Powered by TypePad

« Who Didn't Let The Dogs Out? | Main | See, To Obama "They" Means "I" »

September 30, 2014


Jeff Dobbs

That's just 20th century thinking.


This is how wars are fought in the 21st century. Or something.


I presume most of you have seen the latest Harf embarrassment:


There's a ridiculous substantive point, her claim that the "will to fight" (as opposed to "capability") is a "really tough thing to assess." Yeah, who'd have thought that ISIS was really motivated? And of course she drops in the fact that she worked at the CIA so she really knows this stuff.

But what's also odd is the insistence on "ISIL." Blitzer would say "ISIS" in his question (pronounced eye-sis) and she would respond using "ISIL" (eye-sil). Weird. It's also obvious that she's memorized some lines as opposed to responding in the moment to the questions. Her eyes have that faraway look of recalling memorized lines rather than actually interacting with Blitzer.


History only goes back two years, no risk of repeating it. Ask the Veitor dude.


--It is obvious which nation today can play that role against ISIS. Its name is Iran.--

This seems sound.
Let's ally with a country that is developing the ability to destroy our cities or our allies' cities or launch an EMP attack through a massive nuclear weapons project, to defeat some guys who are developing the ability to put a better bomb in a shoe or some guy's* underpants.

*Not Some Guy's underpants, just some guy's.


You people know this but it's worth reiterating, the admin is deliberately using ISIL rather than ISIS because the last 'S' refers to...Syria. The 'L' refers to the Levant. Must not let the rubes get any ideas that Barry effed this thing up in Syria. Most of the drooling LIVs have no idea what/where the Levant is.


I am wondering if that is the canard Obama used to get the Arab allies on board. Help me, or I will turn to Iran.

Stephanie accidentally OnT?


According to DCaller.

Captain Hate

If 404 uses ISIL then ISIS is what intelligent people should employ.

Barry Dauphin

I'd rather we just use al Qaeda instead if ISIL, ISIS or IS. I don't think we should refer to them as an Islamic state of any kind-- it concedes what we want to stop. Second, it is al Qaeda in Iraq. Third it reminds everyone that we apparently haven't decimated al Qaeda or decimation doesn't mean what I think it means.


Well "decimated" actually means "reduced by 1/10th" which is probably a somewhat pessimistic characterization -- I think we've probably got them down below 90% of what they were...


"I don't think we should refer to them as an Islamic state of any kind...."

So true, Barry Dauphin.

The comments to this entry are closed.