I guess that self-defense isn't adequate in war. -- j

This is not like Vietnam in purpose and justification. The Islamic fascists are a direct threat to us and to our ally Israel.

The similarities are in pretending it's not a war, "advisers" as a surrogate for soldiers, and a mentality of refusing to fight to win.

I have my hope, already, and he can keep the change. -- j

oh, you had to bring THAT up. -- j

Yes, comrade citizen, the All Powerful Great O is the hope and change purgative of that quaint so-called American Dream. Now if we can just get by the latest backlash of refusenik whiners (think Carter beat by Reagan or the last midterm), we of the People's Democrat Party shall again arise behind a great H or even a woo-eee scary 666 Halloween treat to obtain the Candy Mountain dream of a Socialist Utopian Paradise.

When George Washington's troops started to panic once, he charged out into the open and attacked the enemy. It's sheer luck he didn't get shot and killed.

Used to be, presidents were decorated war heroes. I think that is something that is lacking in our current leadership...

I always feel bad for the troops sent. A lot of times they don't get the support they deserve when they come home because so many people are disgusted by the politician's handling of the war. I read a really good quote in a fiction book by Tana French about how wars haven't been the same since kings stopped riding into battle with their troops. You'd never see Obama (or any other future American President) on the front lines. Yet they hold the keys to making life and death decisions for our young men. Frustrating.

if our "advisers" aren't armed, we're really stupid! -- j

the man makes me want to puke. -- j

OH am I ever glad that I'm retired!!! -- j, usaf (ret)

the fighting in the middle east is a biblical length story. the entirety of the washington crowd has no clue. either turn the desert to glass or confine them to fighting each other until there are none left. as you know we WILL see owe citizen soldiers get killed. 0 doesn't care but the republicans will then say we have to send in boots on the ground with bullets to guard the advisers. and of course this activity may help the economy. the washington crowd loves a war economy. in a word they are all jackasses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Numerous military experts have been quoted that the *right* number of troops to get the job done is more like 10,000 to 12,000. That's NOW; unfortunately, but the time this incompetent jerk gets us up to that number it will require another 20,000 or more. It should be "shock and awe" or don't bother.

But comrade citizens, our fearless leader was handed the Peace Prize for the way he moved his lips at the start of his first term. Now fighting a full scale war would make his excellency look a silly ninny, now wouldn't it?
What's a bunch of desert rat Christian kids and some kinda Kurds in some sandy a bowl of whey in comparison to the Left Wing legacy of the glorious Him who art the pinnacle of our ideologue Marxist more than equal elite betters? Think of the way teachers salivate over portraying their legend of Um, Um, Um in their civic and history classes!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ty7WU87...

US has not actually won a war since world war 2. And let's face it war doesn't decide who's right just who's left.

President Obama is deliberately destroying our military through endless nonsensical wars of attrition...just as Eisenhower, Kennedy, and GW Bush.
We don't have the money nor the sperm to do this.

Exactly right. Either do, or do not. There is no try!

Drip...Drip...Drip. The wrong way to fight a war. Put ten divisions in Iraq and Syria, clean out the ISIS scumballs, and bring them home. Better to lose 500 troops now than 4,000 over several years.

The first thing I thought of when I read this was Vietnam. Im worried that this may be the one thing Republicans and Obama agree on...slowly getting us back in to Iraq.