Obama Slays Another Republican Talking Point By Explaining His Strategy To Dismantle ISIS

[babylonsister]

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/09/05/obama-slays-republican-talking-point-explaining-strategy-dismantle-isis.html

Obama Slays Another Republican Talking Point By Explaining His Strategy To Dismantle ISIS
By: Jason Easley
Friday, September, 5th, 2014, 4:40 pm


During his press conference at the NATO summit today, President Obama put another Republican talking point out of its misery by explaining his strategy to dismantle ISIS.

Video @ link~

Transcript:

PRESIDENT OBAMA: You can’t contain an organization that is running roughshod through that much territory, causing that much havoc, displacing that many people, killing that many innocents, enslaving that many women. The goal has to be to dismantle them.

And if you look at what happened with al Qaeda in the FATA, where their primary base was, you initially push them back. You systematically degrade their capabilities. You narrow their scope of action. You slowly shrink the space, the territory that they may control. You take out their leadership. And over time, they are not able to conduct the same kinds of terrorist attacks as they once could.

As I said I think in my last press conference, given the nature of these organizations, are there potentially remnants of an organization that are still running around and hiding and still potentially plotting? Absolutely. And we will continue to hunt them down the same way we’re doing with remnants of al Qaeda in the FATA or elements of al-Shabaab in Somalia, or terrorists who operate anywhere around the world.

But what we can accomplish is to dismantle this network, this force that has claimed to control this much territory, so that they can’t do us harm. And that’s going to be our objective. And as I said before, I’m pleased to see that there’s unanimity among our friends and allies that that is a worthy goal and they are prepared to work with us in accomplishing that goal.

So much for the Republican talking point that the president doesn’t have a strategy to deal with ISIS. Obama has a proven track record of terrorist neutralization. His methods have worked in the past, and there is no reason that they won’t be effective in dealing with ISIS. Republicans going back to George W. Bush have refused to understand that terrorism can’t be defeated with an invading army. The concept of terrorism can’t be defeated with ground troops.

President Obama is correct. The best way to defeat terrorism is to neutralize the threat. Notice that President Obama didn’t use George W. Bush war on terror lingo. This president has more reality based understanding of what it takes to deal with a terrorist threat. ISIS wants to provoke the US into another ground war, but Obama isn’t going to fall for it.

The Obama strategy is better than the Republican strategy of sending a bunch of troops to invade a country that had nothing to do with the terrorist attack on American soil. It’s clear that the president has clear goal, while the only strategy that Republicans have is the one that let Osama Bin Laden roam free while American troops died in Iraq.

[kentuck]

1. For the first time since George H.W. Bush...,

that I can recall, a President is getting our allies together before invading another country?

Since we already have 1100 troops in the country as "advisers", then it would be only fair to ask the allies to put in a thousand troops each into the country of Iraq, to hunt down the ISIS assholes.

Don't you think?

[underpants]

4. No coalition? You seem to have forgotten the Moroccan land mine monkeys

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1524181

[kentuck]

13. :-) I had forgotten.

"Republicans would make good land-mine monkeys."

[underpants]

18. They're like microwave popcorn

When they stop going off every 3 seconds they are done.


-that joke was stolen from someone here at DU

[karynnj]

44. What is the meaning of the word "invading"

In 2003, we invaded Iraq -- there is no reasonable definition of the word to say that we invaded in 2014.

Don't mean to attack you, but with the media comparing this coalition to 2003, we need to avoid falling in that trap ourselves. I agree with you that this has more in common with Gulf War I than 2003. However, this really is about terrorism, while even Senator Lugar said that Gulf War I was about oil and no one on the SFRC contradicted him. (2009 hearing with Jimmy Carter testifying about climate change.)

Differences from 2003:

Iraq asked for help from people attacking their country.
We have no boots on the ground
We are working to include the countries in the region in the effort

Please add any you think of.

[Rex]

2. GOP strategy = start war, worry about repercussions later.

Good to know we have a sensible POTUS in office that doesn't want to get the entire human race killed off. Mc Cain would already have us knee deep in blood.

[kentauros]

6. I'd say their "strategy" is more like

"Start war. Ignore ALL repercussions. And when that boogie man has lost it's fear-factor, repeat with a newly-manufactured enemy."

[Fred Sanders]

9. You forgot "tell buddies in the mass media to help out in the mass delusion".

[kentauros]

15. I guess I meant to imply that

as they own the mass media, too

[Rex]

17. True what was I thinking? They NEVER worry about consequences.

4000 dead military personal on THEIR watch...but you would never know about it, because they don't give a dam.

[AuntPatsy]

3. We should give credit when it is due, Recommending

[GeorgeGist]

5. When does the blockade of Saudi oil begin?

[sub.theory]

8. Never, but it should

Saudi Arabia is indeed the incubator and exporter of Wahabbist/Salafist hate that is the core ideology of ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram , et al.

It's long past time for the US to make clear that a failure to reign in this open export of hatred as well as the financing of Salafist jihadi terrorists will have disastrous consequences for our relationship including our pursuing sanctions against them. Of course this won't happen, because oil.

[meow2u3]

12. Not as long as we're sucking on the Saudi oil teat

And not as long as Big Oil has anything to say, unfortunately. Saudi Arabia is one of the Koch Bros. best customers AFAIK.

[Fred Sanders]

7. Republican talking lie more like it. How much longer must the nation suffer these fools? Do we

have to wait until the mass media is no longer owned by half a dozen corporations, because that could be a while?

[jaxind]

10. Provocation

Not only is ISIS trying to provoke us into another ground war, but so is the Republican party. So, when that fails (which would probably happen - that's why Obama doesn't want to do it), the Republicans can blame Obama. Even if fingers were pointed to them saying this was their idea, then they would say "well, Obama didn't execute it well!"

[Dont call me Shirley]

11. Obama wants to dismantle all John McCain and Lindsay Graham's hard work?!

oh, the shock of it all

Gobama!

[freshwest]

14. VIDEO in which President Obama puts another GOP talking point out of its misery:

President Obama Holds a Press Conference at the NATO Summit

Published on Sep 5, 2014 - The White House

On September 5, 2014, President Obama held a press conference at the 2014 NATO Summit in Newport, Wales.

Thanks, babylonsister!

From that transcript:

PRESIDENT OBAMA:

You can’t contain an organization that is running roughshod through that much territory, causing that much havoc, displacing that many people, killing that many innocents, enslaving that many women. The goal has to be to dismantle them.

That is a good goal.

[world wide wally]

16. Quoting from the runaway best seller, "Republicanism For Dummies",

"Just fucking bomb somebody for Christ's sake!"

(end of chapter on foreign policy)

[kairos12]

20. LOL, but way too true. Unfortunately.

[NewJeffCT]

19. He used too many big words & complete sentences

for Republicans to understand his strategy.

[denvine]

21. I know it's been said before but,

I am so glad we have a President who thinks things through before acting. I'm glad we have a President who builds consensus rather than going rogue. I'm glad we have a President who doesn't make me cringe when he speaks. I'm also glad we have a President who makes the repugs look like the idiot warmongers they are. I am thankful we have President Obama. I only wish more of the country would see it.

[world wide wally]

22. There is a spider that lives beneath the sand of the Sahara Desert that has not seen anything for so

long, it no longer has eyes.
Just think...in a couple of million years, about 47% of Americans will not be born with eyes.

[denvine]

26. Please, please, please, could we speed it up

[madokie]

25. welcome to DU Denvine

I didn't check to see if you are truly new here or not before I posted this, just that I haven't seen you before and so I welcome you to our enclave.

You are spot on with what you said btw

[denvine]

27. Thank you!

[Iliyah]

23. Corporate media and the GOP are not listening

because it messes up their talking points that Pres O is a failure and plain EVIL.

[madokie]

24. This man that we have for a President today is not a shoot from the hip, get a lot of people killed

and create more enemies than we get rid of kind of guy.

I'm more proud of my three votes for this man than the hundreds of votes prior to these three.

[conservaphobe]

28. The foreign policy extremists need to back the fuck off this President.

Whether it be the neocon hawks or sit-on-our-hands-and-err'thing-will-work-out doves.

[grahamhgreen]

33. My goodness, 12 years of war, and you still think war helps?

[Uncle Joe]

29. I believe President Obama is using the correct and wisest strategy.

Thanks for the thread, babylonsister.

[Vattel]

30. "Dismantling ISIS" is a strategy?

[MFrohike]

36. I wondered if I was the only one

Dismantling seems like the result the strategy produces, not the strategy itself.

[Cha]

31. Paul Begala Tweet on the President and ISIS.. "So, while everyone was clucking over whether..

Paul Begala ✔ @PaulBegala
Follow
So, while everyone was clucking over whether @BarackObama emoted enough over ISIS, he just smoked 3 of their leaders. http://tinyurl.com/npys8lx

8:38 AM - 4 Sep 2014

Aide to ISIS Leader Among 3 Killed in U.S. Strike: Iraqi Official -...

Three senior members of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) - including an aide to its leader - were killed in a U.S. airstrike in Iraq, a senior Ir...
NBC News @NBCNews http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/aide-isis-leader-among-3-killed-u-s-strike-iraqi-n195601
465 Retweets 206 favorites

http://theobamadiary.com/2014/09/05/a-tweet-or-two-111/

[grahamhgreen]

32. OMG. It's a 1400 year old war. After these guys, there will be another.

[Scootaloo]

35. No it's not

It's about three years old.

But good job on the ignorant "They've been fighting forever" talking point.

[grahamhgreen]

37. Fascinating! How did this group magically pop into being 3 years ago? Where did they come from?

[Scootaloo]

38. It's more involved than you clearly have the attention span for.

But hey you know? so long as you apply th same "fighting forever" non-logic to Russia and ukraine, at least you're consistent...

[grahamhgreen]

39. It's only 3 years:) Do you know about the original Shia/Sunni split? Or our funding of ISIS, Osama,

or Saddam?

Do you know we support Saudi Arabia that uses beheading to control their population?

What is the end game here? How long do we stay? Who pays?

[Scootaloo]

40. I have a strong understanding of all of that, yes. Which is why I'm sayingthis to you

My point is you can't point at IS and say "durf hurf durf those people have been been fighting forever!" because that's just fucking ignorant. No, IS popped up three years ago as a direct result of the anarchy of Iraq and Syria. A bunch of dudes, mostly immigrant fighters, who decided to capitalize on the power vacuums to install themselves as kings. It's not an ancient ongoing conflict, it's a situation clearly traceable to modern events. Very recent modern events, even.

[grahamhgreen]

41. The goal is the same as the 1400 year old goal to create an Islamic caliphate, no? And when they

are defeated, others will carry that goal forward, agreed?

[Scootaloo]

42. Which is completely different from your initial statement

And is itself a questionable assertion.

Stick with your "who will pay forth is" angle, you're better at it.

[grahamhgreen]

43. I'm just trying to find points of agreement wo we can find a solution. "We Can't Win It" - GWB

[Scootaloo]

34. Any chance of backing Iraq, Syria, and Iran in their fight?

'Cause really, letting the regional actors take the lead for the regional efforts would be best for everyone.