Instead of slowing down the process of bringing in Syrian refugees due to serious problems with vetting them, which includes the rampant fraud with fake Syrian passports, the Obama administration has decided to speed up the process and process 600 Syrian refugees a day according to this Washington Examiner report. The goal is to process 10,000 Syrian refugees for entry into the United States by September 30th. Now, the FBI director stated months ago that there’s no way to vet these people due to no data bases to check their passports, names, etc. against, but leave it to the Obama administration to just write another fake narrative.
Obama’s Syrian refugee program on steroids
Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Politics, Terrorism
libertybelle diaries 
I have it on good authority that the experts recently laid off after finishing the Healthcare.gov site set up just such a database.
Weren’t the Healthcare.gov experts outsourced – vaguely remember it being a Canadian company? Nothing would surprise me, because “careful vetting” isn’t the goal – it’s getting the 10,000 or more Syrian refugees into the US before Obama leaves office they’re working furiously to accomplish.
Wellll … I’ll admit what I did using Healthcare.gov was simply a means to make the joke work. Quickly as possible. “Just such a database” being ridiculous on its face I figured, needed some icing.
On another front – recall Hillary and the White House (among others) ridiculing Cruz’ suggestion that what’s needed is “carpet bombing ISIS”?
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/fox-host-scorches-cruz-over-carpet-bombing-isis-rhetoric-it-proves-you-have-no-military-experience/
Well. What a difference a few months make:
http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2016/04/09/b-52s-arrive-qatar-join-isis-bombing-campaign/82829600/
Hope they have some strategy beyond bombing, but with our fearless leader from behind, I wouldn’t count on it.
“Hope they have some strategy beyond bombing … I wouldn’t count on it.”
Yep.
http://warontherocks.com/2016/04/the-end-of-the-american-empire/
But what? Or, perhaps better asked … How?
Interesting read, agree with some points, disagree with others. Kerry and Obama have no clue how to negotiate from a position of strength, so this any hope that some “peace deal” for Syria that Kerry works out with the Russians will be advantageous to US interests falls in the realm of wishful thinking. The Obama administration has been singularly inept at negotiating or engaging with other world leaders in constructive ways to further a comprehensive US national strategy, mostly because they have no clue how to formulate that kind of strategy.
Among the 2016 candidates, I haven’t heard a single one advocate what I expect in a comprehensive US national strategy. With the dems you get Bernie with no military option and with Hillary she likes military use as a personal tool to boost her favorabilty poll numbers rather than as a means toward some loftier US policy objectives. On the GOP side – Trump is for “total war” options, Cruz wants to go for the air show optics and outsourcing the boots on the ground and Kasich, if he’s even relevant, wants to redo Desert Storm…
This article highlights historical viewpoints most American foreign policy experts ignore, but I still don’t see much in the way of an “American vision” for a comprehensive national security strategy in this article. Lots of bits of historical bits to consider though.
Agree .. mostly. Admitting I don’t have a clue to Kasich’s “wants” probably for the reason you’ve given .. “if he’s even relevant.”
As for Hillary’s “boosting” anything – well, for me at any rate; that’s a lost cause. Libya’s post-Hillary example always seems to come back to my thoughts adding only to my heartburn. (I would imagine its even worse for the actual Libyans if, they have any time to consider “What has Hillary done for us lately?”)
But as you sum up – “Lots of bits to consider.”