saud tribe ! Their Sep 11 like game, will not have many fans, this time.

originally posted by: maes2
Obama has no right to do that without permission of Syria's government. However John Kerry was in the land of Saud tribe and they agreed to fund and help opposition in Syria except ISIL.
Whenever Obama says "International" he means USA, Europe and Saud tribe ! Their Sep 11 like game, will not have many fans, this time.

The US has permission of Syria Govenment. At least the Government they legally recognize. So... yep.

originally posted by: MrSpad

originally posted by: maes2
Obama has no right to do that without permission of Syria's government. However John Kerry was in the land of Saud tribe and they agreed to fund and help opposition in Syria except ISIL.
Whenever Obama says "International" he means USA, Europe and Saud tribe ! Their Sep 11 like game, will not have many fans, this time.

The US has permission of Syria Govenment. At least the Government they legally recognize. So... yep.

So if Russia recognizes Federal State of Novorossiya they can go in and help them out without any problem ?

a reply to: OpinionatedB

ISIS is a threat to all. Unfortunately we have a situation when USA is a de facto world police force.
We need capable UN forces and not this humiliation

31 August 2014 – The United Nations said on Sunday that all 72 Filipino peacekeepers formerly surrounded by armed elements in two different locations in the Golan are now safe.

Meanwhile, the world body continues to seek the immediate and unconditional release of the 44 Fijian peacekeepers detained last Thursday by armed elements, the UN said in a note issued to the press.

Currently, no additional information on their status or location has been established.

The UN said in a note issued to the media that the Fijians were handed to UNDOF at 2:30 p.m. local time. All the 45 peacekeepers are in good condition and will undergo medical assessment.

www.un.org...
www.un.org...

more info here
www.haaretz.com...
"By the way, we are all safe and alive, and we thank Jabhat al-Nusra for keeping us safe and keeping us alive. I'd like to assure you that we have not been harmed in any way," one hostage, who was not identified, said, using the Nusra Front's full name.

"We understand that with the limited resources that they have, they have provided the best for us and we truly appreciate it and we thank them. We are thankful that Jabhat al-Nusra has kept its word and that we will be going home."

Kidnapped armed UN forces thanking ISIS lol

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

At least in Iraq and Libya there was a pretext of adhering to international law even if there were complaints after the fact that the US went beyond the mandate of the UN resolutions passed. I don't think it would be too hard to get security council approval for going after the ISIS in Syria. The international co-operation to destroy Syria's chemical weapons was a success. Anyway is there any real reason not to co-ordinate efforts with Assad? The more intel and co-operation the better and there is no need to actually act on any intel in any situation if there is reason to question the intel or targets.

It wouldn't be wise to completely trust Assad but is it really wise to rely on Syrian rebels who have had close ties to ISIS in the past? Many of the fighters in the ISIS are former Syrian rebels who joined the ISIS because they were the strongest group. In this kind of war I don't think you can rely on your enemies to present themselves as enemies for you to destroy. They will switch sides, go to ground and hide among the general population until there is less heat on them and that is why every resource available needs to used to attempt to hunt them down.

It doesn't matter what they call themselves whether they change their name to al-qaeda, al-nusra or something else complete new and temporarily less well known and threatening. Regardless of what they call themselves these Islamic extremists need to be hunted down because while their name may change their views on Christians and other minorities won't.

originally posted by: muse7
Good. These barbaric animals need to be carpet bombed 24/7

Good enough so that the American Economy can finally collapse, you honestly you can fight in four or five wars eh? its no wonder why then the world hates you and dont get me wrong this bombing of ISIS will fix nor achieve nothing this will make only the Iraqis want to join the ISIS even further.

The only way this is going to turn out right is if ISISL is a paper tiger…not what their all cracked up to be.

Think about whom they have beat in war: the sorry Syrian army, the non existent FSA, and the weak Iraqi army and defensless villagers.

When they have ever gone up against a viable force they have gotten beaten. It seems to me they have taken advantage of the weak just like vultures and when the strong approach they recoil.

If Obama does what he should do, that is ally with the Syrian Army then this could be over quick, relatively speaking.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien

originally posted by: MrSpad

originally posted by: maes2
Obama has no right to do that without permission of Syria's government. However John Kerry was in the land of Saud tribe and they agreed to fund and help opposition in Syria except ISIL.
Whenever Obama says "International" he means USA, Europe and Saud tribe ! Their Sep 11 like game, will not have many fans, this time.

The US has permission of Syria Govenment. At least the Government they legally recognize. So... yep.

So if Russia recognizes Federal State of Novorossiya they can go in and help them out without any problem ?

Sure if they legally recognize them they can do what they want. They just did it in Crimea. Of course the people who do not recognize it might have a problem with it and do something about it. In this case nobody who still recognizes Syria can do anything but, complain.

a reply to: kitzik

Jabat al-Nusra is al-Qaeda and not ISIS - although I suppose that fact is rather beside the point, since both are pretty bad, it's just that ISIS is worse. It's really bad when al-Qaeda looks like saints beside another group - honestly.

That said - I agree with you that the UN should be effective, and the reality is they simply aren't. UN needs an enforcing arm - and in reality the enforcing arm of the UN is supposed to be member countries, which is why US and other countries end up trying to be the enforcing arm.

When one country breaks UN mandates other countries who are UN members are supposed to help enforce those mandates, and the reality is that never happens - unless those member countries think there is something in it for them.

As effective as the UN is, I would say do away with them completely. There is no point in having them if they wont/cannot enforce anything they mandate. It's like telling a two year old to stop playing with matches and then not doing anything when they tell you "NO"

All that said ISIS is really really bad - but I don't think the situation needs to be used to the advantage of anyone who wants to destroy a sovereign country, which is exactly what the US has been wanting desperately to do to Syria. If we have any questions of that just look at what happened in Libya and elsewhere - and the results thereof.

I don't think the US has any business at all messing in Syrian affairs - which they have been doing to the advantage of groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda - and you know if they go over there this is what will happen. ISIS will just be a cover to do whatever they please.

ISIS needs to be stopped by Muslims. Period. In order to actualize their eradication, this is an absolute must. Any other way, and any other people, and ISIS will only grow.

this whole situation makes me feel uneasy because of one little detail.

according to one prophecy (from the bible?), the demolition of damascus will mark the start of the WW3.

and while i don't think ISIL has the capacity to do such damage, lets just hope a bigger mess between usa and the russia won't come out of it.

besides, if ISIL is just what states needed to create a mayhem on syrian soil, one starts to wonder who is really behind their sudden rise to power.

Looks like some of our friends on the other side of the fence might be correct about Assad and removing him from power -

Obama: Assad Shooting At American Planes Would Lead To His Overthrow

US President Barack Obama delivers a live televised address to the nation on his plans for military action against the Islamic State, from the Cross Hall of the White House in Washington September 10, 2014.

President Barack Obama would seek to overthrow the regime of Bashar al-Assad if American planes were attacked upon entering Syrian air space, Peter Baker of The New York Times reports .

If Assad's troops f ired at American planes entering Syrian airspace, "Obama said he would order American forces to wipe out Syria’s air defense system," Baker reports. "He went on to say that such an action by Mr. Assad would lead to his overthrow, according to one account."

On Wednesday, Obama announced that he had authorized US airstrikes in Syria while laying out a four-part strategy to "destroy" and "eradicate" radical ISIS militants who have captured roughly a third of Syria and a third of Iraq.

Since August, US warplanes have backed Iraqi soldiers, Kurdish peshmerga fighters, and Iranian-backed Shia militiamen as they attempt to roll back ISIS gains in Iraq.

Baker, who spoke with 10 people who spoke to the president leading up to his speech on Wednesday, writes that Obama " struck his guests as less certain about the endgame on the Syrian side, where he has called for Mr. Assad to step down and must now rely on the same moderate Syrian rebels he refused to arm in the past."

Syrian rebels associated with the Western-backed Free Syrian Army (FSA) have scoffed at Obama's plan, saying that it rushes to target ISIS while ignoring Assad.

"I don't really understand this sudden fuss about ISIS," one FSA fighter told The Guardian. "They killed people, but Bashar has been killing for the last three years. But nobody seems to be interested in that anymore."

Click link for remainder of article...


Even I find his comments interesting...

a reply to: jedi_hamster

Dont forget ISIL was able to capture Iraqi universities that had nuclear material present.

a reply to: Xcathdra

of course it was.
how convenient.

originally posted by: jedi_hamster
this whole situation makes me feel uneasy because of one little detail.

according to one prophecy (from the bible?), the demolition of damascus will mark the start of the WW3.

and while i don't think ISIL has the capacity to do such damage, lets just hope a bigger mess between usa and the russia won't come out of it.

besides, if ISIL is just what states needed to create a mayhem on syrian soil, one starts to wonder who is really behind their sudden rise to power.

Here`s your answer to that question :

U.S. General: “We Helped Build ISIS” – Islamic State Obtained Weapons from U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya

www.globalresearch.ca...[e ditby]edit on 14-9-2014 by BornAgainAlien because: (no reason given)