Joe Scarborough Schools GOP Senator About ISIS Coalition Strategy
Welcome to another in our long-running yet rarely-necessary series, Joe Scarborough Is Right About A Thing. Episode IV: A New Dope. On Monday morning, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) appeared on Morning Joe to spew Republican derp about how President Obama shouldn’t be taking “options” off the table because it’s not “inspiring,” while also maintaining that the last thing he wants to do is send in ground troops. What followed was the cable news equivalent of a dog performing a card trick, as Scarborough became one of the very few members of the media to expose the obvious flaw in that sort of, well, let’s call it “thinking.”
Johnson: We certainly left stabilizes forces behind in Germany and Japan and South Korea.
Scarborough: Far different than — they weren’t still being shot at in 1950 and 1951.
Scarborough was actually right about a couple of things. The first was the McCain line that we should have left a residual force in Iraq, because Iraq is just like South Korea and Germany. Senator Johnson tried that out on Scarborough, and Scarborough did what mainstream media folks like CNN have failed to do: he dropped a fact on him.
While I’m giving Scarborough major points for this because we’re grading on a curve, he didn’t really challenge Johnson on Iraq being a super-stable place when we left. Maybe it was Iraq-stable, the United States was still taking casualties right up until the last troops left Iraq in December of 2011, and the troops would not have been protected from Iraqi courts had they stayed past that time. You think getting out of Mexican jail is hard?
Then, there’s the latest Republican line that while President Obama definitely shouldn’t be sending in ground troops, he also definitely shouldn’t be saying he’s not sending in ground troops. Johnson tries to explain that “taking options off the table” (ground troops) is bad because it’s not “inspiring” to Arab countries. This load has, once again, gone completely unchallenged by the mainstream press, which is either deliberately ignoring or completely blind to the concept of public diplomacy. It is a sad state of affairs that Joe Scarborough has to set them all straight…READ MORE
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Tommy Christopher
Tommy Christopher is The Daily Banter's White House Correspondent and Political Analyst. He's been a political reporter and liberal commentator since 2007, and has covered the White House since the beginning of the Obama administration, first for PoliticsDaily, and then for Mediaite. Christopher is a frequent guest on a variety of television, radio, and online programs, and was the villain in the documentaries The Audacity of Democracy and Hating Breitbart. He's also That Guy Who Live-Tweeted His Own Heart Attack, and the only person to have ever received public apologies from both Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.
34 responses to Joe Scarborough Schools GOP Senator About ISIS Coalition Strategy
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
fancypants September 22nd, 2014 at 11:52
slam your fist on the table and say ” WE NEED THAT OIL “
fancypants September 22nd, 2014 at 11:52
slam your fist on the table and say ” WE NEED THAT OIL “
rg9rts September 22nd, 2014 at 12:48
No Xmas card for you Joe…did Mika choke???
rg9rts September 22nd, 2014 at 12:48
No Xmas card for you Joe…did Mika choke???
Suzanne McFly September 22nd, 2014 at 12:53
Joe also stated that bush did not secure protections for the troops after 2008. The Senator insisted Obama should of negotiated for these protections. I love how Monday morning quarterbacking is taking place. No one would in their right mind would of sent troops into an area where they are subject to trials for actions of the U.S. government.
The Iraqi government was corrupt and no Sunni Iraqi’s were in al-Maliki’s cabinet. This caused the Iraqi army to abandon their post. We should just contain ISIS in Iraq, Syria and Turkey. If the residents want to fight, stand up and fight. Then possibly we will help out as needed, but make them fight for themselves.
Suzanne McFly September 22nd, 2014 at 12:53
Joe also stated that bush did not secure protections for the troops after 2008. The Senator insisted Obama should of negotiated for these protections. I love how Monday morning quarterbacking is taking place. No one would in their right mind would of sent troops into an area where they are subject to trials for actions of the U.S. government.
The Iraqi government was corrupt and no Sunni Iraqi’s were in al-Maliki’s cabinet. This caused the Iraqi army to abandon their post. We should just contain ISIS in Iraq, Syria and Turkey. If the residents want to fight, stand up and fight. Then possibly we will help out as needed, but make them fight for themselves.
shindigg September 22nd, 2014 at 13:53
“Things were pretty stable in Iraq” HAHHAAHA…so we should have just stayed there and kept dying forever I guess to keep the, um, “stability” yea!! (Even though there were no terrorists there or religious persecution prior to dumbya’s and the dickster’s 2003 crime spree there, when the country was actually stable and didn’t need American soldiers assistance there to actually be stable like it was.)
Also, the Iraqis did not want us to stay there with a residual force. Obama did try to negotiate one, but the Iraqis wouldn’t budge on the notion that our troops would be subjected to Iraqi law (not to mention whatever else) if they continued to stay there unwanted…..
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 07:49
POTUS didn’t want to leave forces, he said that back in 2012.
shindigg September 23rd, 2014 at 10:01
Bush negotiated the removal of forces and scheduled it for when it ultimately happened. That’s what he was dong in Iraq when he had the shoes thrown at him at that news conference. He was there to finalize the agreement to leave Iraq which Obama carried through. Iraq had no interest in keeping a residual force when Obama suggested it later. Iraq insisted on conditions that were unacceptable to the U.S. to even consider a residual force being left there. And I know Faux Noose is harping about we should have kept a residual force, so they can try to somehow twist and turn the blame for this away from Bush’s WRONGFUL and DISASTROUS actions in Iraq that took place in 2003, when THERE WAS NO TERRORISM OR TERRORISTS IN IRAQ, but there is no way to know what would have happened if a residual force would have been kept there UNWANTED by the IRAQIS before this ISIS militant problem has cropped up…..
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 10:23
A lot of your post has nothing to do with the topic, let alone getting a lot of what you did write incorrect.
So ignoring the rest, I’ll get back to topic of my post:
POTUS said himself, on tape, No when asked if he wanted to leave forces. It is that simple. He also commented on how he wrapped up the iraq war and VP and he made comments it will go down as ‘one of the greatest accomplishments of this administration’. That’s on tape, argue with it as you wish.
shindigg September 23rd, 2014 at 10:28
Horseh*t! This POTUS did attempt to negotiate an agreement to keep residual forces there. But the conditions Iraq insisted on placing would have put our troops in further jeopardy and were REJECTED.
The Status of Forces AGREEMENT FOR THEM TO LEAVE was negotiated by Bush, as I said. If Bush thought we should keep residual forces in the Iraq he had destroyed, he should have included in his agreement (as the shoes being thrown at him were flying around his head) a provision about residual forces being kept there, but Bush and the Iraqis (WHO WANTED US GONE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE) did not negotiate such a provision…..
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 10:41
Swear all you want, re-write history all you want, but in this day in age there is digital video… go to youtube or such, pull up debates… when asked if he wanted a sofa, he replies:
NO
You can talk all about bush, or reasons why, good or bad, but to deny who said what on tape is a bit… well, weird if you ask me.
shindigg September 23rd, 2014 at 11:00
Yea, right! I’m the one rewriting history…Please! If he wasn’t considering some residual forces being kept there, then why did he attempt to negotiate something to that effect at the time of withdrawal which was ultimately discarded when the Iraqis placed unacceptable conditions on such an idea?
And you’re damn right I can talk about NO ACCOUNT BUSH if I want, because at best we COULD BE BACK TO an Iraq that was like the one Bush destroyed in 2003.That one that had no terrorism or strong religious persecution in it.
If Bush would not have destroyed Iraq under false pretenses, there would be no this happening now in Iraq.
President Obama is handling a very bad situation and is doing his best to clean it up. It is not that easy to clean up catastrophes like the ones created by NO ACCOUNT Bush and Cheney’s dishonest, wrongful, dishonest actions in 2003, that destroyed secular Iraq and that had NOTHING TO DO with fighting terrorism….
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 11:10
Lets simplify, you’re bringing in a lot of extra things when I’m merely working on one for now:
Did or did not POTUS declare he didn’t want a sofa? Yes or no please, lets get this one point first, ok?
shindigg September 23rd, 2014 at 11:19
For number 1, you are harping on this as if we know for sure what the result would have been if we would have kept residual forces there unwanted. Also, like I said. for how long were we to keep them there exactly…As sitting ducks? FOREVER? And at what cost? What would he have gained from this overall compared to how Iraq was in 2003?
And number 2, I’d have to view what you are saying specifically with regards to this so called one word answer “no” that you say Obama gave about this topic.
I want to see what you are saying he said, but in context. LINK?
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 11:24
LOL, oh geez… I’m not ‘harping on it’ like anything, I’m sticking to what I wrote about:
“POTUS didn’t want to leave forces, he said that back in 2012”
That’s all I wrote, nothing else, then you not only denied it you went off on tangents that had nothing to do w/with my post on him not wanting a sofa. Period.
Link… go to c-span, look up 2012 debate for october.
shindigg September 23rd, 2014 at 12:39
The conz have been desperately harping about this in hindsight. They think it is somehow the way to switch the blame for ISIS being in Iraq from Bush to Obama. And that’s the main thing they care about and “stand for.”
I’m not going to go search for more details about why the U.S. did not keep an unwanted by Iraq residual force there that would have been contrary to the agreed upon removal date negotiated by Bush and the Iraqis. And there is no way to know what we could have expected if some residual force would have been kept there anyway, unwanted, beyond the already agreed to time line.
If I were to search, I expect that there is a more contextual answer that Obama gave about this than a simple “no,” as this is obviously a complicated situation that Bush left Obama to deal with, even though Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism before Bush’s WRONGFUL, DISHONEST ACTIONS permitted the notion of terrorists in Iraq to happen.
The Iraqis did not want a residual force left there, we know that, so they must not have been afraid of ISIS AT THE TIME they agreed with Bush (Bush must have not been afraid of ISIS either, since he agreed with the Iraqis on U.S. troop removal and set the date.) And the Iraqis must not have been so afraid of ISIS at a time LATER THAN the time of the agreement with Bush either, when the issue of residual force was brought up again during the Obama Administration more recently and closer to the time the troops were actually withdrawn.
At the later time, The Iraqis STILL DID NOT want a residual American force kept there indefinitely…
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 16:44
Obama was pres when all troops left, his watch, his decision, good or bad.
Don’t search, and expect all you want, doesn’t change a thing.
(BTW, ISIS wasn’t in existence when bush was pres.)
shindigg September 22nd, 2014 at 13:53
“Things were pretty stable in Iraq” HAHHAAHA…So we should have just stayed there and kept dying forever I guess to keep the, um, “stability” yea!! (And never mind though that there were no terrorists in Iraq, nor was there major religious persecution prior to the dumbya’s and the dickster’s 2003 (had NOTHING TO DO with fighting terrorism!) crime spree there, when the country actually WAS stable and didn’t need American soldiers assistance to stay stable like it actually was.)
Also, the Iraqis did not want us to stay there with a residual force. Obama did try to negotiate one, but the Iraqis wouldn’t budge on the notion that our troops would be subjected to Iraqi law (not to mention whatever else) if they continued to stay there forever, unwanted.
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 07:49
POTUS didn’t want to leave forces, he said that back in 2012.
shindigg September 23rd, 2014 at 10:01
Bush negotiated the removal of forces and scheduled it for when it ultimately happened. That’s what he was dong in Iraq when he had the shoes thrown at him at that news conference. He was there to finalize the agreement to leave Iraq which Obama carried through.
Iraq had no interest in keeping a residual force when Obama suggested it later. Iraq insisted on conditions that were unacceptable to the U.S. to even consider a residual force being left there.
And I know Faux Noose is harping about we should have “magically” just, in hindsight, kept a residual force there so they can try to somehow twist and turn the blame for ISIS now being in Iraq when they weren’t there before AWAY FROM Bush’ s DISHONEST, WRONGFUL DISASTROUS actions that took place in 2003, when he decided to stop going after the terrorists who hit us on 9/11 and to destroy and loot Iraq instead, but there is no way really to know what would have happened if a residual force would have been kept in Iraq UNWANTED by the IRAQIS. Nobody knows for sure how that would have affected this ISIS militant menace cropping up to fill the vacuum that George Bush left by his dishonest crime spree to steal and loot there for his cronies, squandering the good will of the world that was behind us after we got hit on 9/11…..
Repeat: After Bush and Cheney stole that 2000 election, they were going to destroy Iraq no matter what, even though THERE WAS NO TERRORISM OR TERRORISTS IN IRAQ when Bush destroyed it, even though there was no major religious persecution, especially of Christians in Iraq, even though Iraq HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11, which Bush wound up exploiting in order to destroy Iraq that had nothing to do with 9/11, and even though here were NO WMDs in the contained IRAQ Iraq that was no major threat at the time.
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 10:23
A lot of your post has nothing to do with the topic, let alone getting a lot of what you did write incorrect.
So ignoring the rest, I’ll get back to topic of my post:
POTUS said himself, on tape, No when asked if he wanted to leave forces. It is that simple. He also commented on how he wrapped up the iraq war and VP and he made comments it will go down as ‘one of the greatest accomplishments of this administration’. That’s on tape, argue with it as you wish.
shindigg September 23rd, 2014 at 10:28
Horseh*t! This POTUS did attempt to negotiate an agreement to keep residual forces there. But the conditions Iraq insisted on placing would have put our troops in further jeopardy and were REJECTED.
The Status of Forces AGREEMENT FOR THEM TO LEAVE was negotiated by Bush, as I said. If Bush thought we should keep residual forces in the Iraq he had destroyed, he should have included in his agreement (as the shoes being thrown at him were flying around his head) a provision about residual forces being kept there, but Bush and the Iraqis (WHO WANTED US GONE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE) did not negotiate such a provision…..
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 10:41
Swear all you want, re-write history all you want, but in this day in age there is digital video… go to youtube or such, pull up debates… when asked if he wanted a sofa, he replies:
NO
You can talk all about bush, or reasons why, good or bad, but to deny who said what on tape is a bit… well, weird if you ask me.
shindigg September 23rd, 2014 at 11:00
Yea, right! I’m the one rewriting history…Please! If he wasn’t considering some residual forces being kept there, then why did he attempt to negotiate something to that effect at the time of withdrawal which was ultimately discarded when the Iraqis placed unacceptable conditions on such an idea? And for how long anyway would we have kept them there, unwanted, and as sitting ducks? Forever? And at what cost?
And you’re damn right I can talk about NO ACCOUNT BUSH if I want, because AT BEST we COULD BE BACK TO an Iraq that was like the one Bush destroyed in 2003.That one that had no terrorism or strong religious persecution in it.
If Bush would not have destroyed Iraq under false pretenses, there would be no this happening now in Iraq.
President Obama is handling a very bad situation and is doing his best to clean it up. It is not that easy to clean up catastrophes like the ones created by NO ACCOUNT Bush and Cheney’s dishonest, wrongful, dishonest actions in 2003, that destroyed secular Iraq and that had NOTHING TO DO with fighting terrorism….
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 11:10
Lets simplify, you’re bringing in a lot of extra things when I’m merely working on one for now:
Did or did not POTUS declare he didn’t want a sofa? Yes or no please, lets get this one point first, ok?
shindigg September 23rd, 2014 at 11:19
For number 1, you are harping on this as if we know for sure what the result would have been if we would have kept residual forces there unwanted. Also, like I said. for how long were we to keep them there exactly…As sitting ducks? FOREVER? And at what cost? What would he have gained from this overall compared to how Iraq was in 2003?
And number 2, I’d have to view what you are saying specifically with regards to this so called one word answer “no” that you say Obama gave about this topic.
I want to see what you are saying he said, but in context. LINK?
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 11:24
LOL, oh geez… I’m not ‘harping on it’ like anything, I’m sticking to what I wrote about:
“POTUS didn’t want to leave forces, he said that back in 2012”
That’s all I wrote, nothing else, then you not only denied it you went off on tangents that had nothing to do w/with my post on him not wanting a sofa. Period.
Link… go to c-span, look up 2012 debate for october.
shindigg September 23rd, 2014 at 12:39
The conz have been desperately harping about this in hindsight. They think it is somehow the way to switch the blame for ISIS being in Iraq from Bush to Obama. And that’s the main thing they care about and “stand for.”
I’m not going to go search for more details about why the U.S. did not keep an unwanted by Iraq residual force there that would have been contrary to the agreed upon removal date negotiated by Bush and the Iraqis. And there is no way to know what we could have expected if some residual force would have been kept there anyway, unwanted, beyond the already agreed to time line.
If I were to search, I expect that there is a more contextual answer that Obama gave about this than a simple “no,” as this is obviously a complicated situation that Bush left Obama to deal with, even though Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism before Bush’s WRONGFUL, DISHONEST ACTIONS permitted the notion of terrorists in Iraq to happen.
The Iraqis did not want a residual force left there, we know that, so they must have not been so afraid of ISIS AT THE TIME they agreed with Bush (Bush must have not been afraid of ISIS either, since he agreed with the Iraqis on U.S. troop removal and set the date.) And the Iraqis must not have been so afraid of ISIS at a time LATER THAN the time of the agreement with Bush either, when the issue of residual force was brought up again during the Obama Administration more recently and closer to the time the troops were actually withdrawn. They still wanted the troops withdrawn!
At the later time, The Iraqis STILL DID NOT want a residual American force kept there indefinitely…
Spirit of America September 23rd, 2014 at 16:44
Obama was pres when all troops left, his watch, his decision, good or bad.
Don’t search, and expect all you want, doesn’t change a thing.
(BTW, ISIS wasn’t in existence when bush was pres.)
edmeyer_able September 22nd, 2014 at 14:22
I must say that was about the least joe could say in support of POTUS, and not enough for me to watch his show again.
edmeyer_able September 22nd, 2014 at 14:22
I must say that was about the least joe could say in support of POTUS, and not enough for me to watch his show again.
juicyfruityyy September 22nd, 2014 at 14:37
So, it was business as usual..Morning Joke said nothing spectacular. Nothing that we haven’t been saying for a while. He needs his ratings. But he still won’t get them.
juicyfruityyy September 22nd, 2014 at 14:37
So, it was business as usual..Morning Joke said nothing spectacular. Nothing that we haven’t been saying for a while. He needs his ratings. But he still won’t get them.