world

Obama thanks Arab nations for joining airstrikes in Syria

22 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2014 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

22 Comments
Login to comment

Obama has no authority to attack Syria (or to re-attack Iraq). Obama is a war-monger.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

This is in a speech thanking countries for helping to drop bombs?

and rightfully so.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

US-led strikes violate Syria sovereignty.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

It's curious that the same countries that fund and arm IS are now bombing them. The arms manufacturers will be doing well out of it at least.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

US-led strikes violate Syria sovereignty.

NOT to mention, killing a ton of radical Jihadists!!

5 ( +7 / -2 )

NOT to mention, killing a ton of radical Jihadists!!

It would be more effective to bomb training camps of Syrian opposition, that's the place where tons of radical Jihadists are concentrated. As "good" Syrian opposition they receive funding and training by US and Gulf states instructors, and then somehow these guys appeared in Iraq as badass jihadists. And you don't need drones or other spy stuff to find these training centers, just ask senator McCain for locations. In May-2013 he met with Ibrahim al-Badri, a member of chief leadership of "good" Syrian opposition, who is one from the list of the five top terrorists, wanted by the US. "Create and train bad guys, use them, and then kill them if necessary". US foreign policy in its best.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

It seems very much endless war. It is matter of time that ground troops would go there.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama doesn't start wars, he ends wars... oh wait!

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

ISIS is the Al Qaeda 3.0, and there will be 3.5, 4.0, ....The liberal narcissist Obama is now facing the reality, that is war. This photo op is just a tip of iceberg, for the big mess to come. Obama would do double wrongs for his political's sake. He packed the tent against generals' advice, denied helping the Syria free army, called it as "fantasy", and now he is on the reversal spinning to nowhere. This Arab coalition & U.S. will not stop these extremist radicals period; regardless, how many more bombs, and even boots on the ground. These Arabs countries must look themselves in the mirror since they are the source of problems. Everyone tries to march with the drum to save one's own face. Unless the Arabs and Iran are willing to observe their own cultures with real reform and modernity; there still be 4.5, 5.0...to come. Obama's war policy is like kids play with toys game. The bay of pigs invasion during Cuban crisis, the South Vietnamese during Vietnam war all ended in failure. Only when America has leadership who can resolve such as WWII, the war found some ending. Obama leads the world into the wrong path, and it's getting deeper and deeper. Here is the solution: Stay tune, folks. What a shame!

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Had the Obama administration NOT undermined Assad(gasp! Support a now-former ally) and supported instead, then these so-called rebels wouldn't have gained so much power to begin with. ISIS/ISIL is a monster of US creation.

The Military-industrial complex is doing quite well. It's a shame Eisenhower's warning wasn't heeded. Now, that military-industrial complex actually runs the government.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Terrorist stabs police in Australia & gets shot dead....... But yet fools here say "do nothing" on this blog. Yea let it take its course and them grow and get more backers. OMG .........

Crush them now with a surge of troops and F them up lighting fast. Show them how weak there beloved ISIS are.

Iraq war seen 0 U.S troops deaths every week and months, after the tactics/strategy's smashed them. The Iraq war strategy will destroy these weak thugs.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

John Galt:

" Had the Obama administration NOT undermined Assad(gasp! Support a now-former ally) and supported instead, then these so-called rebels wouldn't have gained so much power to begin with. ISIS/ISIL is a monster of US creation. "

Spot on! And these Arab "allies" that Obama is thanking so profusely and prematurely, are in this only with lukewarm interest at best. They are mainly interested in replacing Assad with a Sunni regime, not in fighting fellow Sunnis.

Note also that the country with the biggest and strongest military in the region, namely Turkey, is not in this ridiculous "coalition" to begin with. Erdogan, too, is only interested in replacing Assad. He is not worried about ISIS; they are Sunni islamists like he is, only a tad more radical.

Obama is making a fool of himself with this pointless self-congratulation.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The political correct nonsense keeps on talking about "tolerance" in Islam. The trilogy of Islam including Koran, Sura, and Hadith indicated otherwise. Yes, there is tolerance when Muslims are being under subjugation. Otherwise, hell loose....It is funny to see many liberal friends still having a fantasy of good old days with Saddam Hussein, Mo-mar Qaddafi, Mao Tse Tung, Hugo Chavez, and Kim's dynasty. Keep on dreaming!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Talk about being caught between Iraq and a hard place. At any rate, America is lucky to have a "community organizer" as president at this juncture. Despite Bush's foolish and disastrous invasion, the underlying schisms are so old as to predate the existence of the United States. America can not solve these problems, but it can work as a catalyst to encourage others to act proactively (or at least to discourage them from doing stupid things).

My bet is on the ISIS bleeding funds and forces as the former are cut off (or burned to a crisp in bombings - these people deal in cash) and the latter realize greener pastures exist with other groups. The collapse could be rapid or it could be gradual; and where the diehard ISIS members end up is an open question.

Still, the best idea is to encourage those living in the area and their neighbors to take responsibility for their own fates.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

@Laguna you mean almost a disaster? They won the battle and did win the war "before they got kicked out" from the Shiites government. Iraq would be going incredibly good right now, if it wasn't for the Shiites that forced them out to take over. 0 America troop deaths every week and months. Attacks dropping off each month "only to flare up" after U.S troops had to pull out, that =s Intel 2.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Laguna:

" At any rate, America is lucky to have a "community organizer" as president at this juncture. "

Are you joking??? Your activist community organizer CREATED this!

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Awesome comments here so far. Never thought I would see so many people awake and paying attention to this issue.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

WillieB

Are you joking??? Your activist community organizer CREATED this!

I would have to respectfully disagree with you on that. If you want to blame anything or anyone for the current state of affairs with Da’esh and the Middle East in general, you have to go considerably farther back than Obama; about a hundred years back in fact.

What got this ball rolling was the Asia Minor (Sykes-Picot) Agreement of 1916 in which France and Great Britain (in secret) came up with a plan to carve up the region between themselves ( and to a lesser degree Czarist Russia) in the event of a defeat of the Ottoman Empire at the hands of the allied forces in World War I. France got a big chunk of Turkey and all of Syria and the Brits got the oil fields of Iraq and the Gulf States, as well as a position to defend its sea lanes to India. In the same time frame the British were encouraging the Arab tribes in the region to rise up against the Ottomans with a promise of a pan Arab state all of their own. The British were also involved in talks with the Zionist about creating a Jewish homeland in the area. The obvious intent of the French and British was to destabilize the region as a means of facilitating their ambitions of control and exploitation. Colonialism to a tee.

Long story short, the allies won, the Ottoman Empire collapsed, the borders agreed on in Sykes-Picot were adopted at Versailles, the British reneged on their promise to the Arabs and they (the Arabs) were left holding the bag.

One of the expressed goals of Da’esh (ISIS/ ISIL) is to erase the arbitrary borders established by Britain and France in Sykes- Picot and to finally achieve the Caliphate that they were promised so long ago. On the surface their motivation has merit but their methods are just too 7th century to be accepted by modern society.

Ironically, the United States (who was adamantly opposed to Sykes-Picot at the time) has now morphed into the main defender of those very same arbitrary divisions. Obama may be confused about what to do in the Middle East but he didn’t create the problem. That distinction is probably better attributed to Sir Mark Sykes (Britain) and Monsieur Francois Georges-Picot (France) and their back room scheming back in 1916.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@kuya808

Can't argue with that point. As far as defending the Sykes-Picot agreement, it has since been etched in stone since 1916 therefore, the president can't just simply redraw or decide where the borders will and won't appear unlike ISIS that completely did the exact opposite. I'm definitely not defending Obama, but on that his hands are tied as far as the Sykes-Picot agreement is concerned. He's just following the border laws.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Kuya 808 wrote: |One of the expressed goals of Daesh (ISIS/ ISIL) is to erase the arbitrary borders established by Britain and France in Sykes-Picot and to finally achieve the Caliphate that they were promised so long ago. On the surface their motivation has merit but their methods are just too 7th century to be accepted by modern society.|

The Sykes-Picot boundary line has no historical regional legitimacy. It is a foreign colonial imposition (an artifact) based upon an entirely arbitrary process of determination without any regard for indigenous territorial interests. Such interests, if they were ever even noted, were considered to fall second to State power by rights of conquest or even simple declaration. ||Read: A Line in the Sand: Britain, France and the Struggle That Shaped the Middle East by James Barr|| Certainly shifting (dissolving) S-P boundaries is major part of ISILs Caliphate vision, but there is another important bit of much earlier history which colors their holy war ambition even more dramatically. That was the decision by the Islamic prophet Muhammad not to enter Damascus during his lifetime but to forgo experiencing |that earthly paradise| so as to sustain a devotion to an eternal paradise. Symbolically, taking Damascus is an act by which an ISIL Caliphate could claim a kind of righteous legitimacy which the entire Moslem world would recognize in some form. They could declare that they sacrificed themselves to gain for all Moslems what Muhammad only glimpsed from a mountain top. Assad is well aware that driving Syrian national power from Damascus is central to ISIL ambition. It is their Jerusalem.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

horizon360

Thanks for sharing!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites