Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HappyToBeHere (Post 1819048)

These are my best answers from the information I have been following over the last 6 months.

Why to Combat ISIS

When July and August 2014

Who started it supposedly us and Iran

I think the recruitment has been mostly UK, Canada and Australia

Ok. Let me try:

Early August 2014: In response to ISIS running rampant in Iraq, the U.S. laubches air strikes against them. Primarilly, at first, to protect a town near the Turkish border and a strategic bridge.

Mid to late August 2014: ISIS beheads a U.S. journalist.

September 22, 2014: The U.S. with several Arab countries, including Saudia Arabia, The U.A.E., and Jordan, begin strikes against ISIS in Syria.

September 26: The British Parliment votes in favor of using military force to combat ISIS.

Early October, 2014: Australia sends fighters to assist in fight against ISIS.

October 7, 2014: Canadian Parliment votes to join coalition to fight ISIS.

Late January 2015: in the State of the Union address, President Obama asks Congress for formal authorization to fight ISIS.

February 3, 2015: ISIS releases a video of them burning a Jordanian pilot to death. Jordan, in response, executes 2 terrorist prisoners.

September 22,2014- present:The air strikes against ISIS have continued.

Is that about right?

Is it your implication that if coalition countries, as mentioned in your timeline, had not partaken in military operations, that perhaps the executions would not have happened? Is yours a "cause and effect" argument?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Purple Drank (Post 1819116)

No. My point is that this coalition was started by the U.S. We recruited other countries to join. Remarkably, we even got some Arab countries involved.

Look at the dates. Or, do you guys suppose that. Saudia Arabia, Jordan, and The U.A.E came to us and said, "Let's fight ISIS!"

Do you agree with that, or do you think some other country put this coalition together?

Quote:

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1819106)

It is a good summary of US involvement but leaves out the contributions and involvement of many other countries but not sure what your point is.

My wife is a lawyer so I know when to recognize I am being led into a trap just come out and say it.

I think this discussion, hence NewK's 'loaded question' :), came from the comments about our (sacless) CiC.

Not to turn this political, NewK et al., but this administration has been the absolute worst the military has ever seen, including the eight M. Lewinski....err, Clinton years.

This scourge of individuals do not respond, nor are they even the slightest affected by 'soft power' military tactics.

Our current person, who holds the title of CiC - having not once acted like it - has done more to weaken this country's position in the world, than anyone else. (In the eyes of our friends & foes.)

I personally would like to see him brought up on charges of treason when the first family exits the White House, but obviously that wouldn't happen when the party 'buys' their constituents with myriad entitlement programs.

Good day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1819106)

Let me add to the timeline:

http://www.truthrevolt.org/sites/def...?itok=04dVhY3K

In January, President Barack Obama dismissed the terrorist group ISIS as a "JV Team" that didn't pose a real threat to America.

“The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant. I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.”

The remarks made in an interview with New Yorker may very well come back to haunt Obama as the latest ISIS atrocities come to light.

a video apparently showing the barbaric beheading of American journalist James Foley at the hands of ISIS was posted to YouTube under the heading "A Message To America." The video also included the al Qaeda affiliated group making an audacious challenge to President Obama after showing Journalist Steven Joel Sotloff on camera.

FLASHBACK: Obama Dismisses ISIS As 'JV Team' | Truth Revolt

Quote:

Originally Posted by HappyToBeHere (Post 1819142)

Ha! Now that's funny. You know your wife well. Ok. I'll cut to the chase.

Why all the crap talk (not a legal term) about Obama? Why the questioning of what side he's on? Why the claims that he's weak, and/or won't retaliate? Why the suggestion that him not naming the enemy is more important than the bombs we've been dropping on them for the past 7 months?

He's even using an outdated congressional authorization as a basis for doing what he's doing and could have waited for Congress to screw it up before launching the attacks. (A few weeks ago, in the SOTU, he asked for applicable authorization.) So, he's basically fighting an unconstitutional war. But, you don't know what side he's on.

It makes no sense.

Can you explain?

PS: Good recognition. Your wife taught you well. :D

Not to get too political either but we'd be a lot better off if we'd left Saddam where he was. Iran would be much less of a problem as well. 20/20 hindsight I know but pretty obvious at the time too.

Quote:

Why the suggestion that him not naming the enemy is more important than the bombs we've been dropping on them for the past 7 months?

Really, dropping bombs is going to make a difference? :rolleyes: I've watched the real-time video feed. Like everything else Osama has done, he's doing it half-azzed so he can 'say he did something' but, "look it didn't work?" :mad:

Quote:

So, he's basically fighting an unconstitutional war. But, you don't know what side he's on.

It makes no sense.

Can you explain?

Reference explanation above.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elliot (Post 1819170)

I didn't ask if dropping bombs was going to work. I asked if the bombs we were dropping were more important than the name we we decide to call the people we are dropping bombs on?

Name them correctly as being sub-human, or drop bombs on them to end their human lives for being sub human.

Which one is more important to you?