Gulf War III

Discussion in 'Politics' started by 377OHMS, May 17, 2015.

  1. 377OHMS


    Yep, Ramadi is falling... actually the entire Anbar Province.

    Obama is going to have to re-invade Iraq and everyone knows it. That is unless he has already ceded Iraq to Iran which is certainly possible. Obama's failure to leave a mere 10,000 troops in-country is going to cost him (and every US taxpayer).

    Does anyone here think that Israel is going to tolerate an Iranian occupied Iraq? Is there any doubt about what they are going to do if we don't clean up our mess?

    I thought Obama would harm the United States but it has become clear that he is bringing Americans under direct threat of nuclear war through hubris and incompetence.

    While it is unlikely that the USA would ever experience a coup I find myself hoping for one. The executive branch of the United States government has failed in its duties, abrogated its responsibilites and is not competent to direct the military or to conduct foreign affairs of any kind. Congress has failed to legislate. The supreme court has failed to rule. I would be perfectly happy to see the DoD run the country for a couple of years until the elections. lol.
  2. And all the American media talks about is Ferguson, Baltimore, and the next black shit hole to riot after a multiple felon gets capped by a white cop.

    This is all part of the plan. Keep everyone focused on bullshit while Obama destroys the country.
    CaptainObvious likes this.
  3. Situation was bad in Iraq. Enter Obama and situation gets worse. Trying to appease Islamic terrorists doesn't work. Situation in the inner cites is bad. Enter Obama and situation gets worse. Trying to appease domestic terrorist thugs doesn't work. The pattern is consistent across the board. Leftism doesn't work.
    Clubber Lang likes this.
  4. Situation was bad in the Land of the Chosen. Enter Obama and what do you have ?

    Netanyahu To Appoint Opponent Of Palestinian Statehood As Head Of Peace Talks

    WASHINGTON -- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, under increasing pressure from President Barack Obama to prove his commitment to a two-state solution, is likely to name a new top negotiator for talks with the Palestinians. But Netanyahu’s pick is no peacenik.

    An Israeli official told The Times of Israel on Monday that Netanyahu had chosen recently appointed Interior Minister Silvan Shalom to oversee peace talks.

    The choice is unlikely to appease the White House. Shalom has made comments in direct opposition to Palestinian statehood. In 2012, while serving as a member of the Knesset in the Likud party, Shalom told party activists, “We are all against a Palestinian state, there is no question about it.”

    More recently, as minister of national infrastructure, Shalom blocked the water supply to the newly constructed West Bank town of Rawabi, despite approval by the Defense Ministry.

    Shalom on Monday said his assignment proves Netanyahu’s dedication to peace.

    “The appointment indicates the desire of the prime minister and Israel to have negotiations with the Palestinians, in contrast to the accusations that Israel refuses peace, and in contrast to the Palestinian claims that they cannot avoid unilateral actions in order to advance the establishment of a Palestinian state,” Shalom said, according to a translation provided by The Times of Israel.

    Palestinians are unlikely to see it that way. While they have yet to comment on Shalom’s post, Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat earlier slammed Netanyahu's appointment of Naftali Bennett as education minister and Ayelet Shaked as justice minister.

    “With the dust beginning to settle on the new Israeli coalition government, the face of a new form of racist and discriminatory Israel has been revealed; Benjamin Netanyahu vehemently leading the charge to bury the two-state solution and impose a perpetual Apartheid regime …” Erekat told WAFA, a Palestinian news agency, this month.

    At the moment, Shalom’s appointment has little practical significance. Peace talks are stalled and there is no indication that they are likely to resume in the near future. Rather, the post is further evidence of Netanyahu’s rightward lurch in an effort to maintain his fragile majority within the Israeli government.

    The controversial appointment comes two months after Netanyahu clinched re-election, in part by reassuring right-wing voters in the settlement blocs that he would not allow for the creation of a Palestinian state. Though he has since walked back his comments, the Obama administration has said that it is reevaluating its policy toward Israel and the Palestinian territories in relation to the two-state solution.

    According to The Times of Israel, Shalom’s portfolio also will include strategic dialogue with the U.S.

    J Street, a pro-Israel organization in the U.S., on Monday called on the Obama administration to hold Netanyahu accountable for appointing Shalom.

    “Appointing an opponent of two states to manage negotiations with the Palestinians is yet another sign of Prime Minister Netanyahu's expectation that he can successfully defy the international community in this upcoming term. It is up to the Obama administration to demonstrate that he has badly miscalculated,” said Alan Elsner, J Street’s vice president for communications.

    The White House has been quiet on details of its policy reevaluation, but there is growing speculation that the U.S. may soften longstanding opposition to Palestinian efforts to secure statehood through through the United Nations in lieu of a negotiated settlement with the Israelis.
  5. Ricter


    I remember the days of the "troop surge". Righties here arguing it was too large and, "Obama is breaking his promise to get out us out of Iraq!" And righties here arguing it was too small and, "Obama is endangering our troops there!"
  6. Between Odumbo and the MSM... they are the biggest enemies America has ever faced.

    Clubber Lang likes this.
  7. Ricter


    Obama is mentioned quite a bit in this article, particularly near the end.

    Arab Spring

    The Arab Spring (Arabic: الربيع العربي‎, ar-rabīˁ al-ˁarabī) was a revolutionary wave of demonstrations and protests (both non-violent and violent), riots, and civil wars in the Arab world that began on 18 December 2010 in Tunisia with the Tunisian Revolution, and spread throughout the countries of the Arab League and its surroundings. While the wave of initial revolutions and protests faded by mid-2012, some started to refer to the succeeding and still ongoing large-scale discourse conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa as the Arab Winter. The most radical discourse from Arab Spring into the still ongoing civil wars took place in Syria and Iraq as early as the second half of 2011.

    By the end of February 2012, rulers had been forced from power in Tunisia,[2] Egypt,[3] Libya,[4] and Yemen;[5] civil uprisings had erupted in Bahrain[6] and Syria;[7] major protests had broken out in Algeria,[8] Iraq,[9] Jordan,[10] Kuwait,[11] Morocco,[12] and Sudan;[13] and minor protests had occurred in Mauritania,[14] Oman,[15] Saudi Arabia,[16] Djibouti,[17] Western Sahara,[18] and Palestine. Weapons and Tuareg fighters returning from the Libyan Civil War stoked a simmering conflict in Mali which has been described as "fallout" from the Arab Spring in North Africa.[19]

    The protests shared some techniques of civil resistance in sustained campaigns involving strikes, demonstrations, marches, and rallies, as well as the effective use of social media[20][21] to organize, communicate, and raise awareness in the face of state attempts at repression and Internet censorship, most notably used by the youth members of the Arab population.[22][23]

    Many Arab Spring demonstrations were met with violent responses from authorities,[24][25][26] as well as from pro-government militias and counter-demonstrators. These attacks were answered with violence from protestors in some cases.[27][28][29] A major slogan of the demonstrators in the Arab world is Ash-sha`b yurid isqat an-nizam ("the people want to bring down the regime").[30]

    Some observers have drawn comparisons between the Arab Spring movements and the Revolutions of 1989 (also known as the "Autumn of Nations") that swept through Eastern Europe and the Second World, in terms of their scale and significance.[31][32][33] Others, however, have pointed out that there are several key differences between the movements, such as the desired outcomes and the organizational role of Internet-based technologies in the Arab revolutions.[34][35][36]

    More >>
    futurecurrents likes this.