Al Quaeda splinter group sweeping through Iraq

He's lying, his lips are moving.

It's what he does best.   

Well, that was a load of waffle. He isn't going to do anything, sorry, he's weighing his options. Which probably means he's going to do something truly dumb.

....or not at all. I feel so sad for this wonderful country.

This Pres has surrounded himself with people who have not enough experience in important areas.

I am still not sure he doesn't do it on purpose, Lily, there's a malice to him....Carter was out of his depths, but is a decent sort of person.

You need a president with the vision of JFK or Reagan, and the caution of Eisenhower?

lily wrote:....or not at all.  I feel so sad for this wonderful country.  

This Pres has surrounded himself with people who have not enough experience in important areas.

Look now, Lily. The President of The United States doesn't actually have any power, and never did have. Other people run the country. The President is just a Yes Man. And then he has to answer when these other people cock up, which they do with increasing frequency. Why should they care? There will be another idiot along in a minute.
They have used him shamelessly, and like all Presidents, he fell for it, just for the glory.

Republican or Democrat? The people who actually run The US of A don't give a shit so long as their ends are met. And I simply do not understand why this hasn't occurred to your average American.
Why else do you think that George Double Vee was such a joker. He knew what was going on, and he knew that there was sweet bugger all he could do about it.

And Britain is heading in the same direction. Get an idiot elected and then run the country. Merci beacoup and bon soir. It is the same the world over.

Sabot, I think it's actually the people who own Wall Street and the faceless people known as 'the bankers' who run it.  

The Pres sells out his or her soul...

I should have added, and does not have the guts to do what is right.

lily wrote:Sabot, I think it's actually the people who own Wall Street and the faceless people known as 'the bankers' who run it.  

The Pres sells out his or her soul...

Is this acceptable? What is to be done about it? Sweet bugger all, I do suspect. Obama is a black man, although not actually, but you know what I mean. He was always going to tow the line, just for the glory of being the first Black President of The US of A.

America needs a President that will tell The Aides and The Bankers to bugger off. But it won't won't happen. Men like that don't get elected. And would be buried if they were and if they tried.

I no longer care, although I did once upon a time. Nowadays I would rather deal with a fornicating Frenchman. At least you know where his dick is coming from.

lily wrote:I should have added, and does not have the guts to do what is right.

Feel sorry for them, Lily. There is nothing you can do. Or them, I do suspect.

And as for Mrs Barack Obama, she is a black woman. And much good she has done. She has sold her soul to dress designers, but with absolutely no good taste whatsoever.

The President takes an oath as below.....

The Presidential Oath of Office

The oath to be taken by the president on first entering office is specified in Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.



Read more: The Presidential Oath of Office | Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0878064.html#ixzz34Y6LuBsc

All Obama has to do is obey the American Constitution. It was written for a reason.

bb1 wrote:All Obama has to do is obey the American Constitution. It was written for a reason.

Yes it was, Bonny. It is a most beautiful document too. The first time I read it, it brought tears to my eyes.

Britain will NOT send troops back to Iraq to halt advance of Islamist fighters descending on Baghdad, Cameron and Hague declare
Prime Minister says he will not order 'boots on the ground' in Iraq
William Hague adds: 'We are not planning a British military intervention'
Former PM Tony Blair is yet to speak out over the growing crisis
Barack Obama today also ruled out sending troops back into the country


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2657334/Britain-NOT-send-troops-Iraq-halt-advance-Islamist-fighters-descending-Baghdad-Cameron-Hague-declare.html#ixzz34Z4O39Ut
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Why hasn't Blair volunteered to be dropped in to negotiate with ISIS? I'm sure they'd give him a warm welcome.

Oh Yes! Might it give him a knighthood?

I suspect he'd end up with his head on a spike, to the cheers of millions. None of whom would be ISIS fighters.   

So they will give it to him?   

http://news.sky.com/story/1282087/iraq-iran-offers-to-work-with-arch-foe-us

Iraq: Iran Offers To Work With Arch Foe US
Iran's president says it must "confront terrorist groups" and suggests possibly working with the US to fight the Iraq insurgency.

That's pretty embarrassing for Obama. Frankly, I would suggest any fighting is done by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. They're far more used to operating without electronic toys, and far less likely to kill hundreds of civilians as 'collateral damage'.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/06/iraq-cleric-issues-call-arms-against-isil-2014613125518278210.html

US President Barack Obama said he was exploring all options to save Iraq's security forces from collapse.

One option under consideration is the use of drone strikes, such as those controversially deployed in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen, a US official told the AFP news agency.

A perfect example of what I mean. If Obama starts droning, it's guaranteed that his X-box warriors will decide a column of Iranian soldiers - or refugees - are only 'ragheads' and blow them up.

What is it the X-box warriors call civilians they kill? Bug splat?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2014/apr/07/artists-give-human-face-drones-bug-splat-pakistan



The giant image of a child drone victim placed in a field by the art project NotABugSplat

Big sigh.

If you can face reading through reports from different sources, Lily, it seems that this lot aren't just Mad Mullahs. Their military backbone appears to be Saddam's army, returned. And people fled only partly out of fear of ISIS, but also because they thought they were going to be bombed along with ISIS.

If Saddam's lot manage to restore some kind of order, and restrain the Mad Mullahs from decapitating too many people, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if most Iraqis decide it's better to tolerate them, than live in fear in a ruined country where they're liable to get blown up buying bread in the name of 'democracy'?

If Saddam's lot manage to restore some kind of order, and restrain the Mad Mullahs from decapitating too many people, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if most Iraqis decide it's better to tolerate them, than live in fear in a ruined country where they're liable to get blown up buying bread in the name of 'democracy'?

That is a real possibility Bonny. I know what I would prefer too.

They're very much caught between a rock and a hard place, poor sods.

From:

http://news.sky.com/story/1282537/blair-denies-iraq-violence-result-of-2003-war

Blair Denies Iraq Violence Result Of 2003 War
Tony Blair tells Sky News that the West's failure to act in Syria and Libya has allowed chaos to spread into Iraq.


ARGHHHHH! Can't the SAS kidnap the war criminal and drop him into Mosul? As he's so keen on bloodshed, he can spill some of his own for a change, see how much he likes it.

What part of LYING TO START A WAR does he fail to grasp?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/opinion/sunday/chelsea-manning-the-us-militarys-campaign-against-media-freedom.html?_r=1

Quite an interesting piece by, er, Chelsea Manning, and no, I have no idea why, er, she is writing for the NYT.

I would suggest that the same thing is happening again in the US MSM, where events that don't suit the Obama narrative over Ukraine are simply not being reported.

It's actually counter-productive these days, when so many people simply go to rt or AJ to see a different side to the story. Now, rt and AJ both have their own bias and propaganda - but they don't pretend otherwise. The likes of Fox and CNN claim to be speaking for truth, democracy, etc., but they undermine both of those values when they can so clearly be seen to be dishonest and burying stories that don't suit the State Department.

Fox is, in many ways, the least-worst, as it doesn't hide its bias.