Lauer Shocks Bachmann: Should We Show Compassion to Al Qaeda in Libya?
NBC's Matt Lauer, on Wednesday's Today show, startled Michele Bachmann as he tried to convince her that Obama's strategy of bombing Libya was a good way to show support for the rebels as he pressed the Republican Minnesota Congresswoman "If there are flickers, as you say, of al Qaeda among the rebels, would it not be a sign to them or showing them that the United States has compassion and we are willing to use our military might to help all people?" Bachmann was taken aback by the thrust of the question as she responded: "Compassion for al Qaeda?"
Lauer scrambled to clarify himself, insisting he meant the U.S. would be showing compassion for "civilians in Benghazi." Bachmann pointed out to Lauer: "Well of course we have compassion for people. That is not the point," as seen in the following exchange:
(video, audio and transcript after the jump)
MATT LAUER: Going back to my question though, had you been President on that day, March 17th, what would you have done? Would you have done nothing?
MICHELE BACHMANN: I would not have gone in.
LAUER: So would you have called the other leaders of NATO countries and said, "We support you, but we're not coming?"
BACHMANN: Well I think that what, what presidents do is they stay involved and they, they try to get their, the very best intelligence that they can. Because I think, one thing the American people need to know is that we did not know, nor did the intelligence community know who the opposition is. If we are going in - because, remember, there were, there was just testimony yesterday that there are flickers of al Qaeda. We don't know how much al Qaeda is involved in the opposition forces. Why would we want to strengthen al Qaeda's hand in North Africa? That certainly wouldn't be in the interests of the United States.
LAUER: Well, well let me, let me flip that coin on, on its, on its other side. If there are flickers, as you say, of al Qaeda among the rebels, would it not be a sign to them or showing them that the United States has compassion and we are willing to use our military might to help all people?
BACHMANN: Compassion for al Qaeda?
LAUER: No, compassion for civilians in, in Benghazi.
BACHMANN: Well of course we have compassion for people. That is not the point. There is no more compassionate nation in the world than the United States of America. We are the ones that offer the humanitarian aide. But in this instance, under the Obama Doctrine, the President of the United States is using the United States military for the purpose of humanitarian aide. This is a marked difference from the way that the United States military has been used before. The Obama Doctrine is very, very different from any interventions that we have done in the past.
The following is the full interview as it was aired on the March 30 Today show:
MATT LAUER: Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann from Minnesota has been critical of U.S. involvement in Libya calling it, quote, "President Obama's war." Congresswoman Bachmann, good morning to you.
[On screen headline: "Target: Libya, What Would Bachmann Do Differently?"]
REP. MICHELE BACHMANN, MINNESOTA-R: Good morning, Matt.
LAUER: I want to take you back to March 17th. It was a Thursday, it was the day that Moammar Khaddafy told the people of Libya and Benghazi that his troops were on the way, they would show no mercy and they would find them in their closets. If you had been President of the United States on that day what would you have done specifically?
BACHMANN: Well I don't think at that point that we had seen the threat to the United States either from Khaddafy or have we seen a vital American national interest at risk. That really needs to be our first line of defense. Because unfortunately there are atrocities that do happen in different countries in the world. We just saw this weekend slaughter in Syria. So based upon that criteria humanitarian intervention, which apparently is the new Obama Doctrine-
LAUER: Right.
BACHMANN: That would be the basis for the United States to enter into one country after another. I don't think that's in the American interest-
LAUER: So-
BACHMANN: -for us to enter into one country after another.
LAUER: Going back to my question though, had you been President on that day, March 17th, what would you have done? Would you have done nothing?
BACHMANN: I would not have gone in.
LAUER: So would you have called the other leaders of NATO countries and said, "We support you, but we're not coming?"
BACHMANN: Well I think that what, what presidents do is they stay involved and they, they try to get their, the very best intelligence that they can. Because I think, one thing the American people need to know is that we did not know, nor did the intelligence community know who the opposition is. If we are going in - because, remember, there were, there was just testimony yesterday that there are flickers of al Qaeda. We don't know how much al Qaeda is involved in the opposition forces. Why would we want to strengthen al Qaeda's hand in North Africa? That certainly wouldn't be in the interests of the United States.
LAUER: Well, well let me, let me flip that coin on, on its, on its other side. If there are flickers, as you say, of al Qaeda among the rebels, would it not be a sign to them or showing them that the United States has compassion and we are willing to use our military might to help all people?
BACHMANN: Compassion for al Qaeda?
LAUER: No, compassion for civilians in, in Benghazi.
LAUER: Well of course we have compassion for people. That is not the point. There is no more compassionate nation in the world than the United States of America. We are the ones that offer the humanitarian aide. But in this instance, under the Obama Doctrine, the President of the United States is using the United States military for the purpose of humanitarian aide. This is a marked difference from the way that the United States military has been used before. The Obama Doctrine is very, very different from any interventions that we have done in the past.
LAUER: Alright, let me ask you one more question, again, placing you in the White House. If you are the President of the United States, given what you know now, what's taking place on the ground in Libya, would you make a decision to arm the rebels?
BACHMANN: I would not. Because, again, we do not know enough about who they are. And we also have not identified it an American vital international interest. That must be done before the United States can intervene in another nation's affairs.
LAUER: So as I ask you a couple of questions asking what you would do if you were president, are you running?
BACHMANN: No. I haven't made a decision to run. I'm going into the early primary states and speaking to primary voters, but I won't be making the decision, I don't think, until some time this summer.
LAUER: Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann. Congresswoman Bachmann, thanks for your time this morning. I appreciate it.
BACHMANN: Good to see you, Matt. Thanks.
—Geoffrey Dickens is the Senior News Analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here
- Geoffrey Dickens's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Matt Lauer.. Where was your visible compassion, during Congo war
Submitted by Gary Hall on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 12:43pm.
Yea - journalists as well, Matt Lauer?
Where were you and your ilk, in 1997 (from 1997 thru 2000) just after President Clinton stood in Rwanda promising, "Never Again," and a horrible broad civil war re-erupted next door in the DR Congo?
By the time Clinton left office, some 2 1/2 -3 1/2 million people had died in the deadliest single conflict since the end of WW II. And the genocides - Return to the Congo
The national MSM managed to keep the story away from their audience, and to the best of my knowledge not a soul has ever ventured to ask President Clinton why he, once again, looked the other way.
Where were you and your ilk during the mid-1990's - during the horrors of the Taliban's conquest of Afghanistan? The human rights violations - woman's rights violations - the genocide?
Compassion - LOL. You folks only have compassion when it serves your political party.
(;~/ gar
Interesting, very
Submitted by dscott on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 12:50pm.
Interesting, very interesting, do I detect the MSM and Obama's regime attempting to legitimize al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood and terrorists in general? Think about this, Qadhafi says his fight is against al Qaeda, now this is probably nothing more than propaganda on his part to dissuade foreign support for the rebellion against him by tarring the rebellion as nothing more than an extension of al Qaeda. On the other hand, the Muslim Brotherhood, a sister terror group of al Qaeda publicly stated they want Qadhafi dead (so they can seize power in Libya). People who have fought under al Qaeda's banner in Afghanistan are indeed fighting AGAINST Qadhafi. Obama's Director of National Intelligence James Clapper says the Muslim Brotherhood has changed and is no longer a terrorist organization (despite being branded as one in 2005 by the State Department). So who is being the most truthful here? Perversely, it is Qadhafi who is more (relatively) accurate in his statements. However, we all know that a HALF TRUTH is still a LIE, thus relative accuracy is merely a means of deception. All lies are born from hidden self interest, we already know what Qadhafi's is, what is Obama's self interest?
So was it Lauer's slip of the tongue or a trial balloon to see IF conservatives would be buffaloed into the quicksand of compassionate interventionism? Liberals pay attention, the answer is NO!
Whatever game Obama is playing at, it is a very dangerous one. But until that conspiracy is outed with a smoking gun confession, it's better to play this as Obama's continuing incompetence making him unfit as President.
A reasonable explanation of
Submitted by dscott on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 2:23pm.
A reasonable explanation of Obama's self interest in the Libyan War: http://theothermccain.com/2011/03/30/libya-serious-or-not/
Can you say the 2012 election campaign? Pay particular attention to the strawman tactics by Obama to paint himself as a moderate.
Now Ive heard EVERYTHING!
Submitted by brutony1 on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 12:51pm.
But I shouldnt be surprised! This is just what the left wants-compassion for Al-Qaeda, admitting OUR mistakes and the errors of our ways, holding hands together, walking on sunshine, and we all lived happily ever after! Wow-if I told my 3 yr old twin nieces that story, theyd laugh me out of their room!
When will liberals WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE! -Me
This sounds familiar
Submitted by jon_torlin on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 12:55pm.
Where have I heard something like this before......
Oh yeah, when the Chairman talked about his Muslim religion before Stephie corrected him and said Christian religion.
-Jon
So we should show the Bully that we can be nice...
Submitted by Red Jeep on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 1:05pm.
...and then the Bully seeing our niceness says "Ah....," and leaves us alone. Is that what you were thinking there. Matt? ..........Idiot.
P.S. Hug a thug. Show a Bully you care.
Well, it seems that Obama's
Submitted by dscott on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 1:04pm.
Well, it seems that Obama's TV speech came with a 2 day expiration date.
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/03/30/cnn-us-changing-war-strategy-to-al...
"Now the US says that NATO may start attacking Tripoli itself, presumably to get to Gaddafi’s command and control functions, which makes perfect sense if the mission objective was regime change. There are no reports of massacres in Libya’s capital at the moment, at least none which NATO or the White House have publicized.If the mission is the protection of civilians, which is what the UN mandate states (which Obama said he would not exceed in his speech Monday night), how will bombing Tripoli accomplish that? We will increase the odds for significant collateral civilian losses, not decrease them."
In other words, HE LIED with a straight face to the entire country right to your faces...
This is not about saving innocent civilians, this is taking sides in a civil war in order to save face.
That's all he ever does, dscott
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 2:06pm.
Lie straight to our faces.
He does it every time he opens his stupid mouth. "We're not going it alone". I don't know if we're going to make it to 2012 at the rate we're going.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Don't bet on it
Submitted by jon_torlin on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 2:54pm.
I wouldn't bet on making it to 2012. We're at March 2011, and that's more than a year to November 2012. Everything he's done and everything that's happened is having a cascading effect because the Repubs are all but spineless in taking action or they are virtually powerless.
People remember how Bill Clinton got caught up in the impeachment process and what it took, well, that was because Clinton is an American and did cooperate once the jig was up.
But we have someone who is an anti-American and gives the finger to the law once it's pointed out what ever he does such as ignoring the pointed-out illegality of continuing the ban as well as unConstitutional health care law. Hell, he ordered an illegal attack on Libya under false pretenses and he didn't care that it was out in the open that he did that. All that means is we can't treat him like past presidents because that takes more time than this country has and people are blind to that. People think he will follow the rules when in fact he doesn't. The best example of this would be the so-called health care summit where the Republicans thought they could somehow reason with him and did a great job of it too, just that they weren't reasoning with a normal person.
The manchild has committed crimes against the country several times already and needs to be removed right away and that needs to take more than a "cease and desist" order. That's all there is to it.
-Jon
jon, You nailed it with spineless repubs
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 3:08pm.
It appears they, like the majority of the American sheeple, are going to sit by and watch Obama totally dismantle this country, without even the faintest attempt at trying to stop him.
There is a point of decline beyond which this nation, as it was founded, will be irretrievable.
I think we are right on top of that point.
We have months, not years.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
I saw this segment this morning,
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 1:12pm.
and my first thought was Lauer only invited Bachman on to try and trap her in a gotcha or making a gaffe. Too bad for him it backfired BADLY and took a sizable chunk out of his dhimmi-azz.
He absolutely meant "why not a peace overture to Al-Q?"
You know how to tell what the dead giveaway to his true motive was (prospecting for a MB gaffe) ?
...when is Bachman ever on for only a one minute segment?
Answer: NEVER, except when Lauer embarrasses himself so bad he can't obfuscate his way out of it.
Net positives: 1) MB did not smile much. 2) Vieira's disdainful puss when Lauer handed off to her (not in the clip).
Oh, but this gets even
Submitted by dscott on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 1:18pm.
Oh, but this gets even better:
U.S. says Libyan rebels may sell oil
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/28/us-libya-oil-rebels-idUSTRE72R...
Every revolution should be self financing, don't you think? Clever side step of the UN mandate NOT to supply arms to the Libyan rebels. Leave it to a lawyer to make the rules nothing more than a facile contrivance to do as one pleases. Kind of like Obama's consistent disregard of the law here in the US. So as time permits we are allowing the rebels to steal oil shipments from Libya, legally sell it and then buys arms. And you wondered why Qadhafi was trying to shut down oil production by any means...
Even more importantly . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 3:29pm.
. . . the idea that the rebels will sell the oil to (whom else) Libya's usual European customers, only reinforces the claims by AQ, Hugo Chavez, Louis Farrakhan, et al, that this war is really about oil and not humanitarian support as we claim.
The uprisings across the Arab world appear to be spontaneous -- thanks to the internet -- but this isn't to rule out that AQ and other radical Muslims are already positioning themselves to fill in the leadership vacuum once these Arab leaders are gone.
All I know is if I were
Submitted by dscott on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 3:49pm.
All I know is if I were Qadhafi, I'd be leary of doctors with syringes loaded with thiopental. Mubarack and Ben Ali ended up in comas, they say from a stroke...that's what they say for public consumption. Both these former leaders stepped down and within days...
Uprisings spontaneous as a food price hike. Ironically, IMO all of this started with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid passing a law in the US 2 years ago mandating the increased use of ethanol to 5 times what we are using now, hence the response of the ethanol industry was to massively increase the acreage of crops dedicated to ethanol production. The result: acreage for food production went down causing a constraint in supply. The rest is history. What we are seeing here is the 2009 food riots on steroids because the Arab governments didn't subsidize the rising cost of food quickly enough.
Our entire Libya fiasco can be summed up as the fallout from the incompetence of Democrat Ethanol policy enriching their campaign contributors. Click the link folks, click the link and all becomes clear.
Hat tip drudge: Exclusive:
Submitted by dscott on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 4:54pm.
Hat tip drudge: Exclusive: Obama authorizes secret support for Libya rebels http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-libya-usa-order-idUSTRE72T6...
At this point Obama is so desperate to save face with the potential of Qadhafi staying, he now is in the situation to say what UN mandate? It said what? I didn't read that. That's not what I understood...
You have got to love the irony here, before it was Qadhafi has to go, now it's about whether if Qadhafi doesn't go will Obama be around long enough to matter. ROFL
Obama supports rebels
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 5:03pm.
Color me shocked. Not. We don't know that it is in the interests of the U.S. to support these rebels, but I"m sure BO sees them as muslims to whom he can prove his anti-colonialism.
If he's not bringing down the U.S. intentionally he is the stupidest president we've ever had.
So Obama lied...again? No big
Submitted by Beukeboom on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 10:45am.
So Obama lied...again? No big shock there.
The questions I have are a) when will Obama be held accountable for his lies? and b) by whom?
Why
Submitted by grammajane on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 1:22pm.
Why do these conservatives continue to give their time to the liberal and bias media? The only reason they are asked on these ridiculous shows, is to point fingers and praise the Messiah. Am thinking Republican's have many more important jobs to complete then wasting time with loosers. Reid and Schummer have blasted the Tea Party all week and nary a word from conservatives..............except Rush. Get with it Republicans....
Grammajane
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 2:03pm.
You might enjoy this. Allen West gets it, and OMO!, he can shovel it right back in Reid & Schumer's faces too.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Good link, thanx.
Submitted by Red Jeep on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 4:06pm.
Got Shark Tank bookmarked now.
Allen West DOES get it.
Shark Tank
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 4:11pm.
They are big fans of Allen and Marco.
I missed the Town Hall where Allen told the CAIR guy not to blow smoke up his butt...LOL, it was held about a mile from here. I am going to have to be sure to go to the next one, with the video camera rolling. Seems every time he's out in public he does something memorable (like mocking Reid, I laugh so hard every time I play it, and this is perhaps the 4th time I've posted it here).
Glad you enjoyed, too.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
I'd like to know how guests are scheduled
Submitted by Red Jeep on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 2:19pm.
Does Matt make a "hit" list of people he would like to target (look at the gun terms I used) or do politicians call and say they are available, or both?
If politicians like Bachmann are volunteering to go on I would question their judgement.
If conservatives stayed off these shows they would be boring and the shows would lose audience.
"Show them no mercy, for you shall receive none... "
Submitted by Fenwick on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 1:44pm.
Remember who Al Qaeda is and what they DO!
A Really Stupid Question!
Submitted by Grumpy in Arizona on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 2:25pm.
Where is the “compassion” for the troops we are sending in harms way?
Freudian slip?
Submitted by Beukeboom on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 2:36pm.
Freudian slip?
"If there are flickers, as
Submitted by NC Cop on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 2:41pm.
"If there are flickers, as you say, of al Qaeda among the rebels, would it not be a sign to them or showing them that the United States has compassion and we are willing to use our military might to help all people?"
So screw the Iraqis, save the Libyans!!! Got it, Matt.
The complete stupidity, ignorance and hypocrisy of the left is why I am glad that I have NEVER voted for a democrat.
OK - I'm the President
Submitted by dreamsincolor on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 2:49pm.
LAUER: So would you have called the other leaders of NATO countries and said, "We support you, but we're not coming?"
[ring-ring=calling "nato leaders"]
Yea, that thing, look, we have enough s**t going on already, drop me a memo on how that turns out for you. You see, we have had some experience dealing with this lot, and, well, they don't play very well with others and we just don't have to put up with that s**t anymore.
We'll watch from the satellites and when you're done and nothing has changed except for the population count, give us a ring, we'll do lunch.
"LAUER: So would you have
Submitted by NC Cop on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 2:54pm.
"LAUER: So would you have called the other leaders of NATO countries and said, "We support you, but we're not coming?"
Yep. Just like all those nations did with the United States and Iraq. They all stated that the world would be a better place without Saddam, but they weren't willing to help.
Seriously, do the progressives/liberals/democrats not have a memory before Jan. 20, 2009?!?!?
Anybody wonder why the media stopped talking about Egypt??
Submitted by 10ksnooker on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 2:57pm.
If the ones in charge are still the ones in charge has their been a revolution?
Need more ... http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Law-to-stifle-protest-and-demonstrations-...
At least some still care ...
Fun w/ Matt Lauer.
Submitted by Gary Hall on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 3:08pm.
OK - that was for real... now what if:
So when to pay attention to what Moamer Kafhafi says?
Only when the MSM can use it to their advantage. I can only imagine that had Bush, or any other Republican, been president right now, that one of the loud challenges to the administration - and it would be led by the likes of Matt Lauer - would be:
(;~/ gary
So then,
Submitted by Ashrak on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 3:28pm.
Lauer wants to take my guns away from me, along with everyone else, and show compassion to Al Qaeda too?
I am sure Panama Tingles will hammer this gaff as Bachmann's and twist it to be Bachmann claiming she wants to show compassion for AL Qaeda.
Can it get any more stupid than it is? Really?
The Lauer-Idiot Test
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 3:43pm.
LAUER: " . . . If there are flickers, as you say, of al Qaeda among the rebels, would it not be a sign to them or showing them that the United States has compassion and we are willing to use our military might to help all people?"
Run this simple test, Mr. Lauer. Substitute the word Nazis for al Qaeda, and re-read your question.
Where is Obama's support?
Submitted by okiehawk44 on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 4:09pm.
Obama is either the world's greatest illusionist or its greatest fraud. Maybe both.
→ Bachmann Shocked?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 4:41pm.
She was only shocked that Lauer's burning desire to witness another 9-11 would flow so smoothly from his mouth.
Imagine Walter Cronkite, a bona fide liberal, lobbying for the rehabilitation of the Third Reich.
The Leftwing Media Hacks...
Submitted by Kuso Jiji on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 5:18pm.
...posing as journalists is the biggest fraud of our time. these people truly are a branch of the democratic party and leading us down the path of destruction. Matt Lauer isn't worthy enough to sharpen Rep Bachmann's pencil much less interview her.
Sheer and utter stupidity
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 5:28pm.
Does Lauer have any memory of Afganistan? Where we helped the "rebels" who turned on us as soon as they won control of the country? And showed NO compassion to their own people who were Christians, women, or gay?
It absolutely boggles the mind.
Compassion?
Submitted by GeneralAl on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 5:30pm.
O.K.! How about some compassion like they showed Danny Pearl? How about the contractor? How about the four engineers whose bodies they hung from a bridge? How about the victims of the Twin Towers? Here's my compassion, nuke the worthless infidel pigs!
"Old Soldiers never die, they just fade away"!
I thought Michelle Bachman
Submitted by kwbrownie2003 on Wed, 03/30/2011 - 7:46pm.
I thought Michelle Bachman was supposed to be a "loon" or a "bimbo". Sure didn't look that way to me.
twelfth iman
Submitted by vcb-tn on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 1:23am.
..."barry", "obama", the "bamster", "baraq huessein obama" ... is starting to seem like he may indeed be.. their twelfth iman. assisting, defending the muslim brotherhood, al'queada? on behalf of the u.s gov't, nato, europe.... subverting.
Unilateral Disarmament
Submitted by jcpenny on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 7:19am.
This is merely an extension of the Left's desire in the 70s and 80s to have the US lay down our nukes, The belief was that if we showed them we meant no harm, our enemies would do the same and we'd all live happily ever after. It was niave bafoonery then and still is. Read some commentary from the region, especially prior 2011 and you'll see a far more honest statement of the popular belief in the Arab world.
What the Left, the MSM, and regrettably our POTUS just don't understand is that the vast majority of the Middle East hates us. When this is over they will still hate us. Having spent some time working with them and reading a great book called "The Arab Mind" by Raphael Patai, I can confirm that any news that comes from the natives is spoken for EFFECT and not FACT. The supporters of active involvement in these internal crises need to grow and realize that there are 100 times more angry zealots in the world than their flower children.
The way things are going this year, it looks like the only good result is fewer of the both.
jcp
Only if they hand over bin
Submitted by wiwf on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 9:00am.
Only if they hand over bin Laden first.
I'm happy to show Al-Qaeda Compassion
Submitted by Chris Of Rights on Fri, 04/01/2011 - 9:31am.
Kill 'em quickly.
In case anyone was wondering
Submitted by dscott on Fri, 04/01/2011 - 11:29am.
In case anyone was wondering at the progress of the War in Libya, Hillary says we are doing all we can by bombing and strafing the Libyan army.
Backing the rebels, no questions asked
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/52253.html
At this point are liberals going to acknowledge that the UN mandate has been exceeded and this is now a US led WAR? NATO being a figleaf for the US...
So when the bombing and strafing aren't enough will there be boots on the ground? To be continued...