Watch Judge Jeanine Pirro Fillet Obama's ISIS Foreign Policy

By Elizabeth Nelson

I love to watch Judge Jeanine Pirro on Fox News, because she speaks her mind, not holding any punches.  So when the topic turned to her opinion about ISIS and Obama's handling of it, we know we're going to get a no-holds-barred answer.  Of course, we aren't disappointed when she delivers an absolutely scathing criticism of Obama's utter mishandling of ISIS.  If you've been watching her, this commentary won't come as a shock, she's been saying this for the last few months:

She then told her viewers that “now everyone is saying what I’ve been saying,” and she's right, America is beginning to agree, that ISIS is coming to town, and they aren't Santa, bearing gifts that we want.

Watch as Judge Jeanine Pirro destroys Obama's Foreign ISIS Policy, whatever that is:



“We need to bomb them.  Bomb them again and then bomb them again.”

Although, I do beg to differ with her rewriting of history, at will, in her "there were no weapons of Mass Destruction," [in Iraq], because Democrats allowed Clinton to bomb Saddam, for his "possessing WMD," and Saddam's Biological Weapons Program for that very reason, remember, Judge? And we've seen those same "mythical" weapons of mass destruction, pop back up in Syria, and were being used against al-Assad's people. 

White House Considering Sending "Humanitarian Boots" to Iraq

By Elizabeth Nelson

Obama wouldn't dare send boots to Iraq to settle this issue with ISIS, after "promising" he wouldn't send them, right? Well, get ready, Bush hating liberals, now, Ben Rhodes, Dept National Security Advisor is admitting the White House is considering sending boots to Iraq.  

This coming after Obama even told ISIS that "there is no American military solution to the larger crisis in Iraq" and Resolution to the conflict in Iraq can only come through a political agreement, not a military one."  Well, I guess he blew that with drone strikes now he's going to obliterate it with sending boots to Iraq.  

The Obama administration has consistently said that there will be no combat troops on the ground as part of its ongoing operation in northern Iraq to push back ISIS and bring humanitarian aid to thousands of under-siege Yazidi civilians. Now, it's sounding like the U.S. may come close.

Ben Rhodes, the deputy national security adviser, told reporters on Wednesday that the U.S. is considering sending ground troops into Iraq to help the humanitarian mission to rescue the Yazidis. Military advisers will give their recommendations on the use of troops to the White House in the next few days, following an assessment from about 130 Marines and special-operations forces now in Iraq.

The distinction here is that these would not be combat troops, as much as ground forces with the specific mission of helping rescue Yazidi refugees. Ground combat with ISIS would not be part of the plan. Whether the humanitarian troops would be forced into combat scenarios is another question entirely, and Rhodes admitted that best laid plans don't always work out. "There are dangers involved in any military operation," Rhodes said. Read more National Journal

Now, did you catch that master spin, right there, did you see it? I love the fact that Rhodes, a liberal spin artist, says these are "Humanitarian boots" on the ground, not combat boots.  Their mission is not to fight but to rescue the thousands of Yazidis that have been kidnapped, their men murdered, by the armed ISIS terrorists that have vowed to "drown Americans in blood", and just recently vowed to Obama himself to behead our American soldiers, right?

Oh wait, did you catch the Ben Rhodes military liberal loophole when he said, "There are dangers involved in any military operation"

But Rhodes told reporters Wednesday that Obama is "confident that we can have a limited military objective." Rhodes tried to make the distinction between what the White House is considering—the introduction of humanitarian troops—and what the president and others in his administration have already ruled out. "What he's ruled out is reintroducing U.S. forces into combat on the ground in Iraq," Rhodes said from Martha's Vineyard. A rescue operation, he maintains, is "different than reintroducing U.S. forces in a combat role to take the fight to ISIL." Read more National Journal 

As I taught my son when he was little, a lesson Obama's mother obviously never taught him, a half-truth is still a 100% lie and misleading someone to believe something you know is untrue is still a lie.  What this Administration is intentionally not telling the American people is, as soon as ISIS sees an American - whether there or on our soil - who they have vowed to drown in our own blood, they will open fire, and unless this is Vietnam part 2 and these "Humanitarian Boots" have orders not to defend themselves, they will be drawn into battle and there will be American blood spilled, yet again in Iraq.
 

This means we will be drawn back into battle in Iraq, unless we hear MSM crickets, because Obama won't want it known that his "Humanitarian Boots" died in Iraq.  Oh, don't look shocked, we got daily "Soldier death" updates, while Bush was in office and then suddenly our soldiers must have gotten "luckier" while Obama was in office, because "no one died."?  Certainly our Communist-style MSM wouldn't have had a double standard, and withheld the "Soldier death" updates, just because there was a half-black, Democratic President in office. [insert shocked face here] The war in Iraq didn't "end," Obama abandoned it, he built this threat against America. 

With the continued underestimation of ISIS, from the start, and "pin prick" drone strikes, we have an idea of what Obama would have done, had he been the President during 9/11, and what he's going to do - God forbid, if ISIS comes during Obama's term not after - and they are coming.  Unfortunately, all of our allies, that we are going to need to fight ISIS are cutting their vacations, after Foley's beheading, now loath America and say, " the Western world is on vacation, Obama, cut your vacation already." Then again, nothing gets in the way of our terrorist-sympathizer-in-chief's golf games, vacations and fundraisers.

2006&2007 Bush was Right (again): "Early Withdrawal Would Turn Iraq Into Terrorist State"

By Elizabeth Nelson

We've all pointed how many times Palin and Romney were right about Russia, but did you know that the most hate President Bush got it right too? Yeah, in 2006 and again in 2007 he warned everyone that an, "early withdrawal would turn Iraq into terrorist state."

What Bush warned of eight years ago is exactly what has happened. Although Iraq was -- in his words -- "a success," President Obama still ensured that success would be liquidated by prematurely withdrawing American troops. The result has been, as Bush predicted, "a terrorists state in the heart of the Middle East… more dangerous than [pre-9/11] Afghanistan."

The Islamic State in question has been formed by ISIS, a savage group of Islamists who are on a rampage to expand their territory and exterminate the oldest Christian sects on the planet. Tuesday ISIS released a video that shows one of their barbarians cutting the head off a man reported to be American journalist James Foley.

During a speech to the CENTCOM Coalition Conference the following year, in 2007, Bush again warned of the consequences of a premature Iraq withdrawal. Here he is apparently responding to intense pressure from both the media and Democrats to cut and run:

Withdrawal would have emboldened these radicals and extremists. It would have confirmed their belief that our nations were weak. It would help them gain new recruits, new resources. It would cause them to believe they could strike free nations at their choice.

Withdrawal would have increased the probability that coalition troops would be forced to return to Iraq one day, and confront an enemy that is even more dangerous. Failure in Iraq should be unacceptable to the civilized world. The risks are enormous. Read more Breitbart

So, Obama can say that he "wasn't warned" but we can all see that he had ample warning, and had foreknowledge of ISIS in 2012.  However, sadly, one of the major difference between Obama and Bush, Bush got his military advice from Military Leaders, Obama brings political advisors to the war room with him, not military leaders - and look at the "like-minded" vipers he surrounds himself with.  Don't you feel safer and are you enjoying your "evil" vote now? 

Sometimes it really does suck being right, because being right doesn't make you happy, it just makes you right.  You got your lame-as*-"president" and we were left with the change, no hope, and a transformation of America that isn't safe (by a long shot) and one that even you don't like. Thank you lib-tard.