re: Leaked Audio of Kerry Reveals President Obama Intentionally Allowed Rise of ISIS

quote:

---

conservative treehouse is a horrendous website. When people link that crap on here, it gives the left ammo to mock us for fake news.

---

As a side note: I posted an article that clearly showed Russia didn't hack the democrats. The top intel spook with specialities in Russin programs and intel; backed this up. Not one progressive dem boot-licker posted in the thread.

I will tell you the same thing as ballscaster and the progs. (Pay attention progs I am not replying to ya'll individually) I challenge you to post a link to CTH of anything inaccurate that is not obviously noted: opinion.

I have yet to see the CTH disproven. They pegged things no one said would happen in the primaries and election. Learn young grasshopper, learn. Don't make me link your past statements of ignorance regarding the Trump movement they look so ignorant and unflattering.

If anything all the numbnuts here owe the CTH an apology. They called it when ya'll were believing the MSM/polls and calling us crazy.

Never mind. I se you are just trolling as usual. Carry on

quote:

---

Jesus Christ lefties are the most willfully ignorant breed in human history.

---

At this point it is clear that the Democrats who post regularly on this board are not here for rational debate or conversation. They are here for another purpose. One can decide exactly what that purpose is, but it is obviously not to have rational and informed debate and conversation.

IMHO, they are here simply to troll and antagonize the "home base" posters who post regularly and post rational reasons for their strong opposition to Democrat policy, Alinsky-ism, Obama-ism, Clinton-ism and the like.

If I may say so myself, I have pegged them exactly for what they really are: misinformed trolls here to antagonize the rational people.

OK. But they would never report this and you know it.

So, let's say it's true but never gets reported. Basically, that makes it false news in today's world.

Quite the conundrum.

It.

Is.

Audio.

quote:

---

If you are going to make such a blanket statement, please show your work in links or something.

---

I've probably already done that a dozen times, and I don't have the time to make a full argument from scratch here today. However, just for you, cajunangelle, I will give you the abbreviated version:

quote:

---

First, only regime change, the removal of Bashir Assad, in Syria was the goal for President Obama. This is admitted and outlined by Secretary John Kerry.

---

Of the three points, this one is most reasonable and open to debate. It is true that President Obama lectured the world (what's new?) and peddled the "Assad must go" line. However, it is fairly obvious to everyone who's been following this debacle over the past 6 years that Obama was never really serious about that.

His primary goal for the region was to strike a grand bargain with Iran so that he could tout his historical legacy as a peacemaker in the region. (I'm not sure if we should laugh or cry at that.) Back in 2011 and 2012, both Obama and Putin were thinking that Assad would surely be defeated, but Assad went full bore with his "release ISIS to taint the opposition" strategy, and Iran came to his rescue, and Obama did virtually nothing. This is despite the advice in his own administration from Clinton, Panetta, Petraeus, etc.

What makes this first point overall bullshite, is that it states that "only regime change" was the goal for Obama. Get real. Being accommodating to Iran and preventing escalation with Russia were the primary goals for Obama. He also had a secondary goal of providing support to Kurdish forces in the northeast fighting ISIS, but this had nothing to do with opposing the regime.

Indeed, if you actually listen to the audio (I only listened to a couple of minutes from the time marks you referenced, not the whole thing), you'll hear Kerry talking about how sad it is that we have to respect international law, while Russia does not, and also how Russia was "invited" in by the regime, so they have a legitimacy that we do not, and therefore, the only thing the U.S. can do is support forces fighting ISIS, rather than supporting forces fighting the regime.

quote:

---

Secondly, in order to accomplish this primary goal, the White House was willing to watch the rise of ISIS by placing their bet that ISIS’s success would force Syrian President Bashir Assad to acquiesce toward Obama’s terms and step down.

---

frick no. This gets things EXACTLY backwards. I'm not sure if you could write a more inaccurate statement about the Syrian war if you tried.

Now I know that there was token support by the CIA to efforts from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey to funnel arms to Islamic Sunni resistance groups, but none of this was ever intended to help ISIS. Money and arms leaked across the spectrum of the anti-Assad rebels from moderate to radical, and the less Obama showed his willingness to support the moderates, the more radical the opposition got, until Obama finally pulled the plug on the program completely. It was probably only running strong around 2013 or so.

As I've linked to elsewhere, though, it was Syria, Iran, and even Russia, who aided, abetted, and cheered on the rise of ISIS, and ISIS itself has not pursued anti-regime tactics or strategy. It is anti-regime in the long-run of course, but that's no better than saying that Stalin was anti-Hitler in the long-run when he signed off on the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact in 1939.

quote:

---

Thirdly, in order to facilitate the two objectives, Obama and Kerry intentionally gave arms to ISIS and even, arguably, attacked a Syrian government military convoy to stop a strategic attack upon the Islamic extremists killing 80 Syrian soldiers.

---

See above. Give me a fricking break.



By the way, I did not hear a single comment from Kerry in that audio that supports any of those 3 points.

I'm already sick of the "fake news" tactic lefties are using.

In the opening sentences of the article it links to a New York Times article about the audio.

Good grief.

quote:

---

HHM

---

To be honest, I'm a little embarrassed to have voted on the same side as him. I've always thought him an idiot and still cringe whenever he starts a thread here or the rant- wherever.

quote:

---

I haven't clicked on it because it's a bullshite site but if the audio is legit, I will quickly rethink that opinion

---

The audio is legit. NYT and CNN reported on the audio, but the headline from CHT is what's BS. There is no evidence in the audio that supports the headline's claim. It's clickbait and CHT is probably laughing it's arse off at how stupid people are to believe this while they are reeling in money from ads.