As you may be aware, President Obama delivered some remarks yesterday to address the growing threat of ISIS and how his administration intends to deal with the Islamic terrorist group. The portion of his remarks making headlines came when the President stated that, as of now, “we don’t have a strategy yet” to deal with ISIS.

Report from CNN:

It’s too soon to say what steps the United States will take against ISIS in Syria, President Barack Obama said Thursday.

“I don’t want to put the cart before the horse,” Obama told reporters during a White House news briefing. “We don’t have a strategy yet.”

Obama said he’s asked America’s top defense officials to prepare “a range of options” about what the United States could do to go after ISIS in Syria, which he described as “a safe haven” for the Sunni extremist group that calls itself the Islamic State.

The President’s remarks follow days of speculation about whether the United States had a plan to go after ISIS in Syria.

“We need to make sure that we’ve got clear plans, that we’re developing them. At that point, I will consult with Congress and make sure that their voices are heard,” Obama said. “But there’s no point in me asking for action on the part of Congress before I know exactly what it is that is going to be required for us to get the job done.”

What should the course of action consist of? Should we engage ISIS in Iraq, Syria, or neither?


  1. Mr. President perhaps you shouldn’t rely on ONLY GETTING YOUR INFORMATION FROM WHAT YOU WATCH ON THE NEWS ! ISIL has played a major role in the Syrian civil war since April 2013, has claimed responsibility for bombing attacks since 2010 and has been murdering hundreds of Christians. When you draw “Red Lines” in the sand and ignore them, label the enemy “J.V.” , and hold 5 minute press conferences between holes on the golf course you will find it hard to get any support or respect world wide. By demonstrating that you don’t take these threats serious you paint yourself into a corner and deserve to have your administration viewed as feckless and incompetent.

    WHAT SHOULD WE DO? Well because of the past naïveness of ignoring foreign policy threats and isolating our allies while being sympathetic to our enemies we are extremely limited at this point of what response we can take except us doing it unilaterally. I am not as well informed as D.E. Landreaux who writes on this site as to the extent of how far the damage is done but it seems we have passed the point of simply giving arms, air support and aid. In addition as I stated earlier I fear the country isn’t going to support any ground troops in an open ended military exercise. …..Because of our past willy-nilly foreign policy strategies I’m not sure I could either.

  2. Yesterday the President admitted he did not have any strategy for the growing threat ISIS poses so where is he off to today?……….a fundraiser in Rhode Island and New York. Fox News correspondent Ed Henry ask White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest about the image this projects.

    Should this “Leading From Behind” really come as a surprise to anyone? Just in the past few years I can think of where this administration dithered while our people died in Benghazi, Yazidi’s were dying trapped on a mountaintop, he took a week to decide whether to send a rescue team for American journalist Foley and for 5 months Executive Action has been threatened on immigration reform by the President. Obviously the President is not capable of making snap decisions which does not bode well for either a commander in chief or leader of the free world.

  3. Random Thoughts:

    *The President states he has “NO STRATEGY for fighting the ISIS”. Yet he has no problem in dictating national defense to Israeli Prime Minister Netenyahu?

    * The President has no strategy for fighting ISIS and the 9/11 anniversary is only 12 days away. Can you say “Benghazi” Mr. President?


    • Correction, you’re incessant spamming of content totally off topic and personal obnoxiousness gets posts deleted. Don’t accuse me of stifling opposing views, it has never happened. Your comments needed to be shredded because you were overtaking every post with repetitive copy/paste junk which ruined the concept of discussing the topic at hand.

      Don’t like the topic? Find a topic elsewhere.. but don’t hijack the thread, it will not fly any longer.

      • Bravo. There is a difference between disagreement and name-calling. If someone is abusive, they deserve to be deleted.

        The irony here is that Mr. Fisher is complaining about being deleted while once again posting an off-topic post. So it underlines the fact that he had posts deleted for being obnoxious, not just off-topic.

    • “Rebuke” is much too strong a word. It should have said, “draws U.S. hand-wringing.” Our “rebuke” is always, “oh, dear; oh, my; oh, dear. . . .”

      Whenever Israel does something illegal and/or heinous, at some point, we say, “tsk, tsk,” while we should say, “look for a bully-to-defend-you elsewhere.”

      • “THE IRONY HERE IS” Goethe’s admonishment of Surfisher for going off topic and then responds to that same off topic!

        A Captain Renault moment if I ever saw one! “I’m shocked, shocked…………”

        • Well, no, I did NOT complain about (Sur)Fisher going off topic, and neither was that Nate’s issue.

          You can go off-topic as much as you want, but you can’t rant and spam venom across several threads.

          Surf posted a link without comment, I gave a very brief response, and you misconstrued what’s going on.

  4. Has anyone else noticed that little has been said about NATO forces being used and even less about a joint U.N. force? Probably the U.N. option isn’t considered because of the exorbitant number of Muslim U.N. members and their influence upon the organization.

    Here’s a thought: Maybe the President could have Michelle #Hashtag a strategy ?

    • Bob, you make a good point. What is the UN in existence for if it cannot, as a universal body, condemn and take action against the medieval brutality of these Islamic thugs?

      Beheading journalists, raping women and selling them into slavery, and committing mass murder on a daily basis is apparently not enough to draw ire from the corrupt UN body.

      The rest of NATO is no different. Are they appalled? Sure. Are they going to try and do anything? Not particularly..

      • Nate;
        The left believe themselves to be “citizens of the world” and when the left talks of building international coalitions these two organizations get mentioned first and foremost ! The lefts world view would rather tilt at windmills than fight real opponents. Opponents they can never claim victory over such as racism and income equality because they peddle this load of effluvium to exploit and legitimize political opportunities created by a changing culture or identity politics. They rail about how the right is more of a threat than the ISIS or Al Qeada. Why because “THE OBAMA DOCTRINE” doesn’t involve foreign policy as most doctrines do but to “FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFORM THE UNITED STATES”.

Comments are closed.