Game on, air strikes in Syria

[roo_ster]

Did Coolidge graduate from the same school George A. Custer did? ("Them thar iz FRIENDLY INJUNS!!")  Or perhaps the same Neville Chamberlain did?
ISIS has actually killed Americans and stated their desire to hit us.  Has Boko Haram?    Why is it guys like you complain about us wanting to be cowboys and fix the whole world when we want to TKO the one group that wants to whack us on one day then on the next you wonder why we're not expressing some onanistic desire to blow up the entire evil world full of evildoers?   

And hitting ISIS is not in our interest, since they have whacked two Americans and have expressed their intent to attack the homeland?

Coolidge had more sense than any 50 contemporary policritters.  

"It is more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones"
----Calvin Coolidge

"They criticize me for harping on the obvious; if all the folks in the United States would do the few simple things they know they ought to do, most of our big problems would take care of themselves."
----Calvin Coolidge

Do spend some time learning about him.  It will be time well rewarded.  You might learn something about conservatism.

=====================

ISIS killed two American journalists dumb enough to wander around a war zone known to have countless nutso Muslims of every stripe.  If it wasn't ISIS, it might have been Assad's goons or one of the FSA factions.  ISIS did not reach into America and grab them.  Not impressed.

=====================

Why is it guys like you complain about us wanting to be cowboys and fix the whole world when we want to TKO the one group that wants to whack us on one day then on the next you wonder why we're not expressing some onanistic desire to blow up the entire evil world full of evildoers?  

Rhetorical question is rhetorical.

[Monkeyleg]

I'm really torn on any military involvement now in the Middle East, in part because the involvement of the past ten years hasn't worked very well (why didn't Bush & Co do a better job of planning for after the war?), and in large part because I don't trust Obama to not make things worse. It's his trademark.

That said, ISIS has killed Americans. Whether they deserved it because they were in the enemy's back yard can be debated. I don't know if they really have the capability to reach US shores, but I'm sure they have the capability to cause trouble for us elsewhere in the world. By trouble, I mean death for Americans.

I learned something recently that is related to this debate. I knew that, in the early years of Hitler's buildup of the German military, the armies of France and Great Britain were large enough that either country could have taken on the Germans and forced Hitler to stop expanding his military. I didn't know that, when the Germans put troops along the Rhine in 1936, the officers were under orders to retreat at the first sign of the French army. The French never sent their army, though, figuring that it would provoke the Germans.

Inaction on our part will embolden ISIS. I think there's no doubt about that. The question is what their capability will be in the next few years, not what it is now.

[MicroBalrog]

"It is more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones"
----Calvin Coolidge

Of course, that is no longer true.

[Tallpine]

Of course, that is no longer true.

Yes, because we have to pass them to find out what they are about 

[agricola]

Inaction on our part will embolden ISIS. I think there's no doubt about that. The question is what their capability will be in the next few years, not what it is now.

I am not sure about this, tbh.  

The raison d'etre of ISIS is that they are the representation of fundamentalist Sunni Islam; that they are the ones the Americans want to bomb, that the one that is making all the sexy Youtube videos, the ones that the Gulf States should send their money to, the ones that the Muslim communities in the West should aspire to join up with etc etc.  Thats why al-Q (who previously got those recruits and that money) have fallen out with IS, why the al-Nusra front are actually fighting them etc etc.  By just bombing them all you are doing is feeding into that, advertising them to the Sunni world without having the actual means to extirpate them.

Perhaps it would be better to deal with IS by not dealing with them - for instance, having the threat of IS to deal with is radically improving the standard of governance and the quality of the military in Iraq; its helping to lead to the biggest rapprochement with Iran since the revolution; its welding the Kurds into the base for the West that they should have become in the early 90s, and as long as the "Caliphate" exists as a rival entity the Saudis arent going around the world spreading their particular blend of money and fundamentalism.  You also have the actual experience - the genocide, the rapes, the murders, the corruption - that many of those unfortunate to live under that regime will remember and spread around the world.  

In short, if Iraq and Syria can get rid of them it will be a lot better for the West than if we do it.  

[roo_ster]

Of course, that is no longer true.

I suggest you follow the US Congress and various state houses more closely if you think that.

[MicroBalrog]

I suggest you follow the US Congress and various state houses more closely if you think that.

My logic is simple:

1. A large amount of awful stuff is already law, and people are daily arrested/fined/imprisoned/badgered under it.

2. The laws that exist empower thousands of bureaucrats and busybodies to "legislate from their desk", creating literally hundreds of new regulations daily.

3. Even if no new laws were passed by any legislature ever again, these injustices would continue.

4. Positional warfare is more expensive, and incurs more casualties, than blitzkrieg/deep battle operations.

5. Therefore the goal should be not gridlock, but a succession of merciless and brutal repeals and privatizations, aimed at the schwerpunkts of the welfare/police state.

5. MERCILESSLY REPEAL AND DESTROY THE NEW DEAL.

[MicroBalrog]

P.S. The perfect revolutionary must be fearless, ruthless, and shameless.

[Balog]

We aren't targeting Syrian government or military targets unless "known" to house ISIS/ISIL leadership/members.

So if another country bombs our civilians that's ok?

[MicroBalrog]

Do you honestly things that targeted air strikes with guided munitions on positions which are known to be held by armed enemy combatants is the same thing as indiscriminate attacks on civilians a la Dresden?

[roo_ster]

My logic is simple:

1. A large amount of awful stuff is already law, and people are daily arrested/fined/imprisoned/badgered under it.

2. The laws that exist empower thousands of bureaucrats and busybodies to "legislate from their desk", creating literally hundreds of new regulations daily.

3. Even if no new laws were passed by any legislature ever again, these injustices would continue.

4. Positional warfare is more expensive, and incurs more casualties, than blitzkrieg/deep battle operations.

5. Therefore the goal should be not gridlock, but a succession of merciless and brutal repeals and privatizations, aimed at the schwerpunkts of the welfare/police state.

5. MERCILESSLY REPEAL AND DESTROY THE NEW DEAL.

I understand the logic and buy into it.  

But liberty-minded folk are not able to execute given realities in Congress.  The House has passed dozens of bills that Harry Reid never brought to the floor.  Given that reality, the best one can hope for is to block bad laws.  Like the immivasion amnesty bill.  (Sure would have been nice to have prevented Obamacare from being passed.) Even if the supposedly conservative party gets a majority in both houses, there will still be plenty of bad laws to stop.

I would LOVE for liberty-minded folk to go on the offensive.  For one thing, we need to get better at lawfare.

Do you honestly things that targeted air strikes with guided munitions on positions which are known to be held by armed enemy combatants is the same thing as indiscriminate attacks on civilians a la Dresden?

I don;t think he does.  But, "targeted" does not mean "without collateral damage."  Also, in many cases a much less targeted array that does quite a bit of collateral damage is useful as a pedagogical tool.  Hama is remembered not only because it was bloody & destructive, but becasue it was effective.

[MicroBalrog]

Not everything that is effective should be done.

[roo_ster]

Not everything that is effective should be done.

True, but there needs to be a cost to harboring the enemy. 

"The guerrilla must move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea."
----Mao Tse Tung

"I can make this march, and I will make Georgia howl!"
----William Tecumseh Sherman

Until those enabling the enemy decide it is more painful to oppose us than to oppose the enemy, they need to hurt.  Effectively, that means fewer GPS guided munitions and rattling their tea cups.

[agricola]

Do you honestly things that targeted air strikes with guided munitions on positions which are known to be held by armed enemy combatants is the same thing as indiscriminate attacks on civilians a la Dresden?

Dresden wasnt an "indiscriminate attack on civilians"; you are better than this.

[MicroBalrog]

Dresden wasnt an "indiscriminate attack on civilians"; you are better than this.

I am aware of the argument that the aerial bombing of Dresden was justified for a variety of reasons.

But it's clearly far more indiscriminate than modern bombing operations are, I can't see how you can dispute that.

[Tallpine]

Germany indiscriminately bombed England, too 

May not have been exactly right, but I'm pretty sure there was a bit of retribution involved.

[TommyGunn]

They killed two Americans who were essentially playing in their backyard.  Wake me when they do something here in the US.  Americans are murdered in 3rd world shitholes on a regular basis.  We only paid attention to these guys because they're Muslim and they recorded it. 

Again, doesn't it sound to you like they're trying to get us to engage them?  Why would we play into their hands like that? 

Chris

I won't be able to if you're one of the victims ....... 

[TommyGunn]

Coolidge had more sense than any 50 contemporary policritters.  

"It is more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones"
----Calvin Coolidge

"They criticize me for harping on the obvious; if all the folks in the United States would do the few simple things they know they ought to do, most of our big problems would take care of themselves."
----Calvin Coolidge

Do spend some time learning about him.  It will be time well rewarded.  You might learn something about conservatism.

=====================

ISIS killed two American journalists dumb enough to wander around a war zone known to have countless nutso Muslims of every stripe.  If it wasn't ISIS, it might have been Assad's goons or one of the FSA factions.  ISIS did not reach into America and grab them.  Not impressed.

=====================

Rhetorical question is rhetorical.

And Abraham Lincoln once claimed that "all the armies of europe, asia, and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth could not by force take a drink from the Ohio (river) , or make an attack on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years."
Someone should have reminded him about the British eating lunch at the White House, then burning it down, and sending the congresscritters heading off to the hills, during the War of 1812. 


I'm fairly familiar with Coolidge ...pretty certain he wasn't too cognizant of our current problems with radical Islamists.   I don't think this problem will take care of itself.  But you can go on pretending it will and worshipping a dead president.

[brimic]

Let the Muzzies take care of their iwn problems. Every time we pick sides, arm, train obe group while bombing another always ends up in fail.

9/11 wasn't so much a terrorist success as it was an impitence of domestic safeguards.  Same with the Boston Marathon bombers. Same with the attack on Ben Ghazi. In every instance,  a government agency knew about and let well known terrorists into the country, or knew of an impending attack and stood down. Heck, with the Boston bombers,  even the Russians were screaming to us that these guys were aholes, yet the FBI ignored the warnings.
The real enemies to America and our way of life aren't in the middle east,  they are in D. C.

[brimic]

Did Coolidge graduate from the same school George A. Custer did? ("Them thar iz FRIENDLY INJUNS!!")  Or perhaps the same Neville Chamberlain did?
ISIS has actually killed Americans and stated their desire to hit us.  Has Boko Haram?    Why is it guys like you complain about us wanting to be cowboys and fix the whole world when we want to TKO the one group that wants to whack us on one day then on the next you wonder why we're not expressing some onanistic desire to blow up the entire evil world full of evildoers?   

And hitting ISIS is not in our interest, since they have whacked two Americans and have expressed their intent to attack the homeland?

Lol. How many Americans were murdered in Chicago last weekend? How many of the murderers might have been illegals?
Surgical bombing strikes in Chicago wouldn't even violate borders of sovereign countries.
How about north korea? They've put several americans in hard labor camps for being stupid enough to cross the border.  Nit only that, but the norks constantly bluster about destroying America and actually do have WMDs. If you are going to be intellectually consistant, where is your demand for bombing missions and boots on the ground in North Korea?

[roo_ster]

I'm fairly familiar with Coolidge ...pretty certain he wasn't too cognizant of our current problems with radical Islamists.   I don't think this problem will take care of itself.  But you can go on pretending it will and worshipping a dead president.

I'm mighty fond of dead presidents.  I like to collect them, even.

And given Coolidge's stance and action regarding immigration, I've no doubt the actions he took would be more effective at safeguarding Americans than any taken the last 30 years or so.  See, if Congress had not repealed his Immigration Act of 1924 (in 1964), the 9/11 hijackers would not have been in America to bring down the twin towers.  Mohammed Atta and his goat-humping buddies would have to find their way to Hell without passing through American territory.

So, some dead president pretty much had the problem solved before it was a problem.  It took leftists and neo-conservatives to un-solve it and entangle us in the Forever War in the ME.  

Please forgive me if I look to a time when our policritters had a lick of sense.

[mtnbkr]

I won't be able to if you're one of the victims ....... 

Given my proximity to DC, I'm more likely to be a victim of terrorism than you, yet I'm at much greater risk of dying in an auto accident on my way to work each morning (even when I work from home...might fall down the stairs).

There are greater threats to us here in CONUS than goat humping primitives on the other side of the planet. 

Chris

[MicroBalrog]

Germany indiscriminately bombed England, too 

May not have been exactly right, but I'm pretty sure there was a bit of retribution involved.

Again, I did not actually say what England did was a crime, or even wrong.

[MicroBalrog]

Death to the Islamofascist. America strikes from the air, ISIL cowards burn.

[MicroBalrog]

Most Wanted Terrorist in the world killed.