You Can't Just Bomb Something

[dilloduck]

“I don’t want to leave you with the impression that these Arab members haven’t offered to do air strikes because several of them have,” a senior U.S. State Department official told reporters in Paris.

The official said the offers were not limited to air strikes on Iraq. "Some have indicated for quite a while a willingness to do them elsewhere," the official said. "We have to sort through all of that because you can’t just go and bomb something."
Several Arab countries offer to join air campaign on Islamic State say U.S. officials - Yahoo News

REALLY ? How wise of the State Department to figure this out LOL.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Well, you can, it just isn't necessarily the best idea.

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[eagle1462010]

It's cheaper than smart bombs.............In a concentrated ISIS ISIL area. Why not?

 

[dilloduck]

The legal logistics of Obamas so called strategy is proving to be a nightmare. Do they plan to run any of this by the UN. Are they going to concern themselves with international law ? Are they going to ignore the sovereignty of legitimate nation states ?

 

[eagle1462010]

The legal logistics of Obamas so called strategy is proving to be a nightmare. Do they plan to run any of this by the UN. Are they going to concern themselves with international law ? Are they going to ignore the sovereignty of legitimate nation states ?

YAWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[dilloduck]

It's cheaper than smart bombs.............In a concentrated ISIS ISIL area. Why not?

Because they are now living in towns among civilians and Obama might want their help in taking out Assad. The so called moderate rebels now have a truce with them.

 

[EconChick]

Having spent 10 years in the Air Force, this Administration provides endless entertainment every time they open their mouths about their use of air power. Even in a conventional war we AF types would find their discussion ridiculous, stupid, naïve, and dangerous, but especially in a nonconventional scenario like this one, more so.

ISIS will just start to fade into the populations. There are no uniforms. There is no Geneva Convention. Bombing them has only slowed their warp speed advance. Now they're just advancing at a slower rate.

They've gone from 10,000 people to almost 30,000 in 2 months. That's not retreat.

 

[eagle1462010]

It's cheaper than smart bombs.............In a concentrated ISIS ISIL area. Why not?

Because they are now living in towns among civilians and Obama might want their help in taking out Assad. The so called moderate rebels now have a truce with them.

Assad is a dictator, but he has kept these types under wraps. Some people deserve a boot on their neck for their own good even though I consider Assad a scumbag...............

Obama created helped create this mess by arming groups their already.

 

[EconChick]

It's cheaper than smart bombs.............In a concentrated ISIS ISIL area. Why not?

Eagle is certainly right about it working where there's concentrated ISIS moving in open columns like they so brazenly did in the beginning. But it won't take time before they're blended in and we'll need the troops on the ground to do door to door.

 

[eagle1462010]

It's cheaper than smart bombs.............In a concentrated ISIS ISIL area. Why not?

Eagle is certainly right about it working where there's concentrated ISIS moving in open columns like they so brazenly did in the beginning. But it won't take time before they're blended in and we'll need the troops on the ground to do door to door.

I don't care about collateral damage......

 

[dilloduck]

Obama intends to depose Assad for the same reason that Bush deposed Saddam. It's the same neocon plan from years ago. I guess it just goes to show you that it doesn't matter who is president. Some policies just seem to persist in spite of the politicians. I'm curious what the Russian Syrian and Chinese response will be to bombing so called ISIS positions inside of Syria.

 

[dilloduck]

It's cheaper than smart bombs.............In a concentrated ISIS ISIL area. Why not?

Eagle is certainly right about it working where there's concentrated ISIS moving in open columns like they so brazenly did in the beginning. But it won't take time before they're blended in and we'll need the troops on the ground to do door to door.

I don't care about collateral damage......

I bet the so called Coalition does.

 

[eagle1462010]

Obama intends to depose Assad for the same reason that Bush deposed Saddam. It's the same neocon plan from years ago. I guess it just goes to show you that it doesn't matter who is president. Some policies just seem to persist in spite of the politicians. I'm curious what the Russian Syrian and Chinese response will be to bombing so called ISIS positions inside of Syria.

And then we'll have another conclusion like Libya............We are better off with Assad whether we like him or not.

 

[EconChick]

It's cheaper than smart bombs.............In a concentrated ISIS ISIL area. Why not?

Eagle is certainly right about it working where there's concentrated ISIS moving in open columns like they so brazenly did in the beginning. But it won't take time before they're blended in and we'll need the troops on the ground to do door to door.

I don't care about collateral damage......

Hey, I understand the sentiment. Especially now that Obama squandered the relative stability we left Iraq with. It's going to be much harder to fix.

But I was in Iraq from the early years to nearly the end..... and by the end, the strategy had pretty much worked as planned. I spent a lot of time dealing with Muslims who helped the mission over the years.

We also had the Sunni situation relatively handled as well....which is why I hate this fucking president with a fucking passion. There's no fixing THAT under his "leadership."

 

[Pennywise]

Having spent 10 years in the Air Force, this Administration provides endless entertainment every time they open their mouths about their use of air power. Even in a conventional war we AF types would find their discussion ridiculous, stupid, naïve, and dangerous, but especially in a nonconventional scenario like this one, more so.

ISIS will just start to fade into the populations. There are no uniforms. There is no Geneva Convention. Bombing them has only slowed their warp speed advance. Now they're just advancing at a slower rate.

They've gone from 10,000 people to almost 30,000 in 2 months. That's not retreat.

So what would rank and file soldiers suggest? All in? Walk away? Limited engagement?

 

[eagle1462010]

It's cheaper than smart bombs.............In a concentrated ISIS ISIL area. Why not?

Eagle is certainly right about it working where there's concentrated ISIS moving in open columns like they so brazenly did in the beginning. But it won't take time before they're blended in and we'll need the troops on the ground to do door to door.

I don't care about collateral damage......

I bet the so called Coalition does.

Where are the Coalition at.......................Where are their planes and troops in the current battle against ISIS and ISIL.

Have they conducted one air strike yet?????????????????

 

[bodecea]

It's cheaper than smart bombs.............In a concentrated ISIS ISIL area. Why not?

Because they are now living in towns among civilians and Obama might want their help in taking out Assad. The so called moderate rebels now have a truce with them.

Assad is a dictator, but he has kept these types under wraps. Some people deserve a boot on their neck for their own good even though I consider Assad a scumbag...............

Obama created helped create this mess by arming groups their already.

Saddam Hussein was the same way. And yet, there was a NEED by the past administration to screw that up.

 

[eagle1462010]

Having spent 10 years in the Air Force, this Administration provides endless entertainment every time they open their mouths about their use of air power. Even in a conventional war we AF types would find their discussion ridiculous, stupid, naïve, and dangerous, but especially in a nonconventional scenario like this one, more so.

ISIS will just start to fade into the populations. There are no uniforms. There is no Geneva Convention. Bombing them has only slowed their warp speed advance. Now they're just advancing at a slower rate.

They've gone from 10,000 people to almost 30,000 in 2 months. That's not retreat.

So what would rank and file soldiers suggest? All in? Walk away? Limited engagement?

It's cheaper than smart bombs.............In a concentrated ISIS ISIL area. Why not?

Because they are now living in towns among civilians and Obama might want their help in taking out Assad. The so called moderate rebels now have a truce with them.

Assad is a dictator, but he has kept these types under wraps. Some people deserve a boot on their neck for their own good even though I consider Assad a scumbag...............

Obama created helped create this mess by arming groups their already.

Saddam Hussein was the same way. And yet, there was a NEED by the past administration to screw that up.

Name a leader of this country or other who hasn't fucked up the Middle East..............The Middle East is Pandora's Box.

 

[dilloduck]

It's cheaper than smart bombs.............In a concentrated ISIS ISIL area. Why not?

Eagle is certainly right about it working where there's concentrated ISIS moving in open columns like they so brazenly did in the beginning. But it won't take time before they're blended in and we'll need the troops on the ground to do door to door.

I don't care about collateral damage......

I bet the so called Coalition does.

Where are the Coalition at.......................Where are their planes and troops in the current battle against ISIS and ISIL.

Have they conducted one air strike yet?????????????????

Obama and Kerry are busy pulling them together. I'm sure they have a price for there participation.