The President will speak at 9pm ET this evening delivering remarks on plans to defeat the terrorist organization known as The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

Report from Yahoo News:

US President Barack Obama spoke by phone with Saudi King Abdullah on Wednesday and met his top national security and intelligence advisors ahead of his prime time speech on the Islamic State.

Obama called Abdullah from the Oval Office, underlining Saudi Arabia’s role as a potentially key member of the international coalition Obama is trying to build to take on the jihadist group.

The call preceded his speech to the nation at 9pm (0100 GMT Thursday) about his new strategy to take on Islamic State and came ahead of a planned visit to Saudi Arabia by Secretary of State John Kerry.

Obama also gathered what is effectively his war cabinet in the secure Situation Room of the White House. The meeting included Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, senior leaders of the military and the chiefs of US intelligence agencies.

Post your thoughts, comments, criticisms, etc…

What do you want to hear? What do you expect to hear?

7 COMMENTS

  1. Someone said yesterday that Bush wanted to rush in without thinking and Obama wants to think instead of act.

    It’s clear that Obama hates war and seems to be trying to use economic tools to influence other countries. That kind of change takes time. Also, “punishing” other countries always hurts the punisher, too, whether it’s war or sanctions or anything else. Meddling is expensive.

    I do like the sound of forming coalitions AND forcing other countries to take action, since they know we are not going to do everything for them. I’ve often said that GHW Bush had the right idea in “The Gulf War.” And, you’ll remember, there was quite a bit of delay before action there.

    If Obama really can get Arab countries to take some responsibility for battling their own extremists, we will have made a MAJOR step forward. I hope that’s what the speech is all about.

  2. If only Goethe was right about the President using caution and looking to build a coalition before going to war. Unlike President Bush President Obama has pissed away all of his credibility on the international scene to build any coalition. Also the President has a history of dickering and putting off decisions or “Leading From Behind” not only internationally but here at home and I believe his speech tonight is perfectly described below.

    “In sum Obama’s speech tonight will not really be an attempt to rally the country or to explain the need for action to a skeptical uninformed public. It will not in other words be a genuine exercise in leadership. Rather Obama will attempt to show that he has caught up with the country. The Parade has started without the drum major. Tonight the drum major will scramble to get in front of the marching band and enable it to play the music it wants.”

    From the “Powerline” article by Paul Mirengoff entitled ” Obama Tries To Catch Up With The Parade”

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/09/obama-tries-to-catch-up-with-the-parade.php

  3. So! Nothing new here!

    If anyone doubts that the Presidents speech wasn’t simply poll driven we weren’t listening to the same speech. He didn’t say anything that we didn’t hear already concerning intense air strikes, no boots on the ground and his serious determination yadda, yadda, yadda. The problem with his speeches are he never follows through with his “serious determination”. Lt. Col. Ralph Peters summed it up on Fox News by calling it “a shoddy strategy”. Which in my opinion if he intends to go to Congress for support or authority he better have a better detailed plan of attack than the vague outline he gave this evening.

    Basically he mentioned that there will be a “broad Coalition” without being specific as to the countries being major world leaders or third world nations and the extent of their support.(Fox News had “broad” at 9 countries) I seriously doubt any of the European nations will oblige with ground troops. I did notice however that by him pointing out in the beginning of his speech about the ISIS isn’t Islamic he was aiming that remark to the Mid-East nations and not America by saying “I am depending on you to join our coalition with boots on the ground and prove I’m right about Islam being peaceful.” One of his four points was air strikes against ISIS using Yemen and Somolia as examples of it’s effectiveness (as pointed out by the pundits poor examples Mr. President). Another point was our depending on supplying Syrian and Iraq troops on the ground with weapons. What he didn’t elaborate on was as to what if air support isn’t enough and will we have to fight against those same weapons in one year to take Assad out? After all it was exactly a year ago he was advocating that exact idea.

    Now we come to the biggest question in my mind because we all know this isn’t going to be settled overnight. As a matter of fact this whole agenda that was laid out tonight sounds like “kick the can down the road to the next administration.” As I said in the beginning of this post his speech tonight was poll driven. BUT what we really need to look at is the resolve of the American public that drove these poll numbers. They have been known for their impatience for quick results, not accepting any casualties either military or civilian, and lack of patience for extended periods of support and occupation. Will America support an extended war on terrorism or will they be “war weary” all over again and demand the next President pull the troops out as they did with President Obama? If so we will be back to square one !

  4. FORGET WHAT THE PRESIDENT SAID LAST NIGHT WE ARE NOT AT WAR WITH ISIS according to Secretary of State Kerry! Honest folks you can’t make this up.

    “Secretary of State John Kerry in Jeddah for a meeting with Arab leaders to enlist regional support for a coalition to defeat ISIS would not say on Thurs. the United States is at war with ISIS. “What we are doing is engaging in a very significant counter terrorism operation” Kerry told CNN Elise Labott.” Would that be like helping the Arab states with “work place violence?” Hmmm that would mean the administration has no intention of asking Congress to vote support ? And it would also be an indication of the seriousness they take up this endeavor with?

    Quotes from the CNN article entitled “Kerry: U.S. Not At War With ISIS”

    http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/11/world/meast/kerry-mideast-visit-isis/index.html

Comments are closed.