That genocide that happened in the Yugoslavia wars of the 1990s ....well according to the UN ,it really didn't happen.

U.N. court: Serbs' actions in Croatia not considered genocide - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/03/europe/croatia-serbia-genocide/)

You see ,ethnic cleansing isn't really genocide. Tell that to the 100,000 victims of the ethnic cleasning . Tell that to Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic ,who in 2001 was convicted of genocide and sentenced to 46 years in prison.Slobodan Milosevic would've been sentenced too if he didn't have to courtesy of being found dead during his trial.


I'm sure the Islamic State is comforted over this decision.

Well Tom one man's ethnic cleansing is another man's genocide or is that the other way around, and it is all wrapped up in the question of terrorism and freedom fighting. I find the issue both disturbing and confusing but there can be no doubt this sort of thing is happening in other parts of the world today

It really is no consolation to see other governments wimping out like ours does.

What would you have them do Cats? The world tried twice to create a better method of conflict resolution and failed both times. The UN is a toothless tiger held in check by a security council veto and even if it decides to act it needs nations to contribute forces at their own cost. There are a lot of bankrupt nations in the world when it comes to military action

I don't think rushing in like fools while everybody sits back, and waits, is the way for us to deal with ISIS at all.

As for the UN, they have a way to go.

The "Useless Nations" they sure live up to that name. They are a waste of real estate and nothing but a den of spies. Need to move them out to Hawaii where they are limited in the damage they can do to the US.

Ok tal so you want to gather splinters from sitting on the fence watching others get Killed! No one suggested rushing in and the pace has certainly been leasurely, but given the size of the Daesh force a concerted effort from NATO and other allies could resolve it quickly. Quick, is of course a relative term, but not the 13 years of Afghanistan where a quick effort defeated an enemy and then let him get away. What has to be recognised is that a hands off approach brought us to where we are today. Syria was allowed to smolder and burn for three years and now we have Daesh who is a threat to everyone, and this threat isn't going to go away by doing nothing because the arabs don't have the will to deal with this. This was made plain in Iraq, which is why large parts of Iraq have to be retaken. That cannot be done with aircraft and ragtag militia who will go home as soon as they have achieved a local objective. Can you see the Peshmerga pushing beyond Mosul? Shiite forces liberating Sunni areas? What we seem to forget is that this tiny force has faced some large well armed "professional" forces and come out ahead. Their tactics are bold and intuitive and opposition needs to be equally bold and intuitive. There is no political solution available. If Assard were to resign there is still Daesh to deal with. This is an "Apocolypse Now" scenario

Well Clete, give up your seat on the fence, and send in those bad a$$ Aussies to prevent the Apocalypse. You don't have to wait for US do you?

Take care of Assard and AQ while you are at it!

Show everyone how its done.

Well tal we might if we thought it was of some real benefit to us, but we don't do the US dirty work for them. We are not mercenaries or the world police. We made a considerable impact in the opening days of the Gulf War, which gives you an idea of capability. That same capabilty hasn't got the go ahead from Iraq. I have not sat on the fence on this, I have said from the start there needs to be concerted action and I have to bring the hard truth back to you. Your nation had a hand in creating this situation and I think you should fix it but instead you walked away and placed it in incompetent hands

Need to move them out to Hawaii where they are limited in the damage they can do to the US.

I was thinking Mogadishu. Turtle Bay Manhattan is indeed prime real estate area ,and the UN building would easily convert to office space or condos.

so tal ,are you saying you opposed the Clintoon intervention in Bosnia and Kosovo ,especially the humanitarian bombing campaign in Belgrade that destroyed a large part of that city(and we also 'accidently ' bombed the Chinese embassy ) ? We almost ended up in a full scale war with the Russians during that adventure ( British lieutenant general Mike Clark refused to obey the orders of US General Wesley Clarke and that prevented a shootout for the Pristina Airport)

I was thinking Mogadishu. Turtle Bay Manhattan is indeed prime real estate area ,and the UN building would easily convert to office space or condos.


Really I was think it was time to give Putin a go, he could fund the UN out of oil revenue and find how difficult it is to accommodate diplomats, maybe he would have less veto's when he is footing the bill, but wait someone is sanctioning him you can't do that to your host can you, some very remote space, Kerluean Island, I'm sure France wouldn't mind

But an even better idea Ashmore Island they could gain first hand experience in dealing with refugees

Afghanistan where a quick effort defeated an enemy and then let him get away

Ah, yes. Nation-building: The reason we lost 3 of our last 5 wars and tied another one. (No Championship ring for D.C.)

I'm not sure losing wars is nation building although my own nation is built on a sad wartime experence in a far away place, we have had many losing experiences since and some successes however we have never initiated a war. Now please remind me which of those wars did you win? Korea, Vietnam, Iraq I, Iraq II Afghanistan, oh I know, Granada because Iraq II was an extension of Iraq I. The Cold War doesn't count although it could be said you won that one. What is the point of winning a war if bankruptcy is the outcome?

Reality is none of us have won the important ones, The war on poverty, the war on drugs, the war on terror. These go on and on and have become generational

Their tactics are bold and intuitive and opposition needs to be equally bold and intuitive. There is no political solution available.

yup ,the West was getting bored with beheading videos so they adopted and did an immolation murder and tossed a homosexual 7 stories off a building . When he didn't die immediately ,the crowd finished him off with your boiler plate stoning . We love a good Grand Guignol.

The Cold War doesn't count although it could be said you won that one.
Vietnam and Korea were both proxy wars in the greater cold war . Yes there was a heavy price and neither were executed very well. However ,the policy goal was containment . South Korea is still a free and independent nation Vietnam was lost only when the Democrat Congress grew tired of the effort . We did to our South Vietnam allies the same thing the emperor tried to do to the free Iraqi government . The emergence of the Islamic State from the former AQ in Iraq was predictable .

Take care of Assard and AQ while you are at it!
We can't do both because Assad is backed by the emperor's gumbas ;the 12ers in Tehran. The emperor has decided that once we finally bug out , a logical hegemon to fill the vacuum is the Persian empire.

A resurrected Persian empire to your ressurrected Roman empire, how quaint

I'm not kidding


But in an interview this week, Hadi al-Amiri, the founder and leader of Iraq’s oldest and most powerful Shiite militia, the Badr Organization, told me the U.S. ambassador recently offered air strikes to support the Iraqi army and militia ground forces under his command. This has placed the U.S. in the strange position of deepening an alliance with the Islamic Republic of Iran for its war against Islamic extremists.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-02-03/exclusive-iran-s-militias-are-taking-over-iraq-s-army (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-02-03/exclusive-iran-s-militias-are-taking-over-iraq-s-army)

Now please remind me which of those wars did you win?

The win I was referring to was Bosnia.

Cats the Bosnian war was essentially a civil war in which NATO played a role, no doubt your forces served as part of NATO but I doubt you can count it as a US win.
Bosnian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_War)

Thank goodness Wikileaks hasn't gotten to everything, like U.S. involvement pre-95.

I don't think we were talking of clandestine activity, I have no doubt it occurs in all places all the time and there are many involved. I know it is difficult to discern when NATO should be read as US, from a Russian perspective that is all the time. You did fight in Libya but no one could consider that skermish a win just an unending dog fight. I think the tactic of the moment is apparent, massive use of air power including cruise, and leave the locals to mop up. Perhaps it is within the President's prerogative of not declaring war but responding to treaty obligations, whatever stops it being bogged down in Congress

the emperor should request an authorization. He would get it . But he won't because he doesn't think the executive branch is an equal branch of government .

Well tom he is, so your theory missed this time.

I explained already why he felt compelled to ask for the AUMF . His mission goal is to ' "degrade " and "ultimately" destroy ISIL '. Such language makes me think he envisions an operation that lasts longer than his imposed 3 year deadline.

Either that or he anticipates a larger force than you do. Special forces can mean a number of things

Either that or he anticipates a larger force than you do
The one thing he keeps in his mind from 2008 is that he was the candidate that was going to end America's involvement in all these wars . He envisions no such thing as a 'larger force'. He just wants Congress to take on the responsibility .He already has an AUMF that covers the war he's waging . He just wants to handcuff the next POTUS in a way that he isn't legally restrained.

Well tom you need to elect a hawk, where is Barry Goldwater when you need him?

What's wrong with congress actually doing it's job and providing a check and balance to the executive branch for the responsibility of military (and everything else for that matter) instead of sitting back and b'tching?

You keep talking about the emperor, and the way he does his job, well congress should be held to the same standard, I mean since the repubs did win the last election, and have control of the congress now.



What's wrong with congress actually doing it's job, and providing a check and balance to the executive branch for the responsibility of military (and everything else for that matter) instead of sitting back, and b'tching?

You keep talking about the emperor, and the way he does his job, well congress should be held to the same standard, I mean since the repubs did win the last election, and have control of the congress now.

Tal you you think Tom is hard of hearing? Yes all branches should do their job. In the perfect system the legislature passes laws and the executive implements them but somewhere along the way you have developed an arse first system where the executive thinks it creates the laws and the legislature is involved in every jot and title of implementation

Give Tom a break Clete, the sausage making is slow ugly, and loud in the US. It gets made though.

What's wrong with congress actually doing it's job They already did . He has the authority to act . He had it even if there weren't a AUMF . What he is asking for is for Congress to restrain the NEXT POTUS . In his weasly mind he will get prior limits on how the future CIC conducts the war . And if Congress doesn't grant his request ,it gives him even more fodder for his war on Congress.

even Obot Eugene Robinson agrees with me about the emperor's aim .

Obama's Ambivalent War Logic | RealClearPolitics (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/02/13/obamas_ambivalent_war_logic_125593.html)

Well you scoured the web and found one person. Congrats.

It is pointless trying to get inside Obama's head. He has to keep a lot of options open as he doesn't know how the withdrawl from Afghanistan will come out, whether involvement will be needed in the Ukraine, what might be needed in Iraq. All of these are relatively small scale compared with operations of earlier years but you can add Yemen to the mix. At the same time he must keep his forces in the Pacific and the Gulf

right now he ought to be doing what he can to break the siege of the al Asad air base .

Undoubtedly he is considering the possibilities, you need to remember nothing in the ME is soveriegn US territory and he can only do anything by invitation. Our special forces have been sitting in Qatar for months waiting for that invitation

If American troops are under siege like they were in Khe Sanh and now presumably in the al Asad base ,then he needs no invitation.

If American troops are under siege like they were in Khe Sanh and now presumably in the al Asad base ,then he needs no invitation.

More american rhetoric for home consumption a few suicide bombers somewhere nearby become a siege requiring massive retaliation
Suicide bombers get onto Iraq Ain al-Assad airbase where U.S. Marines based near ISIS positions - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/suicide-bombers-iraq-ain-al-assad-airbase-us-marines-near-isis/)

Devilishly cleaver these terrorists they know how to push your buttons and get you terrorised

you need to be much more concerned about what the UN has planned for the Paris Conference, I know people who are terrified by it considering it the beginning of one world government
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference