I note we are still immersed in the “boots/no boots” controversy in the “war/no war” kinetic military action we are efforting against ISIS.
The General said “boots”
“To be clear, if we reach the point where I believe our advisers should accompany Iraqi troops on attacks against specific ISIL targets, I will recommend that to the president,”
While the Commander in Chief clearly said “no boots”
Press secretary Josh Earnest said the president has been “very specific and precise” about not using ground troops in Iraq or Syria, and downplayed Dempsey’s remarks as pertaining only to a “hypothetical scenario.”
Because as CIC, he doesn’t really have to follow his Joint Chiefs of Staff advice you know. They’re just advisors.
So, the “no boots” votes have it; as clarified by our JV State Department Harfie:
"The president has been very clear we will not have troops on the ground in combat roles, period," State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said. "That is an underlying principle of our actions in Iraq.
Because, as I said, Big Guy doesn’t really have to pay any attention to his generals’ recommendations.
On a different war front though, we did commit boots to the ground:
And because that includes everybody:
And because Obamacare is working out so well on the home front, we’ve decided to expand its coverage to our African brothers and sisters.
So what do you say we suit up all of our little footed-pajama boys and send them over to wage Obamacare against Africa’s plague of Ebola?
So now that we have a strategy for the War on Pestilence, what do you say we get back to the drawing board to work on strategies against the other 3 Horsemen of the Apocalypse; war, famine, and death? Or at least war.
Cross-Posted on Patriot Action Network