Didn't Obama say the war was over in Iraq? Yes, he did three years ago...

Hmmmmmm, guess he changed his mind...with targeted airstrikes. We are gonna use targeted airstrikes....and no boots on the ground...

But, like myself and others who understand how air power it used, it's vey hard to hit small targets (ISIS folks) on the ground without the use of JTACS/Combat Controllers/Forward Air Controllers even with the best guided weapons. We might as well be pissing in the wind on certain targeting examples without the aforementioned folks to do terminal guidance of these munitions.

So why aren't we going to just wipe ISIS out? The Iraqis sure seem to want it. The Kurds sure seem to want it. Targeted airstrikes should be considered analogous to the stupid Rumsfeld policy of a light footprint of boots on the ground which had to be fixed with the SURGE in later years. Yes, I said that. Rumsfeld's policy to go in with just as little to get the job done was not what should have been done. We should have hit Iraq with everything we had like in the first Gulf War and use overwhelming force (see the Road to Basra pics).

Most of you do realize that a LOT of the air drops of supplies and ordnance drops (if Obama approves) are going to be made within the WEZ (weapons engagement zone) of the Stinger missiles(stolen from Iraqi army) and SA-11s the ISIS now have (most recently used in the Ukraine).

Guess that the "IRAQ WAR" isn't really over like Obama stated it was...

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-announces-end-of-iraq-war-troops-to-return-home-by-year-end/

After nearly 9 years, America's war in Iraq will be over," said Mr. Obama.


He said the last American troops will depart the country by January 1 "with their heads held high, proud of their success, and knowing that the American people stand united in our support for our troops."

Sal wrote:You never wanted to leave, so what're you whining about?

Uh, were baaaaaaaaaaaaaack and had we never cut and run, ISIS would not be in Iraq.

He did say the war was over....I remember.

Sal wrote:You never wanted to leave, so what're you whining about?

Good to see that you finally agree that we, Conservatives, were right. Not a great surprise.

Good to see that you finally agree that we, Conservatives, were right. Not a great surprise.


Please explain what your position was and is now.

There never was a reason for the US to go to war in Iraq.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/12/22/congress-cites-911-bush-cover-up-demands-obama-act/

"...Startling disclosures?
This week, Congressional representatives Stephen Lynch (D-MA) and Walter Jones (R-NC) have officially requested a congressional resolution demanding President Obama declassify the heavily redacted Congressional Investigative Report on 9/11.
The two representatives had just been given authority under penalty of “national security secrecy” to read the censored 28 pages of the 800-page report that had not been seen.
For nearly a decade, the US has maintained security policies, both domestic and international, based on threats now known to have been totally fabricated. The cost, trillions of dollars, thousands of Americans dead in wars against “enemies” long known to have never been involved in terror attacks on America, the phony “hunt for bin Laden,” all of it, nothing but utter hogwash.
Bush cited as conspirator
What has been made clear is that President Bush was fully aware that neither Afghanistan nor Iraq were involved in 9/11 and that military action against those two nations was done to cover involvement of his administration in 9/11, involvement that included support from foreign intelligence agencies.
The representatives, while reviewing the report, came to the portion titled “Specific Sources of Foreign Support.” A 28-page section here had been “butchered” by the White House on the personal orders of President Bush. On the original report given to Congress, an estimated 5-10,000 words were omitted from this section with page after page of dotted lines replacing text.
The full report carries a tale of not only broad complicity of foreign intelligence agencies but, in the use of the term “complicity,” indications of full knowledge of the funding and planning of 9/11 by the Bush administration.
However, the lawmakers, without the support of a resolution, are under a “gag order” and unable to name the nation or nations that supplied.
Israel, Saudi Arabia or both
Recent revelations tied to events in Syria and Egypt have exposed an unimagined level of cooperation between the intelligence services of Israel and Saudi Arabia. For years, Israel has cited Saudi Arabia as the greatest threat to their security, much greater than Iraq under Saddam or their claims of a “nuclear Iran.”
This and much else of what Israel has publicly claimed as part of their “mythology of victimization” is now recognized as falsehood. Though both Israel and Saudi Arabia are known as allies of the US, their partnerships with America have been with specific groups, extremists within government and the military willing to back the plots now plainly evident even when US interests are sacrificed or even American lives are lost..."

WAR CRIMINALS..!!

Obama said ISIS was the JV, so what's he so worried about? Funny, Obama was warned what would happen in Iraq if he cut and ran and now wants to blame Intel for it. Lol.