Why is Obama talking about containment of ISIS and not annihilation of ISIS? The history of WW2 and Afghanistan might shed some light
Posted on | September 4, 2014 | 8 Comments
Many in the media are questioning, why Obama is talking about forming an international coalition to contain ISIS and not defeat it. We can probably find an answer in analyzing the history of WW2 and the history of Afghan wars.
Many state that Hitler could have been defeated early on and the policy of appeasement led to Hitler’s expansion. I believe, this was not an appeasement, it was a conscious decision by the ruling oligarchy not to stop Hitler and let him expand and invade the Soviet Union. Hitler was seen as a tool for fighting the communist proliferation in Europe. Only when it was clear that Hitler lost and the Soviets had an upper hand and were advancing, did the US decide to land in Normandy and join the European war theater. Every country liberated by the US stayed in the market of free economies. Every country liberated by the Soviet Union was turned communist. There are some new publications, which show that that at least one or both of Dulles brothers were involved in this policy of using Hitler as a tool against the Soviets.
Case study #2. US actively supported the Mujahadden and Al Qaeda to fight Soviet proliferation in Afghanistan. Unfortunately for the U.S. Al Qaeda turned against its’ sponsor.
We know that there are reported meetings between John McCain and Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi (or whatever his real name is), the Caliph of the ISIS Caliphate. There were common goals between the U.S. and the so called “rebels” in Syria. U.S. sponsored the rebels for two reasons:
a. U.S. sought to overthrow the President of Syria Bashir al -Assad, who, just as his father Hafez al-Assad, had close ties with Russia. Additionally, support of Sunni caliphate was a counter force against Shiah majority in Iraq and most importantly Shiah Iran.
So, as long as ISIS operates against Assad and Rouhani, U.S. probably will not do anything.
I believe that the idea was to counter attack ISIS if it goes against the U.S. or U.S. allies, such as Kurds on the North, Lebanon and Israeli Golan Heights in the West and Jordan and further on Saudi Arabia and emirates on the South.
This might explain Obama’s statements of containment.
At issue is, whether Obama is really willing and able to contain ISIS.
Same facts suggest that he is playing both sides.
One can see the correlation and a perfect timing of ISIS going into the major offensive right after Obama released 5 top Taliban leaders from GITMO.
A very unsettling fact is not only in this release, but also the fact that one of these former detainees, Khairulla Kharakhwa, was known as a liaison between Taliban and Iran. Further Obama did not take any steps in protecting the homeland against ISIS. Obama keeps the US borders wide open and retaliates against the border patrol officers who are the whistle blowers. He, also, did not revoke the passports of American Muslims who went to Syria to fight the Taliban.
What is even more unsettling, is the fact that Obama recently sold 52 billion of sophisticated military equipment to Qatar, which is known for its’ support for ISS, Hamas, Boca Haram and other terrorist organizations.
While we understand the context of the meaning “containment” of ISIS, at issue is the fact that Obama might not be able and most importantly not willing to contain.
Comments
8 Responses to “Why is Obama talking about containment of ISIS and not annihilation of ISIS? The history of WW2 and Afghanistan might shed some light”
Leave a Reply
EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — YouTube Indiana Trial of Obama !
Petition the White House to institute Edward Snowden, National Whistleblower – Patriots against Government Corruption Day
OrlyTaitzEsq.comTAITZ REPORT
Official Facebook
IMPORTANT NOTICES – PLEASE READ!
Historic DVD Now Available!
DVD of the historic trial in GA and DVD of a historic testimony in NH, where evidence was provided showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a stolen social security number. The DVDs are in a beautiful commemorative case with personal autographs from attorney Dr. Orly Taitz $22.50 each +$2.50 for shipping and handling.
---------
To order these DVDs, donate $25.00 by credit card on the website RunOrlyRun.com and email orly.taitz@gmail.com with you name and address. Or send a $25.00 check with your name and address to: Orly Taitz for US Senate 2012, 29839 Santa Margarita ste 100, RSM, CA 92688.
Advertisement / Sponsors
29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy,
Ste 100
Rancho Sta Margarita, CA 92688
orly.taitz @gmail. com
(949) 766-7687
--------------------------------------
Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld
--------------------------------------
Bumper Sticker
$9.99 thru PayPal--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------Orly Taitz Photo Collections
September 4th, 2014 @ 8:27 am
1) To see Hitler as a tool for fighting the communist proliferation in Europe could make some sense for the ruling oligarchy if … if this very ruling oligarchy really wished to confront communism. In reality, they help advancement of the Bolshevik coup in 1917. And in 1933 America established the diplomatic relation with the regime of a cannibal – Stalin.
A (possible) conscious decision by the ruling oligarchy not to stop Hitler and let him expand and invade the Soviet Union was easily overdone by the sinister plan “Icebreaker” – see below.
2) In 1939 there was the Stalin-Hitler pact – a step in the Stalin’s strategic plan “Icebreaker” (see Victor Suvorov). According to that plan, Stalin wanted first to empower and encourage Hitler so much, that Hitler easily occupy the entire Western Europe.
3) Then the pact gave the opportunity to capture the nations between the USSR and Germany so that both became adjacent. Then Stalin was going to suddenly attack Germany and cut it from the Rumanian oil supply. In so doing Stalin hoped to come as a “liberator” of Europe (using Hitler as an “icebreaker”).
4) On June 22, 1941, invading USSR, Hitler anticipated Stalin only in a few weeks, incurring terrible losses to USSR. Even so, the Icebreaker plan had finally succeeded (assisted by Roosevelt and Churchill), though “partially”: Stalin “liberated” and captured only the Eastern Europe!..
5) Not only America and the Allies had failed to decipher the Icebreaker plan. Much worse: They cooperated with Stalin helping him to implement it! Under pressure from Stalin, they conducted the war so that by no means to appear and liberate Europe PRIOR to Stalin! The D Day and the heavy invasion to Normandy was a wasteful, very heavy, and deliberately delayed plan pushed by Stalin’s agents in the US. As soon the Allies had a bulwark in Italy in 1943, they could liberate Europe from there: Earlier and much cheaper, while Stalin was still far back in his GULAGs. But America was in a long process of licking Stalin’s boot since 1933. It was then when America and the West lost their soul (Diana West).
September 4th, 2014 @ 8:52 am
http://www.wnd.com/2014/09/obama-head-of-the-isis-snake/
Eric Rush asks in this article: Why in May of this year did Obama close off one half million acres of NM on the boarder of the Mexican State of Chihuahua?
September 4th, 2014 @ 9:59 am
the link does not work
September 4th, 2014 @ 10:12 am
I’m not convinced that Stalin would have wanted to attack Germany prior to Hitler’s attacking. In Svetlana Stalin’s book “Only One Year”, she says that as a young girl(16 or 17 years old) she went into her father’s office in the Kremlin on the day Germany attacked, finding him on the phone, just listening and with a look on his face of dismay and shock. He didn’t acknowledge her presence as she stood in front of him at his desk. He was just listening and had that look on his face. When he finally placed the phone down on its cradle he raised his eyes toward her. “Papa, what’s wrong?”, she said. He stared blankly and said “Together we could have ruled the world.”
September 4th, 2014 @ 10:24 am
We need to approach the situation of Obama from a different angle. He’s not a dufus. He’s brilliant, or at least semi-so. He must certainly listen to people of brilliance who have his ear. What he’s doing by going soft on isis is empowering islam in their unending attempt at conquest. islam is supremely jealous. They think that the world was meant to be controlled by them and that the West stole Islam’s rightful place.
In order for islam to triumph the United States must be brought to our knees, being made impotent. We stand in the way of islam’s twisted, satanic cravings. It is Obama’s duty to his islamism that he help to destroy our country.
September 4th, 2014 @ 11:24 am
Turnright…you got that right.
This Obama creature is demonic
and as bad as the barbarians
who are as cruel as any in the
Ghengis Khan era.
This ISIL (he’s out to destroy Israel)
is his cup of tea.
Naturally, he has to condemn them.
If he didn’t, he knows he would
have ‘broken his cover’ and be
tarred and feathered, before being
hanged as a traitor… although, I
am not sure if a Muslim and non-citizen
can be labeled a ‘traitor’ per se.
Every time I read an article by any
person at all, in which he is
referred to as “President Obama”
I want to discreetly vomit.
September 4th, 2014 @ 12:52 pm
To Turnright. Thank you for the quote: Very telling… Stalin and Hitler (being quite in a harmony) DID rule the world between the 1930s and June 22, 1941. A huge economic and military exchange between them is well documented. Stalin did empower Hitler.
However, does these words reported by Svetlana (if true) really mean that Stalin SINCERELY planned to stay in alliance with Hitler forever? Stalin was not a person adhered to alliances in true sense… The “Icebreaker” plan had been actually fulfilled, though partially, only for Eastern Europe – special thanks to Roosevelt and Churchill. “Partial Icebreaker” is a fact. For the rest – read Suvorov.
September 4th, 2014 @ 3:17 pm
Found this quote just now. Love it.
D.C. WHISPERS: Obama “Out Of It” During “Bizarre” Conversation With Prime Minister
UlstermanBooks.com > Politics > D.C. WHISPERS: Obama “Out Of It” During “Bizarre” Conversation With Prime Minister
A recent report was published here this morning regarding Lt. Colonel Ralph Peters declaring Barack Obama suffered “psychological problems” that has him incapable of making the kind of decisions required of his job as President of the United States. Now this information comes via D.C. sources which outline a very brief, troubling, and bizarre phone conversation between British Prime Minister David Cameron and President Obama that left the Prime Minister’s staff stunned and baffled as to what could be going on with the alleged “Leader of the Free World.”
The communication from British Prime Minister to the president is said to have been initiated at approximately 5:00 eastern time. (Which would also indicate the Prime Minister was working late into the night London time.) According to the published White House schedule for Tuesday, that would have put Barack Obama on Air Force One on his way to Europe. The Prime Minister was said to have to wait for nearly twenty minutes before the call was finally taken by the president.
Why would it take twenty minutes for staff to locate the President of the United States within the confines of a airplane – even one as luxurious as AF1?
That is far from the most troubling aspect of the alleged interaction between the two world leaders though.
President Obama is said to have been “nearly incoherent”, slurring his words heavily and even at one point “giggling as the Prime Minister struggled to focus the conversation on the terrorist threats in the Middle East.” The President of the United States was said to be “out of it” during a conversation that has staff for the Prime Minister privately describing to their D.C. counterparts as “bizarre.”
Was Barack Obama given an in-flight sedative to help him sleep during his flight trip to Estonia and then later the United Kingdom for a scheduled NATO summit? If so, he could have been woken up by staff to take the Prime Minister’s call and been struggling to remain awake during the conversation.
An alternative to that more Obama-friendly scenario would be one related to the night of the Benghazi Massacre where White House records have no indication of the President of the United States’ whereabouts on that night, though rumors persist Barack Obama was “incapacitated” and unable to perform his duties as Commander in Chief. Those missing hours in the president’s schedule have never yet to be accounted for and the next day, a late to rise Barack Obama then flew off for a fundraiser to Las Vegas.
No president has utilized Air Force One more than Barack Obama, though its use has been primarily for fundraising and vacation excursions. That extensive use also allows the president considerable time at the back of the plane alone inside the private rooms if he so chooses, far from the prying eyes of the White House machine and accompanying media. (The media are confined to a small area at the front of the plane) He could be doing a great many things on that plane we would never know of.
Whatever the cause for the president’s condition and resulting behavior during the brief conversation with Prime Minister Cameron, it is sure to be a source of further concern for both Cameron and other world leaders during this week’s NATO conference as more and more come to realize the United States is seemingly without the required leadership today’s increasingly troubled times require.
RELATED STORY: Military Officer: Barack Obama Suffers From “Psychological Problems”
____________________________
HE DOESN’T PLAY NICE.
EIGHT STORIES – ONE LOW PRICE!
DOWNLOAD IT NOW HERE
ulsterman
Posted byulsterman
September 3, 2014
Tags:Bizarre, ISIS, Obama, Phone Conversation, Prime Minister Cameron, Weird
14
4
Share:
8737 200 Google +9 5 16
Related Articles
Valerie Jarrett Stages “Obama At Work” White House Photo Op
Deadly Stinger Missiles Added To List Of Terrorist Weapons In Iraq
Barack Obama: “A Disgrace, Incompetent, Unfocused,Shameless” (VIDEO)
HAPPY BIRTHDAY AMERICA!
4 Comments
John S September 3, 2014 Reply
Coked up, perhaps? It’s a crying shame that the media is well aware of this dysfunction and chooses to cover it up.
Jennifer September 4, 2014 Reply
I don’t think coked up, I think high on pot. Coke doesn’t make you giggle.
Jofus September 4, 2014 Reply
Most likely he had taken Xanax or a stronger sedative. I’ve had experience with this medication from my younger days and of all the drugs, this makes the most sense. A sedative would explain why it took 20 minutes for his staff to get him aroused out of a stupor that sedatives put him in, and when one is on a heavy dose they mumble incoherently and giggle just as the article describes. This does raise suspicion on the night of Benghazi as well. If the president takes sedatives to sleep, it could very well be the reason he was incapacitated that night!
swampsniper September 4, 2014 Reply
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”
H. L. Mencken