Defeating ISIS: Trump Allows Generals to Do What Generals Do

Posted by Tina

A new strategy to totally defeat radical Islamists (Al Qaeda,Al Shabaab, ISIS, Boko Haram, Abu Sayef, and the variaous “Province” fighters) is still a work in progress but in the mean time, generals on the ground have been given greater leeway to make strategic decisions based on their experience and immediate conditions. The new freedom to act will make fighting the enemy more effective. This newfound authority was on display last Thursday when General John Nicholson used his discretion to drop a huge (MOAB) bomb in Afghanistan to destroy a series of tunnels and caves:

Gen. Nicholson said Friday it was too early to say how many militants had been killed in the previous day’s bombing. The Afghan Defense Ministry retracted an earlier statement that the strike had killed 36 militants, saying it was unable to provide precise figures yet.

A military official for the coalition who viewed footage of the bombing said it was difficult to make out details of its effects beyond a “mushroom cloud” of smoke rising into the sky. He added that a second MOAB was available for use in the country, but no decision had been made on whether it should be deployed.

The Islamic States news agency (yes they have one) claimed on Friday that no fighters lost their lives in the attack. However, Afghan officials report at least 90-92 Islamic State fighters were killed. The bunkers and tunnels were built near civilian communities but the local people had already abandoned their homes because of fighting.

Elsewhere, the military has sent more soldiers into Somalia, Iraq, and Syria. And of course our Navy is confronting the other threat to civilization posed by the chubby fanatic, KJU

It will be months, perhaps years, before we can fully measure the effectiveness of this (old) new approach to fighting the enemy. But the election Of Barack Obama, twice, signaled a change that has been incredibly ineffective, creating much more dangerous conditions and widespread disruption in the lives of civilians and military alike. It’s time we did something that works.

The usual criticisms have been launched…nuclear WWIII is just around the corner…war monger president…military complex…blah blah, blah. Most of it comes from the mouths of those who advised President Obama or worked under Hillary Clinton and John Kerry and their mouthpiece media puppets. Those people postured and talked to disastrous result…we can do better. As citizens we must look passed negative headlines and opinions that are politically designed.

President Trump has been working personally to realign with our allies and confront our enemies. Often the positive result of his work goes unnoticed and unreported. A good article to that end is here. And at the UN, Nikki Haley has reasserted US strength. She has reminded that body of the purpose and goals of the UN charter and made it clear that America will not sit at the back of the bus while the bullies of the world strut their stuff…no nation should.

I’m betting that Trumps peace through strength stance will work!

This entry was posted in Military. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Defeating ISIS: Trump Allows Generals to Do What Generals Do

  1. J. Soden says:

    Hallelujah! The day of micro-managing the battlefield for the last 8 years is over!

    You confront bullies – not appease them a la Obumble!

    • Dewster says:

      We are a Bully ..Period.

      One can not defend our history of never ending war.

      So Kim JU ? just as crazy and trump. 2 peas in a Pod. Both ignorant narcissistic dangerous men.

      Amazing how excited supposed Pro Life People get over the death of innocent civilians during these wars. Starving babies in Yemen means nothing?

      Hypocrisy by media Sheeple is truly Sad.

      • Post Scripts says:

        1776 revolution for independence… not bullying.

        1812 war over maritime sovereignty and freedom for commerce, (Britain’s interference with American international trade, seizure of ships on the high seaes and other issues, led Congress to declare war on Great Britain on June 18,
        1812) …. not bullying

        1861 war between the states over issues of issues of Constitutional freedoms v federal authority… not bullying

        1898 war with Spain over human rights and independence (The war originated in the Cuban struggle for independence from Spain, which began in February 1895. Spain’s brutally repressive measures to halt the rebellion were graphically portrayed for the U.S. public by several sensational newspapers, and American sympathy for the rebels rose) … not bullying.

        1917, World war One, up until just before the U.S. declared war on April 6th, 1917, the U.S. had desperately tried to stay neutral, but ties to Britain, the unrestricted sinking of ships by German U-boats, and a German attempt to get Mexico to declare war on the U.S. pushed the U.S. to getting involved….not bullying.

        1941, World war two, The roots of World War II, which eventually pitted Germany, Japan, and Italy (the Axis) against the United States, Great Britain and the Soviet Union (the Allies), lay in the militaristic ideologies and expansionist policies of Nazi Germany, Italy, and Japan. The weak response of the European democracies to fascist aggression and American isolationism allowed the Axis powers to gain the upper hand initially. Although the war began with Nazi Germany’s attack on Poland in September 1939, the United States did not enter the war until after the Japanese bombed the American fleet in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on December 7, 1941… not bullying.

        1950 – war in Korea, On June 25 the Korean War began when North Korea, supported by the Soviet Union and China, invaded South Korea, which was supported by the United States…. the United States only tried to support our ally and contain the spread of communism, which has devastated North Korea to this day. Bullying by the USA had nothing to do with it.

        STOP…..I’ve had enough of this. Dewey, I’m getting sick of trying to teach you basic U.S. history. The truth, the information you should know is all out here, but I believe you refuse to accept it because you hate America. If true, that makes you un-American. Why else do you embrace every crackpot anti-American conspiracy that has ever come along. I can’t deal with that anymore, not today, it’s too much.

  2. Dewster says:

    Oh and why did you drop benghazzzziii? cause the Ambassador knew what was going on ? The CIA arming the rebels we fight? The fact Hillary most likely approved for the Sarin gas to be delivered? That was what was going on in Benghazzzzziiiiiii

    • Post Scripts says:

      Dewster, to the best of my knowledge the US was in Benghazi to re-purchase weapons, including Stinger missiles that has found their way to rebels from as far away as Afghanistan. No where in the Congressional record or anywhere within the federal government is there an alternate stated mission. Where and how you came by your disinformation God only knows, but there’s nothing substantive about it. As far your Hillary comment, equally absurd and I have no use for Hillary, so I would be biased, but even I can’t allow my bias to believe your cockamamie story about her selling Sarin gas to rebels.

      • Tina says:

        Jack, it could be his information came from Seymore Hersh.

        I doubt if anything that was going on in Benghazi was “official.”

        Andrew McCarthy at National Review:

        As U.S. armed forces attack ISIS in Libya, WikiLeaks is poised to remind us that ISIS is in Libya — indeed, that ISIS is ISIS — thanks to disastrous policies championed by Hillary Clinton as President Obama’s secretary of state. Also raised, yet again, is the specter of Mrs. Clinton’s lying to Congress and the American people — this time regarding a matter some of us have been trying for years to get answers about: What mission was so important the United States kept personnel in the jihadist hellhole of Benghazi in 2012? Specifically, did that mission involve arming the Syrian “rebels” — including al-Qaeda and forces that became ISIS — just as, at Mrs. Clinton’s urging, our government had armed Libyan “rebels” (again, jihadists) to catastrophic effect?

        Now the organization’s founder, Julian Assange, has announced that WikiLeaks is soon to publish highly sensitive government e-mails that demonstrate Hillary Clinton’s key participation in efforts to arm jihadists in Syria. Just as in Libya, where Mrs. Clinton championed the strategy of arming Islamist “rebels,” the Syrian “rebels” who ultimately received weapons included the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda, and ISIS

        The Obama administration, like the Bush administration, had touted Qaddafi as a key counterterrorism ally against rabidly anti-American jihadists in eastern Libya. Nevertheless, Secretary Clinton led the policy shift in which our government changed sides in Libya — shifting support to the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies, just as Mrs. Clinton had urged shifting U.S. support to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. In Libya, this included arming “rebels,” who naturally included a heavy concentration of jihadists. (continues)

        See also National Review Editorial, “What We Do Know about the Benghazi Attack Demands a Reckoning,”

        And National Review, “Hillary’s Benghazi Coverup Threatens Terror Prosecutions,” By Andrew McCarthy.

        The last administration successfully ran out the clock, with the help of a few Republicans, in Congress to provide cover for Hillary’s ambitios desire to be president It’s a disgrace. It’s my opinion that the Benghazi cover up had a lot to do with Hillary’s failed presidential bid. Whatever she did or did not do, she was not fit to be president.

        Dewey can’t seriously sling mud at Post Scripts on this issue. We were on the story from day one, covering whatever information we could find. He apparently believes we should have more power than we have…lol…as if his yammering ever affected anything.

        Dewey loves to randomly sling invective and draw equivalencies, usually where none exists. He is so bad at discerning differences and gathering information that his rebelliousness turns clownish.

  3. Tina says:

    That hppens to me to from tme to time, Peggy. I usually have to restart my computer to return it to function.

    Here you go…

    Washington Times

    In its efforts to keep arms from countries and groups that might harm Americans and American interests, Congress has authorized the Departments of State and Treasury to be arms gatekeepers. They can declare a country or group to be a terrorist organization, in which case selling or facilitating the sale of arms to it is a felony. They also can license dealers to sell.

    Mr. Turi sold hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of arms to the government of Qatar, which then, at the request of American government officials, were sold, bartered or given to rebel groups in Libya and Syria. Some of the groups that received the arms were on the U.S. terror list. Thus, the same State and Treasury Departments that licensed the sales also prohibited them.

    How could that be?

    That’s where Mrs. Clinton’s secret State Department and her secret war come in. Because Mrs. Clinton used her husband’s computer server for all of her email traffic while she was the secretary of state, a violation of three federal laws, few in the State Department outside her inner circle knew what she was up to.

    Now we know.

    She obtained permission from President Obama and consent from congressional leaders in both houses of Congress and in both parties to arm rebels in Syria and Libya in an effort to overthrow the governments of those countries.

    Many of the rebels Mrs. Clinton armed, using the weapons lawfully sold to Qatar by Mr. Turi and others, were terrorist groups who are our sworn enemies. There was no congressional declaration of war, no congressional vote, no congressional knowledge beyond fewer than a dozen members, and no federal statute that authorized this.

    When Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican, asked Mrs. Clinton at a public hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Jan. 23, 2013, whether she knew about American arms shipped to the Middle East, to Turkey or to any other country, she denied any knowledge. It is unclear whether she was under oath at the time, but that is legally irrelevant. The obligation to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to Congress pertains to all witnesses who testify before congressional committees, whether an oath has been administered or not. (Just ask Roger Clemens, who was twice prosecuted for misleading Congress about the contents of his urine while not under oath. He was acquitted.)

    Here is her relevant testimony:

    Mr. Paul: My question is is the U.S. involved with any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons buying, selling anyhow transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?

    Mrs. Clinton: To Turkey? … I will have to take that question for the record. Nobody’s ever raised that with me. I, I .

    Mr. Paul: It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that they may have weapons and what I’d like to know is the [Benghazi] annex that was close by . Were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons and were any of these weapons transferred to other countries any countries, Turkey included?

    Mrs. Clinton: Senator, you will have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. And I will see what information is available and ahhhh .

    Mr. Paul: You are saying you don’t know .

    Mrs. Clinton: I do not know. I don’t have any information on that.

    At the time that Mrs. Clinton denied knowledge of the arms shipments, she and her State Department political designee, Andrew Shapiro, had authorized thousands of shipments of billions of dollars’ worth of arms to U.S. enemies to fight her secret war. Among the casualties of her war were U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three colleagues, who were assassinated at the American consulate in Benghazi, by rebels Mrs. Clinton armed with American military hardware in violation of American law.

    This secret war and the criminal behavior that animated it was the product of conspirators in the White House, the State Department, the Treasury Department, the Justice Department, the CIA and a tight-knit group of members of Congress. Their conspiracy has now unraveled. Where is the outrage among the balance of Congress?

    Hillary Clinton lied to Congress, gave arms to terrorists and destroyed her emails. How much longer can she hide the truth? How much longer can her lawlessness go unchallenged and unprosecuted? Does she really think the American voters will overlook her criminal behavior and put her in the White House where she can pardon herself?

    Some say it’s like a big secret club in DC…you don’t rat on me and I won’t rat on you. When things come up a big show of outrage is staged and then it fizzles and nothing comes of it. Whatever the machinations it stinks all around.

    • Peggy says:

      Thanks Tina, I try your suggestion.

      I remembered reading about the arms dealer and congress denying Hillary’s and Obama’s request to arm the Libyan rebels to take out Gadhafi, but they did approve the arms being sold to Qatar where they were then shipped to Libya. Which is why it earned the name, “Hillary’s Secret War.”

      I do believe the 30 plus employees at the CIA annex were there to buy back those guns and have them shipped to the Syrian rebels through Turkey. Remember Chris Stevens flew back to Benghazi from Tripoli to meet the guy from Turkey that evening.

      Hillary and Obama made one mell of a hess out of the ME and like The Judge said she did it all on her private computer so no one would know what they were up too.

      Oh yeah, that arms dealer I believe was also in Arkansas.

      Side note: I tried to also post Sharyl Attkisson’s article on Obama’s surveillance timeline. After three attempts I gave up. It is really good laying out all of the major acts done by the Obama administration against individuals and groups during his two terms.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.