"JV Team"

[Newell Steamer]

Is this a misunderestimation thing?

 

[CZroe]

Is this a misunderestimation thing?

It's a denial thing. He was denying after fundamentally underestimating the consequences of the draw-down.

 

[Bowfinger]

Gee. You're, like, one of the only people to bring that up.

That was not a "we're done here. let's pack up and leave" statement. That was a "we don't have Saddam's head on a stick but he's damned sure deposed. For troop morale we need to make it clear that we are no longer fighting him" statement. I don't see where it had anything to do with packing up to go home and refusing to stay behind to deal with the consequences or acknowledge the ongoing threat. If it had any bearing on their decision to downplay the threat and leave too few, they fully back-pedaled when they admitted that a troop surge was necessary. Will Obama admit that he was wrong?

Obama's still hesitating to cross the "boots on the ground" line and admit he underestimated ISIS/ISIL and the effects of the drawdown (losing Falluja is what prompted the statement). At the time he was clearly concerned with downplaying their threat to the USA in his future term while tooting his horn about his success with the better-known terrorists (Al Qaeda) and justifying the draw-down.

...but go on laughing like it's the same thing.

It's not the same thing at all. The "Mission Accomplished" event, where Bush declared, "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended,' was a planned and carefully scripted event. Obama's "JV" comment, in contrast, was an off-the-cuff remark. It also took Bush four years to "fully back-pedal" with the surge. If that's your standard, Obama has another year to fully back-pedal on ISIS (though, in fact, Obama publicly admitted he underestimated ISIS after only two years, in 2014).

By the way, I find your spin on the "Mission Accomplished" speech amusing, though not at all unexpected. Not even the Bush White House tried to spin it like you did. They eventually admitted it was ill-considered, and they should have been more clear that Bush only meant that the men on that carrier had completed their mission.

 

[Atreus21]

It's not the same thing at all. The "Mission Accomplished" event, where Bush declared, "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended,' was a planned and carefully scripted event. Obama's "JV" comment, in contrast, was an off-the-cuff remark. It also took Bush four years to "fully back-pedal" with the surge. If that's your standard, Obama has another year to fully back-pedal on ISIS (though, in fact, Obama publicly admitted he underestimated ISIS after only two years, in 2014).

By the way, I find your spin on the "Mission Accomplished" speech amusing, though not at all unexpected. Not even the Bush White House tried to spin it like you did. They eventually admitted it was ill-considered, and they should have been more clear that Bush only meant that the men on that carrier had completed their mission.

And "JV Team" wasn't ill-considered?

 

[Bowfinger]

And "JV Team" wasn't ill-considered?

Of course it was. It was a frankly stupid comment. Obama was wrong. The difference is it was an off-the-cuff stupid comment instead of an elaborately planned and staged stupid comment.

 

[Jaskalas]

Of course it was. It was a frankly stupid comment. Obama was wrong. The difference is it was an off-the-cuff stupid comment instead of an elaborately planned and staged stupid comment.

Why did Obama declare ISIS 'contained' the day before Paris attack?

The JV President remains clueless.
As do many Americans.

You'd rather Americans still be dying by the thousands in Iraq?

No, you don't park our soldiers on our streets to play policeman while they get slaughtered. Any commander and chief who does that to our troops needs to be impeached. You fight a war, not an occupation.

I've said it many times, and will have to continue to explain it for the ignorant. You invade with ground forces, but you do not enter the cities. You cut off travel and isolate them. You empower the local governments to take back their territory by rendering ISIS disabled.

Step one of that is working with Russia to protect Assad.
After Obama stops arming Syrian terrorists. After he changes his mind on Neocon policy.

Why defend a Neocon President as incompetent as this one?

 

[CZroe]

It's not the same thing at all. The "Mission Accomplished" event, where Bush declared, "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended,' was a planned and carefully scripted event. Obama's "JV" comment, in contrast, was an off-the-cuff remark. It also took Bush four years to "fully back-pedal" with the surge. If that's your standard, Obama has another year to fully back-pedal on ISIS (though, in fact, Obama publicly admitted he underestimated ISIS after only two years, in 2014).

By the way, I find your spin on the "Mission Accomplished" speech amusing, though not at all unexpected. Not even the Bush White House tried to spin it like you did. They eventually admitted it was ill-considered, and they should have been more clear that Bush only meant that the men on that carrier had completed their mission.

"Two years?!" He announced his intentions to pull out troops out before he was even elected the first time against the advisement of almost everyone in the know. Two years from "JV Team" does not mean two years to admit that he was wrong about underestimating the threat that was spelled out to him in 2008.

Of course it was. It was a frankly stupid comment. Obama was wrong. The difference is it was an off-the-cuff stupid comment instead of an elaborately planned and staged stupid comment.

It was an off the cuff comment as a response to a valid observation about Al Qaeda and ISIL/ISIS ongoing activities in Iraq. He knew that what was really going on flies in the face of the "Al Quaeda is defeated" message he was trying to sell and he chose to downplay and deny it. At that time ISIS/ISIL was still Al Qaeda-affiliate (they were discussing the Al Qaeda flag raised by ISIS/ISIL in Fallujah).

Sorry, but "Mission Accomplished," as stupid as it was, was not a denial like "JV Team" was.

 

[theeedude]

Why did Obama declare ISIS 'contained' the day before Paris attack?

The JV President remains clueless.
As do many Americans.



No, you don't park our soldiers on our streets to play policeman while they get slaughtered. Any commander and chief who does that to our troops needs to be impeached. You fight a war, not an occupation.

I've said it many times, and will have to continue to explain it for the ignorant. You invade with ground forces, but you do not enter the cities. You cut off travel and isolate them. You empower the local governments to take back their territory by rendering ISIS disabled.

Step one of that is working with Russia to protect Assad.
After Obama stops arming Syrian terrorists. After he changes his mind on Neocon policy.

Why defend a Neocon President as incompetent as this one?

Obama took our troops out of Iraq.

 

[Bowfinger]

"Two years?!" He announced his intentions to pull out troops out before he was even elected the first time against the advisement of almost everyone in the know. Two years from "JV Team" does not mean two years to admit that he was wrong about underestimating the threat that was spelled out to him in 2008.

You mean he announced his intention to abide by the agreement the Bush administration negotiated with Iraq. Further, the Obama administration did try to negotiate a new agreement leaving several thousand U.S. troops in Iraq, but the Iraqi government wouldn't accept it. Regardless, the topic of this thread is the "JV" comment about ISIS, and it is perfectly appropriate to use that as the point of comparison with Bush's "Mission Accomplished."

It was an off the cuff comment as a response to a valid observation about Al Qaeda and ISIL/ISIS ongoing activities in Iraq.

Yes, we already covered this. He was wrong.

He knew that what was really going on flies in the face of the "Al Quaeda is defeated" message he was trying to sell and he chose to downplay and deny it. At that time ISIS/ISIL was still Al Qaeda-affiliate (they were discussing the Al Qaeda flag raised by ISIS/ISIL in Fallujah).

So you're saying at that point of time, ISIS was, in fact, Al Qaeda's JV team?

Sorry, but "Mission Accomplished," as stupid as it was, was not a denial like "JV Team" was.

You are welcome to your opinion.

 

[Bowfinger]

Why did Obama declare ISIS 'contained' the day before Paris attack?...

Good question. They don't seem very contained to me. I'm guessing it was another stupid comment he's going to regret.

Edit: As pointed out by Woolfe9998, the full context of Obama's remark was:

"What is true, from the start our goal has been first to contain and we have contained them. They have not gained ground in Iraq and in Syria. They'll come in. They'll leave. But you don't see this systemic march by ISIL across the terrain. What we have not yet been able to do is to completely decapitate their command and control structures. We've made some progress in trying to reduce the flow of foreign fighters."
​

Given that context, that Obama was specifically referring to geographic containment, the remark seems reasonable to me.

 

[CZroe]

You mean he announced his intention to abide by the agreement the Bush administration negotiated with Iraq. Further, the Obama administration did try to negotiate a new agreement leaving several thousand U.S. troops in Iraq, but the Iraqi government wouldn't accept it. Regardless, the topic of this thread is the "JV" comment about ISIS, and it is perfectly appropriate to use that as the point of comparison with Bush's "Mission Accomplished."

They were deliberately vague with dates and deadlines, specifically criticized his insistence on defining a deadline for insurgents to wait for, and never would have left in the state it was without demonstrating that they will come right back if they re-emerge.

So you're saying at that point of time, ISIS was, in fact, Al Qaeda's JV team?

Nope. They were toppling cities while Al Qaeda was waiting in the shadows. They split because they were more ruthless than Al Qaeda was comfortable with. Don't tell me that you are hearing this for the first time from me.

 

[Bowfinger]

They were deliberately vague with dates and deadlines, specifically criticized his insistence on defining a deadline for insurgents to wait for, and never would have left in the state it was without demonstrating that they will come right back if they re-emerge.

The agreement accepted by the Bush administration was quite specific that all U.S. forces would be removed from Iraq by December 31, 2011. There's nothing vague about that. Absent Iraq accepting a new agreement, the original terms were in force.

Nope. They were toppling cities while Al Qaeda was waiting in the shadows. They split because they were more ruthless than Al Qaeda was comfortable with. Don't tell me that you are hearing this for the first time from me.

Not at all. I'm mocking you for contradicting yourself. Vigorous spinning will do that to you. I've already agreed Obama's JV remark was stupid. You continue to press the point as if I'm defending it.

 

[unokitty]

Washington Times: ISIS Contained?

In an interview with ABC News on Friday, Mr. Obama said the Islamic State was not gaining strength and that “we have contained them.”

When interviewer George Stephanopolous suggested the Islamic State was getting stronger, Mr. Obama rejected the notion.

“I don’t think they’re gaining strength,” Mr. Obama said. “From the start, our goal has been first to contain and we have contained them,” he said.

27 Jan 14 New Yorker Magazine

“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,” Obama said, resorting to an uncharacteristically flip analogy. “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.

NPR: Pledging To End Two Wars, Obama Finds Himself Entangled In Three

President Obama entered the White House with a pledge to bring home U.S. troops from two major wars. Now it looks almost certain he will leave office with U.S. forces engaged in three ongoing conflicts: Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Obama, really good at sending other people's children into war zones.

Really good with drone killings.

Really good with rewarding defense contractors that contributed to his campaign.

Really good with shifting blame to others.

Ending wars like he promised? Nicht so gut.

Uno

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I quoted what you said in my post.

Do you read the lefts posts here? Do you ever challenge them when they blame the right for everything?

Or do your panties only when someone that thinks differently then you?

You're the bound up guy. You'll spout something about this statement that again will redirect about how bad liberals are.
Again Obama calling them the JV Team was silly. Should he be impeached or shamed over that statement? No that would be insane.

 

[woolfe9998]

Good question. They don't seem very contained to me. I'm guessing it was another stupid comment he's going to regret.

He meant that their territory in Syria and Iraq wasn't growing. That's exactly what he said he meant at the time. From what I understand as conditions on the ground, the statement was accurate. He said nothing about terrorism in other countries. I didn't even take that as implied when I heard the comment before the Paris attack.

What is true, from the start our goal has been first to contain and we have contained them. They have not gained ground in Iraq and in Syria. They'll come in. They'll leave. But you don't see this systemic march by ISIL across the terrain. What we have not yet been able to do is to completely decapitate their command and control structures. We've made some progress in trying to reduce the flow of foreign fighters.

What was stupid about an accurate description of conditions on the ground in Iraq and Syria? It is quite clearly another dishonest talking point coming from the right.

 

[Bowfinger]

He meant that their territory in Syria and Iraq wasn't growing. That's exactly what he said he meant at the time. From what I understand as conditions on the ground, the statement was accurate. He said nothing about terrorism in other countries. I didn't even take that as implied when I heard the comment before the Paris attack.


What was stupid about an accurate description of conditions on the ground in Iraq and Syria?

I said it was a good question. You've provided a good answer. Thank you. Obama's remark is reasonable once we have context.

 

[michal1980]

Obama took our troops out of Iraq.

that worked out well.

 

[michal1980]

You're the bound up guy. You'll spout something about this statement that again will redirect about how bad liberals are.
Again Obama calling them the JV Team was silly. Should he be impeached or shamed over that statement? No that would be insane.

yes that would be insane. But its also insane to ignore it, and pretend he didnt say it.

Just this week he said ISIS was contained. So either he's a liar, or clueless. I'd honestly prefer him being a liar.

 

[Sulaco]

fair point. Maybe if Obama flew onto an air-borne hellicarrier using the Batwing to match.

appearing on the deck of a carrier in a flightsuit certainly isn't off the cuff.

No.

Which is why I said it's more similar to Bush's "Bring 'em on" statement.

 

[Jaskalas]

Obama took our troops out of Iraq.

And for that Paris bleeds. ISIS will claim more victims before this is over.

 

[theeedude]

And for that Paris bleeds. ISIS will claim more victims before this is over.

We lost several hundred Americans per year in Iraq. Until Obama ended that madness. France is not a ward of the United States. It can take care of its own problems.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

yes that would be insane. But its also insane to ignore it, and pretend he didnt say it.

Just this week he said ISIS was contained. So either he's a liar, or clueless. I'd honestly prefer him being a liar.

1) Nobody has said he didn't say it so why do you continually drone on about it. Do you want a penalty for Obama because he called ISIS the JV league? I just don't get your hang up over that statement.

2) Contained as in Geographically contained, they are no longer spreading into Iraq or Kurdish areas.

 

[woolfe9998]

I said it was a good question. You've provided a good answer. Thank you. Obama's remark is reasonable once we have context.

And sure enough, on queue, I just heard Carly Fiorina on the radio quoting the "contained" comment out of context. Apparently being a political "outsider" doesn't say much of anything about one's ethics. So much for the system corrupting the pols. Most are already there before they've held office.

 

[zinfamous]

No.

Which is why I said it's more similar to Bush's "Bring 'em on" statement.

right.

that's why I agreed with you.

 

[CZroe]

1) Nobody has said he didn't say it so why do you continually drone on about it. Do you want a penalty for Obama because he called ISIS the JV league? I just don't get your hang up over that statement.



2) Contained as in Geographically contained, they are no longer spreading into Iraq or Kurdish areas.

I think this proves that just because they aren't taking and holding new territory doesn't mean that they, themselves, are contained within or confined to that area.