Just now on CNN, President Obama announced that the US military will conduct "targeted airstrikes" on ISIS terrorists advancing towards the US Consulate in Irbil, Iraq.

In addition, President Obama authorized a humanitarian mission to supply food items to the Azidis, who are trapped in the mountains of Northern Iraq.

He says "there won't be any US combat troops on the ground in Iraq".
More details later

They had to wait till they close in on their embassy. Why are they neglecting the mess they started.

Libya next after starting an Avalanche smh.

Modified: The guy above me is smart, but the one below? Am not so sure

.

The ISIS terrorists are already in control of Iraq's largest dam

BadBoy25: simply send a Nuke to wipe out the entire iraq both young and old ,innocent and guilty. WHO GIVES a FVCK WHAT ANYONE THINKS?

So says the crackhead.

.

BadBoy25: it's a waste of time risking american lives in fighting those animals .

And whose lives were risked starting the war in the first place? Still waiting for evidence of Sadam's WMDs. Fyi I ain't no fan of Sadam.

BadBoy25: simply decimate the entire iraq with a Nuke, both young and old ,innocent and guilty. WHO GIVES a FVCK WHAT ANYONE THINKS?

CFCfan: The ISIS terrorists are already in control of Iraq's largest dam

I think it should be part of the tactical strategy.

Concentrate a large number of ISIS fighters on Iraqi cities in the west and the borders from Syria while the civilians flee from their onslaught then you use airstrike to ground their incursion further North and use the Iraqi military(infantry) to clean up the mess and finally use the drones to ensure that ISIS do not cross back to Syria where they've maintained a stranglehold on Assad which appears to be a better evil for now.

Wrong heading Mr.Man or are you telling us you don't comprehend in Clear terms what Oba really mean?

He said; No Military Action but only Targeted airtrikes "plus intelligent support

BadBoy25: simply decimate the entire iraq with a Nuke, both young and old ,innocent and guilty. WHO GIVES a FVCK WHAT ANYONE THINKS?

That would be the end of the Obama administration. The backlash against the United States for such an action will be massive.

.

DonaldGenes: Wrong heading Mr.Man or are you telling us you don't comprehend in Clear terms what Oba really mean?

He said; No Military Action but only Targeted airtrikes "plus intelligent support

Air strikes are also a form of military action

BadBoy25: it's a waste of time risking american lives in fighting those animals .

If you think they are animals ,I just hope you won't cry blue murder when you're racially profiled by your gods in the West.

BadBoy25: the United states invaded Iraq because there' a lot of oil there,and because Saddam was a disloyal slowpoke . who gives a fvck what anyone thinks? no need to beat around the bush ,I believe in action and Force .

Here you might have point but why nuke innocent civilians after all the chaos they kick started in the 1st place?

BadBoy25: simply decimate the entire iraq with a Nuke, both young and old ,innocent and guilty. WHO GIVES a FVCK WHAT ANYONE THINKS?

BadBoy25: the United states invaded Iraq because there's a lot of oil there,and because Saddam was a disloyal punk . who gives a fvck what anyone thinks? no need to beat around the bush ,I believe in action and Force .
these should be reported on the news , I don't understand why people are such cowards scared of what people think. who gives a fvck what people think ?

You'd have a lot to think about when some peeps you call fellow Americans begins to blow themselves up while shouting 'Allahu akhbar' in your safe haven

Have you seen anyone that goes into fighting without sweating?

.

BadBoy25: here's the main reason why Iraq was invaded : A small group of politicians believed strongly that the fact that Saddam Hussien remained in power after the first Gulf War was a signal of weakness to the rest of the world, one that invited attacks and terrorism. Shortly after taking power with George Bush in 2000 and after the attack on 9/11, they were able to use the terrorist attacks to justify war with Iraq on this basis and exaggerated threats of the development of weapons of mass destruction. The military strength of the U.S. and the brutality of Saddam's regime led them to imagine that the military and political victory would be relatively easy.

That's what they want you to believe.

Iraq was simply invaded just for the greed associated with your masters in the west.

And of course ,paid CIA trolls like you will always say otherwise.

.

BadBoy25: I think you are a slave . where's your master? who pays you to type all the rubbish you post ?
I don't discuss with slaves . your master should speak with me directly not send cowards like you to talk to me . I am a visionary and innovator .

Exactly what I was thinking.........It takes a slave to know one.

You know, Schizoprenic folks like you should be on a tight leash always.Who gave you access to the internet?

When they're in Iraq, they are bad guys, terrorists who need to be killed, but when cross into Syria, they're the good guys fighting the evil dictator Assad. ''Obama asks congress for $500m to arm moderate Syrian rebels''. But when they take the arms given to them by US back into Iraq, they are bad again, horrible terrorists. If Syria bombs them in Syrian-Iraqi border, Assad is threatend because US doesn't want him bombing people who will be freedom fighters when they go back to Syria.
I give up.

Aside from the humanitarian mission, Obama has to do something to protect Americans. After the US ambassador to Libya was killed in the Benghazi attack and all the flack the administration got for doing nothing, he must act now. As Sunni militantsis advance toward the US diplomatic consulate and operations center in Irbil, he can't afford to do nothing this time.

texanomaly: Aside from the humanitarian mission, Obama has to do something to protect Americans. After the US ambassador to Libya was killed in the Benghazi attack and all the flack the administration got for doing nothing, he must act now. As Sunni militantsis advance toward the US diplomatic consulate and operations center in Irbil, he can't afford to do nothing this time.

Yeah, I think Obama was to avoid another "Benghazi" in Iraq. But on CNN, the experts were saying that to effectively carry out airstrikes against ISIS, there would be a need for boots on the ground to give proper coordinates on the enemy. And Obama is in no mood to send in combat troops into Northern Iraq. What gives?

CFCfan:
Yeah, I think Obama was to avoid another "Benghazi" in Iraq. But on CNN, the experts were saying that to effectively carry out airstrikes against ISIS, there would be a need for boots on the ground to give proper coordinates on the enemy. And Obama is in no mood to send in combat troops into Northern Iraq. What gives?

He's worried about what history will say about him at this point. He has been put in a precarious position. His approval ratings are dropping. He needs to walk a thin line.

Plus he has idio.ts advising him. He is not a military man and is clueless when it comes to foreign affairs.

texanomaly:

He's worried about what history will say about him at this point. He has been put in a precarious position. His approval ratings are dropping. He needs to walk a thin line.

Plus he has idio.ts advising him. He is not a military man and is clueless when it comes to foreign affairs.

I'm sure Joe Biden, Susan Rice, Tom Donilon etc will have a different view of the bolded
But come to think of it, these National Security folks often attend the best ivy-league schools and graduate near the top of their classes. Why then do they repeat the same foreign policy mistakes since the 1960s?

CFCfan:
I'm sure Joe Biden, Susan Rice, Tom Donilon etc will have a different view of the bolded
But come to think of it, these National Security folks often attend the best ivy-league schools and graduate near the top of their classes. Why then do they repeat the same foreign policy mistakes since the 1960s?

Good question.

which approval again?shebi dem get camp there already

mumubynature: which approval again?shebi dem get camp there already

The US Airforce/Navy can't launch air strikes without the explicit permission of the President and/or Congress.

.

CFCfan:
The US Airforce/Navy can't launch air strikes without the explicit permission of the President and/or Congress.

okay..

BekeeBuAgbara: When they're in Iraq, they are bad guys, terrorists who need to be killed, but when cross into Syria, they're the good guys fighting the evil dictator Assad. ''Obama asks congress for $500m to arm moderate Syrian rebels''. But when they take the arms given to them by US back into Iraq, they are bad again, horrible terrorists. If Syria bombs them in Syria-Iraqi border, Assad is threatend because US doesn't want him bombing people who will be freedom fighters when they go back to Syria.
I give up.

You have summarised it all!!

I keep saying it, United States is one of the biggest headaches of our time. Her disposition towards issues especially as regards world peace and security leaves a very sour taste in the mouth. They have assumed the right to designate a group "terrorist" depending on how you rapport with them and just how much you hurt their interests. They have created such a huge mess in the mideast turning the region into one massive killing field to promote their world depopulation agenda!

US armed groups in Syria and Libya to take down regimes that seem unfriendly towards them but leaning more towards Moscow, now we have two protracted insurrection whose end no one can tell. Thesame US armed the Mujahedeens to take out Russia from Afghanistan and when they tried to operate independent of handouts and orders from Washington, Uncle Sam proscribed the group and labelled it terrorist!

Now we have the crises of the Islamic States on our hands and they seem primed to take over the entire Iraq, and would do so if the US doesn't stop their advancement. There is no gainsaying the fighters were at some point getting support from the US when they fought against Asad. Thesame weapons that were supplied them are the weapons being used to deny Iraqis the right to live!! The US should stop jeopardising chances of peace in the mideast by constantly arming non state actors simply because a regime refuses to be a puppet! The more arms that get into that region, the more volatile it gets!!