Tonight Obama will move us back to war

[Robbins]

He is almost certain to announce air strikes In Syria.Unfortuly the public or a majority of it since 2 journalists were beheaded Is back to 2002.We are slowly moving back to iraq with air strikes and "Advisers" It's only matter of time before troops return to iraq.

Let's by honest if there was vote in congress most democrats would vote for war.Neocon are taking over both parties.Obama elected
because of being against iraq war will be taking us to expanding war In both Iraq and Syria.Very soon both parties may sound alike on
foreign policy.

I am against US involvement In middle east wars.We should be evacurating all americans from iraq and completely withdrawing from
Afghanistan.Instead more are going to iraq and we will be bombing iraq and syria.We can't arrest police officers in this country who
execute unarmed black men but we can be world's policeman.

Wars cost money.With a tea party house and senate possibly turning republican In november where will this money be coming from?
I will tell where.Cuts to domestic and social programs.Screw the poor and disabled as long as this country can launch wars.

Come november 2016 we will likely have choice between 2 war hawks.Hillary and whoever the republicans put up.Whoever wins we lose.Hillary is more hawkish than obama.She even praises Kissinger.Same thing with wall street they win no matter who wins.

The day may soon come where there is nowhere for liberals to vote since both parties are too similar to each other especially on war,wall street,and gutting social programs to pay for more wars.

[NYC_SKP]

1. You've made up your mind no matter what Obama says.

That's kind of sad.

[RKP5637]

2. +1, n/t

[Andy823]

4. +100,000 nt

[cali]

8. the past may not always be prologue but when it comes to our military engagement

in the middle east, it's been remarkably consistent for a very long time now. I fear that increased bombing with the inevitable large civilian death toll will strengthen ISIS and other radical groups rather than weaken it. I fear that the arms we provide to "moderate" opposition groups in Syria will end up in the hands of the extremists. That's simply what happens. How do we identify the so-called moderate opposition? Our intelligence about these groups is poor. It was a a "moderate" group that sold Stephen Sotloff to ISIS. Add to that that this another very, very expensive endeavor in an era of increasing social welfare program cuts and in an era where our infrastructure is in increasingly poor condition.

All I can think, on this date, is how incredibly successful bin-laden was. The bush reaction to 9/11 was a hideous, monumental failure and this is in that vein.

ISIS is horrible but I don't see that they pose a threat to this country in any real or substantial way. What I'd really like to see is a campaign to cut off their money. There must be ways to do that.

[Scuba]

13. +1,000

[Andy823]

3. The bottom line here is

Both parties are NOT the same as you seem to be implying. If republicans keep the house, and take back the senate this year the whole country will find that out. Do you really think if republicans took control of things they would be the same policies we have now? This meme of the two parties being the same is pure crap! Ask anyone who ended up with a republican controlled state back in 2010 how things are still the same!

[MoonRiver]

6. ...

[Robbins]

11. On war and economy

the lines between partys are becoming blured.They are all rushing to want to go to war In Iraq and Syria.The main different is at least for now there won't be any combat troops only more "advisors" but remember vietnam when you hear about "Advisors" going to iraq.

Where is the money going to come from for these wars both partys want to engage in? It sure won't come from taxes.Both partys cut 8 billion from food stamps.Yeah the GOP wanted to cut 30 billion but obama and democrats In Congress went along with cutting 8 billion
from food stamps.and now they are sure to cut more from programs to pay for more wars.If republicans take senate they will be able to
make massive cuts In budget and eather obama signs it or there will be another government shut-down.

[HereSince1628]

5. Gruesome deaths of journalists who went to places the state dept said to avoid

is a cause for war.

Well, it seems the PTB have made that determination and it's based on what is best called shopping for an excuse.

More dead people is the universal solution.

[stevenleser]

7. I hope he does, and quickly, as long as he uses only US airpower

ISIS has now overrun large swaths of territory in two countries, openly boasts that their goal is to take over the entire region and actual state armies seem unable to stop them. They also openly brag that they will execute terrorist attacks against the US and the west.

Your references to 2002 dont work because that was a war based on a lie. This is a war based on the enemy's proudly stated goals.

[cali]

12. but it's not going to be only US airpower. It's going to be training and funding

"moderate" Syrian rebels. I'm sure they would like to execute terrorist attacks but I don't see how a bombing campaign mitigates that. Indeed, I think it increases the likelihood. And I doubt (and so do quite a few analysts) that they have the capability of pulling off terrorist attacks here. Many military analysts have said that a bombing campaign won't suffice to wipe out ISIS.

We are told how poor our intelligence is in Syria regarding the factions there; how on earth is the U.S. going to determine which groups to provide arms and training to?

[Vattel]

14. I too am concerned about (1) how we can relay on moderate Syrian rebels to be the boots on the

ground in Syria, whether this will make us safer or more at risk of terrorist attacks here, and (3) the harm we will cause to innocent bystanders by waging this war.

[stevenleser]

17. "I don't see how a bombing campaign mitigates (terrorist attacks)" Just like they did with Al Qaeda

I'm fine with training and funding the Free Syrian Army. I think if we destroy all of ISIS armor (tanks, vehicles, armored personnel carriers) and their artillery, and carpet bomb their troop concentrations, the FSA (and anyone else in Syria) and the Iraqi Army will be more than a match for them.

[cali]

18. It's like you've never heard of blowback or unintended consequences.

Amazing.

[stevenleser]

19. Ignore a group that has already taken over swaths of several states because of potential blowback?

That's like not shipping food by plane to a million starving people because of the danger a plane will crash and kill 20.

[cali]

20. We do that with a fair degree of frequency.

And I'm not suggesting doing nothing. Wage an aggressive fight against their funding. Wage a PR fight in the Islamic world. (and yes, they are getting millions and millions from private wealthy individuals). Provide a lot more aid to folks in Islamic countries.

Look, one more time: Our history of intervention is that region CREATED this abysmal mess. More military intervention- lasting years and costing billions, is more likely, based on history, to fail and create a bigger mess, than it is to succeed.

[FSogol]

9. Unrec. Why not wait until he speaks and then post your nonsense?

And I reject your whole, the GOP will take the House and Senate. Stop giving up.

[IronGate]

10. You haven't even heard the speech and you're convinced that President Obama

is intent on sending troops back to Iraq?
Try this, wait for the speech before judging what he's going to do.

[KG]

15. it's not 'war' if obama does it...

[conservaphobe]

16. ISIS is an overblown threat, but for that I do not blame Obama.

His speech tonight is a response to the demands of a majority of Americans (read the polls over the past few days) whipped up into a frenzy by neocons and their media allies.