On Wednesday the following below is what Nancy Pelosi had to say to
reporters regarding the current Obama disaster in Iraq. Pelosi failed to
mention that in 2011, Obama ordered all U.S. Military to leave Iraq with no
residual forces to remain to train and join Iraqi forces in containing and
destroying remnants of al Qaeda.
Obama used the excuse to leave Iraq because the Iraqi government refused to enter a "status of forces" agreement. The truth of the matter is that the Iraqi government refused to accept the pitifully small residual force proposed by Obama at less than 7000 troops, when the U.S. military command advised a residual force of between 15,000 and 25,000 combat troops. Fast forward to the conflict with the savage barbarians of ISIS and their butchery of untold numbers of innocent civilians and two Americans that were gruesomely beheaded to scare America and Obama into leaving ISIS alone to create their dream of an Islamic Caliphate beginning in Iraq and Syria.
“The worse it gets the less reason I think we should send troops,” she argued at her weekly briefing, after highlighting a quote from philosopher Hannah Arendt about violence begetting violence.
With this irrational logic, the U.S. should never gone to war with Japan for their attacking Pearl Harbor and killing approximately 2800 Americans.
It must be remembered that American service personnel have, over many wars and foreign conflicts, shed their blood and often gave up their lives so that idiots like Nancy Pelosi could spout off on how "violence begets violence" as if all violence can merely be negotiated away or ignored. In the real world this is considered idiotic on so many levels. Yet, Nancy Pelosi is not alone with this warped and demented thinking. This is standard liberal thinking.
Tuesday, speaking before a Senate panel Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey raised the possibility that ground troops could be deployed to take on ISIS in Iraq.
“Whatever he intended and however they characterized it — and I’m sure in the military they always reserve the right to review a strategy on certain topics, all I can say to you and I’ve told this to my caucus and they have told it to me — we are not there to support combat troops in any of these engagements,” Pelosi said of Dempsey’s comments. Continue Reading Breitbart
Pelosi's
comments beg the question of why, then, is the Obama administration engaging
American military aircraft in combat missions over Iraq and, supposedly, over
Syria? If you believe "violence begets violence", how can
bombing by U.S. aircraft not violate that concept? Won't bombing violence
beget violence among the Islamist terrorists of ISIS? This is where
Pelosi's logic falls completely apart.
War is
said to be the result of the failure of diplomatic negotiations between nations
or parties in conflict with each other. Perhaps Nancy Pelosi can explain
why Secretary of State John Kerry failed in negotiations with the savage
barbarians of ISIS? After all, Kerry, as the representative of the Obama
administration, signifies and stands for Obama's unwillingness to engage America's
enemies in conflict.
Why
then is Nancy Pelosi and her liberal cohorts supporting the funding of Syrian
rebels to fight against ISIS? Again, isn't this going to create
further violence exhibited by ISIS. By now you get the point that Pelosi
has a problem with both logic and reality.
Let's
make the last point the most important point. President Obama has never
made a decision that wasn't made on the basis of politics and his personal
ideology, which is wrapped up in his oversized narcissistic personality
disorder.

The
second reason Obama refuses to engage U.S, ground troops is centered around his
personal ideology regarding the Muslim world and going to war against a
substantial faction of Islam. It's obvious that Obama has chosen Islam
over defending America and its western allies
No comments:
Post a Comment