Posted on 05/21/2015 4:02:59 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
President Obama denied that the United States and its allies were losing the fight against Islamic State forces in the Middle East, but he acknowledged in an interview posted online on Thursday that more should be done to help Iraqis recapture lost territory.
He offered no regrets about his handling of the war and said in the end it would be up to the Iraqis to increase their efforts.
The president and his team argued for months that they had reversed the momentum of the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, but critics and independent experts said it was now time to rethink the approach.
Mr. Obama has authorized airstrikes and occasional special forces missions, but otherwise he said he was counting on the government of Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi of Iraq and moderate Syrian rebels to conduct the fight on the ground.
“There’s no doubt that in the Sunni areas, we’re going to have to ramp up not just training but also commitment, and we better get Sunni tribes more activated than they currently have been,” Mr. Obama said. “So it is a source of concern.”
But he counseled patience. “We’re eight months into what we’ve always anticipated to be a multiyear campaign, and I think Prime Minister Abadi recognizes many of these problems, but they’re going to have to be addressed,” Mr. Obama said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Obama won’t do shit to fight ISIS...he’s on their side.
Obama reminds me of my mother-in-law. He says whatever he thinks people want to hear and then he goes and does whatever it is he wants to do. The two positions never have to agree and he seems to have no conscience about it.
Let me guess, more MONEY is needed?
how many more Christians and women and children will be lost in the “multi year campaign”
Obama has no morals, ethics, standards, conscience or soul.
We know that our allies are losing in Iraq and also that Obama is losing his mind.
Now what do we do about helping our allies and as well as putting Obamunism in a padded cell?
Obama could make this much easier for himself if he would clarify what ISIS would have to do in Iraq for him to concede that ISIS was winning the war.
We know that ISIS’s capturing of Ramadi merely drew a yawn from Obama and his generals since in their estimation the city wasn’t ‘’strategic’’ enough for them to worry about.
But what Iraqi city DO they consider strategic enough for them to care about? Baghdad? If that were the case, Obama would be ordering extensive ground troops into Baghdad to protect it from the kind of ISIS capture-plus-bloodbath recently visited on Ramadi. But he’s not doing that.
So what can we expect from ISIS except that it will use the large supply of American-made tanks and personnel carriers it captured in Ramadi to descend on Baghdad for a bloody siege to end all sieges?
We’re doing nothing but the republicans are blocking the spending to do a lot more of the same. It’s hugh.
Obama has a consistent losing strategy...why change now?
Substitute Iraq with the name of any ally of the USA and you can hear “you are on your own”.
Once we get serious about global warming ISIS is dead meat.
0bama’s ISIS Strategy: “Give them space to destroy!”
Obama built this.
The blood is on HIS hands.
Heh... indeed.
The comparison could extend to our soldiers as Baltimore’s policemen, as they were similarly hamstrung in their jobs.
It’s the 0bama Way.
Stand down! Let mayhem ensue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.