Russia Bombs Near US Troops, Says Not Us!

[Tehon]

So let me get this straight, Republicans on this site are wishing the American seals or military were killed by the Iranians or Russians so they can blame Obama and Hillary?

True colors of so called conservatives, aren't pretty!!!! Sad sad sad indeed!!!

I think what people are saying is that it is foolish for us to have military personnel on the ground inside the sovereign nation of Syria assisting terrorists.

According to the article it was a coalition of troops helping the KURDISH people train and learn how to fight.

Are Kurdish now terrorists?

What exactly is going on in Syria? Bad guys on all sides...? the Government, the ISIS group, the Kurds????

Who are the good guys? The refugees fleeing??

Are Kurdish now terrorists?

Sure, why not? They are using acts of violence with the intention of coercing the legitimate governing authority of a sovereign state. No different than ISIS.

The United States has no legitimate reason for being in Syria. Obama is directly responsible for our presence there, no one else.

What is the US/coalition's goal? Who does the USA believe is the Bad Guys? And why?? Do you know, and have an abbreviated version or do I need to spend hours googling and reading up on it myself?

The goal is to remove Assad from power and install a government that is not aligned with Iran.

Here, you don't need to spend hours searching, take a couple minutes and peruse Hillary's email in which the situation is discussed..
WikiLeaks - Hillary Clinton Email Archive

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

The United States has no legitimate reason for permanently being in Syria. Obama is directly responsible for our presence there, no one else.

We had no legitimate business being in Libya, and for that matter, no legitimate business for being permanently in Afghanistan either. All we had to do was send in the Special Forces and taken out Bin Laden. It would have been the simplest thing in the world. We are doing that now. We are sending Special Forces everywhere. Why didn't we do that to begin with instead of scattering the Taliban like ants, where even a grasshopper from outer space couldn't have found the leaders?

If it took us 10 years to kill Bin Laden, then how in the hell, could Bush's ultimatum to the Taliban been met. They could not have turned over Bin Laden because they had no control over him. Any moron could have figured that out.

 

[Tehon]

The United States has no legitimate reason for permanently being in Syria. Obama is directly responsible for our presence there, no one else.

We had no legitimate business being in Libya, and for that matter, no legitimate business for being permanently in Afghanistan either. All we had to do was send in the Special Forces and taken out Bin Laden. It would have been the simplest thing in the world. We are doing that now. We are sending Special Forces everywhere. Why didn't we do that to begin with instead of scattering the Taliban like ants, where even a grasshopper from outer space couldn't have found the leaders?

If it took us 10 years to kill Bin Laden, then how in the hell, could Bush's ultimatum to the Taliban been met. They could not have turned over Bin Laden because they had no control over him. Any moron could have figured that out.

The United States isn't overly concerned with ridding the region of extremists. They provide the necessary pretext for being there.

 

[Grizz]

So let me get this straight, Republicans on this site are wishing the American seals or military were killed by the Iranians or Russians so they can blame Obama and Hillary?

True colors of so called conservatives, aren't pretty!!!! Sad sad sad indeed!!!

I think what people are saying is that it is foolish for us to have military personnel on the ground inside the sovereign nation of Syria assisting terrorists.

According to the article it was a coalition of troops helping the KURDISH people train and learn how to fight.

Are Kurdish now terrorists?

What exactly is going on in Syria? Bad guys on all sides...? the Government, the ISIS group, the Kurds????

Who are the good guys? The refugees fleeing??

We are supporting the "Rebels" , the " Rebels" include ISIS and Al Qaeda.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

The United States has no legitimate reason for permanently being in Syria. Obama is directly responsible for our presence there, no one else.

We had no legitimate business being in Libya, and for that matter, no legitimate business for being permanently in Afghanistan either. All we had to do was send in the Special Forces and taken out Bin Laden. It would have been the simplest thing in the world. We are doing that now. We are sending Special Forces everywhere. Why didn't we do that to begin with instead of scattering the Taliban like ants, where even a grasshopper from outer space couldn't have found the leaders?

If it took us 10 years to kill Bin Laden, then how in the hell, could Bush's ultimatum to the Taliban been met. They could not have turned over Bin Laden because they had no control over him. Any moron could have figured that out.

The United States isn't overly concerned with ridding the region of extremists. They provide the necessary pretext for being there.

We never needed to be in the ME at all if they had just had some balls and killed Bin Laden quickly.

 

[Tehon]

The United States has no legitimate reason for permanently being in Syria. Obama is directly responsible for our presence there, no one else.

We had no legitimate business being in Libya, and for that matter, no legitimate business for being permanently in Afghanistan either. All we had to do was send in the Special Forces and taken out Bin Laden. It would have been the simplest thing in the world. We are doing that now. We are sending Special Forces everywhere. Why didn't we do that to begin with instead of scattering the Taliban like ants, where even a grasshopper from outer space couldn't have found the leaders?

If it took us 10 years to kill Bin Laden, then how in the hell, could Bush's ultimatum to the Taliban been met. They could not have turned over Bin Laden because they had no control over him. Any moron could have figured that out.

The United States isn't overly concerned with ridding the region of extremists. They provide the necessary pretext for being there.

We never needed to be in the ME at all if they had just had some balls and killed Bin Laden quickly.

I agree, we don't need to be there, we want to be there is the point. Our government wants to be there in order to reshape the M.E.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

The United States has no legitimate reason for permanently being in Syria. Obama is directly responsible for our presence there, no one else.

We had no legitimate business being in Libya, and for that matter, no legitimate business for being permanently in Afghanistan either. All we had to do was send in the Special Forces and taken out Bin Laden. It would have been the simplest thing in the world. We are doing that now. We are sending Special Forces everywhere. Why didn't we do that to begin with instead of scattering the Taliban like ants, where even a grasshopper from outer space couldn't have found the leaders?

If it took us 10 years to kill Bin Laden, then how in the hell, could Bush's ultimatum to the Taliban been met. They could not have turned over Bin Laden because they had no control over him. Any moron could have figured that out.

The United States isn't overly concerned with ridding the region of extremists. They provide the necessary pretext for being there.

We never needed to be in the ME at all if they had just had some balls and killed Bin Laden quickly.

I agree, we don't need to be there, we want to be there is the point. Our government wants to be there in order to reshape the M.E.

Isn't that a major departure from being the world's policeman?

 

[Tehon]

The United States has no legitimate reason for permanently being in Syria. Obama is directly responsible for our presence there, no one else.

We had no legitimate business being in Libya, and for that matter, no legitimate business for being permanently in Afghanistan either. All we had to do was send in the Special Forces and taken out Bin Laden. It would have been the simplest thing in the world. We are doing that now. We are sending Special Forces everywhere. Why didn't we do that to begin with instead of scattering the Taliban like ants, where even a grasshopper from outer space couldn't have found the leaders?

If it took us 10 years to kill Bin Laden, then how in the hell, could Bush's ultimatum to the Taliban been met. They could not have turned over Bin Laden because they had no control over him. Any moron could have figured that out.

The United States isn't overly concerned with ridding the region of extremists. They provide the necessary pretext for being there.

We never needed to be in the ME at all if they had just had some balls and killed Bin Laden quickly.

I agree, we don't need to be there, we want to be there is the point. Our government wants to be there in order to reshape the M.E.

Isn't that a major departure from being the world's policeman?

I suppose. That is a false narrative sold to the American public. If Americans understood the realities of what is going on they might not be approving or as apathetic. What happened to the left in this country? The anti war movement?

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

We had no legitimate business being in Libya, and for that matter, no legitimate business for being permanently in Afghanistan either. All we had to do was send in the Special Forces and taken out Bin Laden. It would have been the simplest thing in the world. We are doing that now. We are sending Special Forces everywhere. Why didn't we do that to begin with instead of scattering the Taliban like ants, where even a grasshopper from outer space couldn't have found the leaders?

If it took us 10 years to kill Bin Laden, then how in the hell, could Bush's ultimatum to the Taliban been met. They could not have turned over Bin Laden because they had no control over him. Any moron could have figured that out.

The United States isn't overly concerned with ridding the region of extremists. They provide the necessary pretext for being there.

We never needed to be in the ME at all if they had just had some balls and killed Bin Laden quickly.

I agree, we don't need to be there, we want to be there is the point. Our government wants to be there in order to reshape the M.E.

Isn't that a major departure from being the world's policeman?

I suppose. That is a false narrative sold to the American public. If Americans understood the realities of what is going on they might not be approving or as apathetic. What happened to the left in this country? The anti war movement?

 

[whoisit]

Navy Seals forgot their oaths. The whole reason JF Kennedy created the Seals was to protect America from a roque government. Before the Seals we had the Frogmen but they were not formed for same reason.

How do you know they were not "formed"? Alliances within the military are handled by intelligence. I had a very good friend in the OSI, while I was in the Air Force and have some insight into this.

I'm sure your right. There are lots of quesions about our security concerns within our military and high security like Homeland Security and CIA,even FBI now has muslims in high positions. And we know that we work with Muslim Brotherhod and CAIR. Plus over 400 high ranking generals and others have been fired and rplaced with questionable people.

 

[the_human_being]

So let me get this straight, Republicans on this site are wishing the American seals or military were killed by the Iranians or Russians so they can blame Obama and Hillary?

True colors of so called conservatives, aren't pretty!!!! Sad sad sad indeed!!!

I think what people are saying is that it is foolish for us to have military personnel on the ground inside the sovereign nation of Syria assisting terrorists.

According to the article it was a coalition of troops helping the KURDISH people train and learn how to fight.

Are Kurdish now terrorists?

What exactly is going on in Syria? Bad guys on all sides...? the Government, the ISIS group, the Kurds????

Who are the good guys? The refugees fleeing??

Are Kurdish now terrorists?

Sure, why not? They are using acts of violence with the intention of coercing the legitimate governing authority of a sovereign state. No different than ISIS.

The United States has no legitimate reason for being in Syria. Obama is directly responsible for our presence there, no one else.

What is the US/coalition's goal? Who does the USA believe is the Bad Guys? And why?? Do you know, and have an abbreviated version or do I need to spend hours googling and reading up on it myself?

The goal is to remove Assad from power and install a government that is not aligned with Iran.

And leave Iran intact? What good at all will that do?

 

[Tehon]

I think what people are saying is that it is foolish for us to have military personnel on the ground inside the sovereign nation of Syria assisting terrorists.

According to the article it was a coalition of troops helping the KURDISH people train and learn how to fight.

Are Kurdish now terrorists?

What exactly is going on in Syria? Bad guys on all sides...? the Government, the ISIS group, the Kurds????

Who are the good guys? The refugees fleeing??

Are Kurdish now terrorists?

Sure, why not? They are using acts of violence with the intention of coercing the legitimate governing authority of a sovereign state. No different than ISIS.

The United States has no legitimate reason for being in Syria. Obama is directly responsible for our presence there, no one else.

What is the US/coalition's goal? Who does the USA believe is the Bad Guys? And why?? Do you know, and have an abbreviated version or do I need to spend hours googling and reading up on it myself?

The goal is to remove Assad from power and install a government that is not aligned with Iran.

And leave Iran intact? What good at all will that do?

Destroying Iran will be the next phase of the plan.

 

[the_human_being]

According to the article it was a coalition of troops helping the KURDISH people train and learn how to fight.

Are Kurdish now terrorists?

What exactly is going on in Syria? Bad guys on all sides...? the Government, the ISIS group, the Kurds????

Who are the good guys? The refugees fleeing??

Are Kurdish now terrorists?

Sure, why not? They are using acts of violence with the intention of coercing the legitimate governing authority of a sovereign state. No different than ISIS.

The United States has no legitimate reason for being in Syria. Obama is directly responsible for our presence there, no one else.

What is the US/coalition's goal? Who does the USA believe is the Bad Guys? And why?? Do you know, and have an abbreviated version or do I need to spend hours googling and reading up on it myself?

The goal is to remove Assad from power and install a government that is not aligned with Iran.

And leave Iran intact? What good at all will that do?

Destroying Iran will be the next phase of the plan.

Yes. I believe Hillary will go to war against the combined military forces of Syria, Iran, Libya, Russia, and China.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

So let me get this straight, Republicans on this site are wishing the American seals or military were killed by the Iranians or Russians so they can blame Obama and Hillary?

True colors of so called conservatives, aren't pretty!!!! Sad sad sad indeed!!!

You seriously need to seek help for that reading comprehension problem. You obviously go through life pulling on doors marked "push".

 

[mudwhistle]

Obama and Hillary have already lost the Middle East. 100,000 Iranian troops now in Iraq. Libya is a hell hole for ISIS. Obama's red line in Syria was a total loss.

Yes......they succeeded in their goals....and now their work is done.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Obama and Hillary have already lost the Middle East. 100,000 Iranian troops now in Iraq. Libya is a hell hole for ISIS. Obama's red line in Syria was a total loss.

Yes......they succeeded in their goals....and now their work is done.

The red line turned to scarlet.