Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on September 02, 2014, 02:31:34 PM
-
Do we have a strategy yet?
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/09/02/video-reportedly-shows-beheading-reporter-steven-sotloff-by-isis/
-
Wearing a controversial suit while you continue sounding weak and vacillatory doesn't count? I still say the golf intimidation is a slow burn.
-
Yeah, who woulda thunk the White House sending ISIS that #we'retellingeveryoneyour'eabigmeanie tweet wouldn't work?
-
Yeah, who woulda thunk the White House sending ISIS that #we'retellingeveryoneyour'eabigmeanie tweet wouldn't work?
Well, who could really blame them for getting it wrong? These people are SOOO last century. 14th Century even!
We can just sit back and relax, because they are clearly "on the wrong side of history."
-
Plus there are people going on record that they have been briefing Obama for at least a year now on ISIS and their growing influence. Just waiting for an attack here in the states that is ISIS related.
-
Well, who could really blame them for getting it wrong? These people are SOOO last century. 14th Century even!
We can just sit back and relax, because they are clearly "on the wrong side of history."
I've been thinking about it, and there is a crucial distinction between current events and previous headbutting between the West and Islam/its political entities. The historical conflicts have occurred between competing civilizations.
What we're dealing with today is a war between civilization and barbarism. There is no negotiation with someone for whom the concept of negotiation is a display of weakness.
-
What we're dealing with today is a war between civilization and barbarism. There is no negotiation with someone for whom the concept of negotiation is a display of weakness.
That only happens when the side offering negotiation is offering it from a position of weakness.
The West is weak. It has great military power, but lacks the will to do what needs to be done to defeat these barbarians. They recognize that weakness.
Bin Laden called us a "Paper Tiger" and though he may now be dead, he appears to have been right. We never had the will to do what was needed to defeat his ideology.
Now, we could have done it quickly with overwhelming force and wiping out all who supported him mercilessly. We did not have the will to do that.
Alternatively, we could have done it slowly by wiping out the terrorists as they popped up while preventing as many "non-combatant" deaths as possible and deposing hostile dictators while trying to build an alternative model for the less enthusiastic supporters of Bin Laden's ideology. We clearly lost interest long before that happened and thus do not have the will to do that, either.
So, we will continue to see these Godless bloodthirsty savages (for that is what they are) ignore and even taunt the West- they realize our weakness is not found in our impressive technology and soldiers. It is in the will to use them.
Si vis pacem, para bellum. We have not been preparing for war in this country. Our people have no idea what it takes to fight a war. We have prepared our military capabilities while allowing our national will to be purposely degraded. It will not end well given what will be necessary to solidify that will.
-
That only happens when the side offering negotiation is offering it from a position of weakness.
The West is weak. It has great military power, but lacks the will to do what needs to be done to defeat these barbarians. They recognize that weakness.
Bin Laden called us a "Paper Tiger" and though he may now be dead, he appears to have been right. We never had the will to do what was needed to defeat his ideology.
Now, we could have done it quickly with overwhelming force and wiping out all who supported him mercilessly. We did not have the will to do that.
Alternatively, we could have done it slowly by wiping out the terrorists as they popped up while preventing as many "non-combatant" deaths as possible and deposing hostile dictators while trying to build an alternative model for the less enthusiastic supporters of Bin Laden's ideology. We clearly lost interest long before that happened and thus do not have the will to do that, either.
So, we will continue to see these Godless bloodthirsty savages (for that is what they are) ignore and even taunt the West- they realize our weakness is not found in our impressive technology and soldiers. It is in the will to use them.
Si vis pacem, para bellum. We have not been preparing for war in this country. Our people have no idea what it takes to fight a war. We have prepared our military capabilities while allowing our national will to be purposely degraded. It will not end well given what will be necessary to solidify that will.
The problem with that is that it assumes military power can be used to wipe out people of that particular viewpoint, which really isnt the lesson of history, and comes with its own very considerable moral costs.
It also tends to ignore the very real reasons why people might feel the need to back the (usually very small) number of true believers in any particular group; for example, it is surely no mere coincidence that the two main areas of Sunni fundamentalist expansion right now (Iraq and Nigeria) are going on in the two of the most corrupt countries on the planet. It is also perhaps not surprising that they feel able to criticize democracy when the one main Islamist group to actually engage with that process - the MB in Egypt - got overthrown in a coup that resulted in thousands of deaths, with nary a peep out of the West. Nor is it really that hard to argue in favour of any moral superiority for Western values when the media (at least in this country) have spent much of the past week
talking about the X-Factor, leaked naked pictures of various celebrities and our football clubs spending nearly a billion pounds on players.
Of course, the real way to defeat such things is to do what we did to get rid of our fundamentalists - to educate as many people as possible, to adopt science in order to actively disprove many erroneous religious-based beliefs, and to encourage social progression towards freer, richer, less corrupt societies. Of course not everywhere in the West did that to the same level, but the countries which did were the ones that ended up on top.
-
we could have...
left Saddam Hussein in charge of Iraq and all this would never have happened :P
-
Do we have a strategy yet?
Fundraising and golf.
-
The problem with that is that it assumes military power can be used to wipe out people of that particular viewpoint, which really isnt the lesson of history, and comes with its own very considerable moral costs.
When dealing with hostiles, maybe the west can learn at least a little from the experience of the Romans who suffered mightily during their immensely costly Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Punic Wars.
Oh, wait . . .
-
There is a lesson in this-fight the sons of bitches tooth and nail to the last breath, send a few to their *expletive deleted*it god along the way if you can. You don't see Marines being beheaded, just eloi who drive around with coexist stickers on their bumpers.
-
Be more like Israel and damn the collateral damage.
-
Be more like Israel and damn the collateral damage.
I tend to agree. I think the rules of engagement we have increasingly used since WWII have don't little but put our soldiers in difficult situations. The military mission is to kill people and destroy stuff. If they can't do that or we can't stomach that, we shouldn't send them over.
The other questions are who is ISIS, where are they, and what would we have to do to get assets there to kill them? If we can't clearly answer those questions, stay home.
Also, were these the same guys that Obama and John McCain were trying to get us fighting alongside in Syria?
-
Also, were these the same guys that Obama and John McCain were trying to get us fighting alongside in Syria?
Yes. Mccain even posed for pictures with isis/isil leaders that he was helping funnel arms to.
-
When dealing with hostiles, maybe the west can learn at least a little from the experience of the Romans who suffered mightily during their immensely costly Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Punic Wars.
Oh, wait . . .
Those would be the same Romans that spent most of the next hundred years after Carthage fell consuming themselves in civil wars, domestic strife, unimaginable corruption and whatnot?
As I said, there are costs when you want to do what they did.
-
Those would be the same Romans that spent most of the next hundred years after Carthage fell consuming themselves in civil wars, domestic strife, unimaginable corruption and whatnot?
Well, at least our government has a proven template to follow.
-
Those would be the same Romans that spent most of the next hundred years after Carthage fell consuming themselves in civil wars, domestic strife, unimaginable corruption and whatnot?
As I said, there are costs when you want to do what they did.
I don't think Carthage's fate was actually the cause of Rome's internal problems . . . but let's see . . . we don't currently have a civil war, but we've already got domestic strife . . . and corruption that would make a Roman blush. It would be nice if we could eliminate an external threat (Rome had Carthage, we have ISIS et.al.). And though we don't have hostile elephants crossing the Alps, we do have a serious border problem at the Rio Grande . . .
Fortunately, we don't have to worry about a dynasty in our leadership; unlike the Romans where the Emperor's office became a family affair, one or a few families won't be running our government.
Oh, wait . . . :facepalm:
-
I don't think Carthage's fate was actually the cause of Rome's internal problems . . . but let's see . . . we don't currently have a civil war, but we've already got domestic strife . . . and corruption that would make a Roman blush. It would be nice if we could eliminate an external threat (Rome had Carthage, we have ISIS et.al.). And though we don't have hostile elephants crossing the Alps, we do have a serious border problem at the Rio Grande . . .
Fortunately, we don't have to worry about a dynasty in our leadership; unlike the Romans where the Emperor's office became a family affair, one or a few families won't be running our government.
Oh, wait . . . :facepalm:
I disagree - all great nations need a great rival or they end up going a bit daft. To take your own country for example, when the USSR was around you enjoyed considerable progress on a variety of fields and went to the Moon; since then you have developed HBO and elected Presidents that were addicted to women, buffoonery and golf.
-
I disagree - all great nations need a great rival or they end up going a bit daft. To take your own country for example, when the USSR was around you enjoyed considerable progress on a variety of fields and went to the Moon; since then you have developed HBO and elected Presidents that were addicted to women, buffoonery and golf.
Hmmm . . . history may record Obama as a great rival to the USA . . .
It bothers me that when our nation was in its infancy with a total population smaller than NYC today, we found men like Washington and Jefferson to elect as President. Today, with a population of well over 300 million, we get . . . [barf]
-
Eventually we will be forced to respond in total disproportion, after say NY, DC, and LA go up in smoke. There will come a time when we pull out ALL the stops. As in world wide thermonuclear attacks to totally eradicate Islam. Probably include bio and chemical attacks as well. This is what happens when we don't deal with stuff as it arises. I figure a few billion will die, mostly innocents of course, just like in Dresden and Nagasaki- won't make any difference at that point.
Or we may get lucky- the Russians or Chinese may do our dirty work for us.
Or we may get really lucky and see them (sunni) do it to them (shia) -the Iranians must be putting in triple time on their pet nuke project right now- their number one nightmare must be that ISIS gets hold of a loaner nuke from Pakistan or somewhere.
Lot of wild cards out there, this will not be a nice ride no matter what.
-
I disagree - all great nations need a great rival or they end up going a bit daft. To take your own country for example, when the USSR was around you enjoyed considerable progress on a variety of fields and went to the Moon; since then you have developed HBO and elected Presidents that were addicted to women, buffoonery and golf.
There's a lot of truth there. And it hurts. Especially the part where we kicked the USSR's ass in the space race, then had to start begging the Russians for rides.
-
Hmmm . . . history may record Obama as a great rival to the USA . . .
It bothers me that when our nation was in its infancy with a total population smaller than NYC today, we found men like Washington and Jefferson to elect as President. Today, with a population of well over 300 million, we get . . . [barf]
Rise of the special interests and lobbyists.
-
Of course, the real way to defeat such things is to do what we did to get rid of our fundamentalists - to educate as many people as possible, to adopt science in order to actively disprove many erroneous religious-based beliefs, and to encourage social progression towards freer, richer, less corrupt societies. Of course not everywhere in the West did that to the same level, but the countries which did were the ones that ended up on top.
And how do you educate people who do not wish to partake of your version of education? How do you lead people who reject any science that contradicts their fundamentalist beliefs as immoral to adopt science?
These people are not (by civilized standards) sane or rational. They are rational only within their own, twisted frame of reality. They are not even thugs -- they're just bloodthirsty savages. The west needs to start taking them out in serious numbers starting yesterday, be cause every day we dawdle they get more arms, bigger arms, and more fresh recruits.
-
Rise of the special interests and lobbyists.
And the welfare state.
-
ISIS is fantastically weak, even tepid military responses from Obama will cut them up badly.
ISIS is more of a symptom of the larger Middle Eastern/Muslim pathologies than it is some Islamic ubermench army. The ME is so weak and screwed up culturally, anyone who can act with cohesion and a willingness to fight can make impressive gains, but to continue the medical analogy, they're not "MRSA" they're more like a pedestrian bacteria ravaging someone without a good immune system.
Those willing to organize and fight ISIS seem to be doing okay, such as the Kurds.
So the big unsaid thing is that ISIS is Iraq's failure, it's the Shia's failure, and it's the moderate Sunni's failure. After a decade of training, and billions of our military gear, Iraqis in ARMOR, export-grade M1 tanks... fled before ISIS with small arms driving in a bunch of Toyota pickup trucks.
Yeah, the West is "weak" (politically), but ISIS is where they are because the ME is even weaker.
That said, I don't mind one bit that it's being cast as "Obama's Failure" too. =)
Sucks for the Libertarian wing of the GOP like Rand Paul's 2016 chances, unless he can articulate some sort of "Bomb em', kill em', don't occupy em'" strategy that can make everyone happy.
-
Where I see ISIS "failing" right now is that they are spreading themselves too thin. On the other hand I read a report stating that ISIS is stealing foreign fighters from the Taliban.
-
I think that ISIS is a direct byproduct of "indirect" US intervention in Syria. Kind of like Al Qaeda and Afghanistan.
So we sprinkle "freedom fighter" pixie dust on the region, and out spring "terrorists"...
Gosh darn it, you would think they would know by now not to feed the freedom fighters any ammunition after midnight! ;/
-
I've been thinking about it, and there is a crucial distinction between current events and previous headbutting between the West and Islam/its political entities. The historical conflicts have occurred between competing civilizations.
What we're dealing with today is a war between civilization and barbarism. There is no negotiation with someone for whom the concept of negotiation is a display of weakness.
Indeed, it is a clash of civilizations. And those who insist on seeing it as just the latest politics in the vein of Metternich will constantly follow the wrong path.
The problem with that is that it assumes military power can be used to wipe out people of that particular viewpoint, which really isnt the lesson of history, and comes with its own very considerable moral costs.
http://theblackcordelias.wordpress.com/2008/08/27/the-difference-between-dominicans-and-jesuits/
Two men considering a religious vocation were having a conversation. “What is similar about the Jesuit and Dominican Orders? ” the one asked.
The second replied, “Well, they were both founded by Spaniards — St. Dominic for the Dominicans, and St. Ignatius of Loyola for the Jesuits. They were also both founded to combat heresy — the Dominicans to fight the Albigensians, and the Jesuits to fight the Protestants.”
“What is different about the Jesuit and Dominican Orders?”
“Met any Albigensians lately?”
The point being that a combination of religio-philosophical and military might can do the trick. And leave the fighter better off afterwards.
It also tends to ignore the very real reasons why people might feel the need to back the (usually very small) number of true believers in any particular group; for example, it is surely no mere coincidence that the two main areas of Sunni fundamentalist expansion right now (Iraq and Nigeria) are going on in the two of the most corrupt countries on the planet.
Order vs Chaos. Most folk in most societies prize order. All those places you mention are basket cases where the central gov't can not provide order. In steps a better-organized group that displays an ability to provide order.
Saw something similar as the western half of the Roman empire tottered. Christian bishops stepped up and provided order and relief as the Roman gov't dissolved into chaos. It is why during Russia's mess after the COld War, many in Russia looked back at Stalin with longing.
It is also perhaps not surprising that they feel able to criticize democracy when the one main Islamist group to actually engage with that process - the MB in Egypt - got overthrown in a coup that resulted in thousands of deaths, with nary a peep out of the West. Nor is it really that hard to argue in favour of any moral superiority for Western values when the media (at least in this country) have spent much of the past week talking about the X-Factor, leaked naked pictures of various celebrities and our football clubs spending nearly a billion pounds on players.
They criticize democracy because democracy's supporters in the ME are almost invariably the weakest of the rival powers. It deserves no respect because it is not a serious player as the authoritarian secularists and authoritarian Muslims are. Pinhead western journolists and dumbass diplomats think ME democratic movements are larger than they really are because the journos & diplodunderheads can more easily communicate with the pro-demo activists (because they are more likely to speak English).
Since the overthrow of the MB, not so much turmoil in Egypt. The secular authoritarians are providing more & better order.
Of course, the real way to defeat such things is to do what we did to get rid of our fundamentalists - to educate as many people as possible, to adopt science in order to actively disprove many erroneous religious-based beliefs, and to encourage social progression towards freer, richer, less corrupt societies. Of course not everywhere in the West did that to the same level, but the countries which did were the ones that ended up on top.
Um, the most influential scientists in the West with the greatest breakthroughs that helped usher in modernity were orthodox Christians. They would be considered very fundy nowadays.
The trend to a fee-er less corrupt society was the work of a couple millenia in the West and is not transferable to other cultures without going "clean slate" on them. Athens, Rome, Jerusalem, and Germania. The nation-state also requires a nationality, not a notionality. Notional polities eventually require mass murder and oppression to exist, as any student of multi-ethnic empires could tell.
The West traded Christian-inspired culture for a Marxist-inspired culture at the top. Has been a sucker's deal. We now have had and still have even more nasty and closed-minded fundies at the levers of power. Or is the 20th Century's megadeath lost in the mists of history? Fascism in the Wilson and FDR administrations (imprisonment for belief and speech or national origin). Fascism in Spain & Italy (How many murdered by the regimes?). Naziism is Germany (Millions murdered). USSR & China & Nork & Cambodia (Made the Nazis look like retailers of death while they worked death wholesale).
Those would be the same Romans that spent most of the next hundred years after Carthage fell consuming themselves in civil wars, domestic strife, unimaginable corruption and whatnot?
As I said, there are costs when you want to do what they did.
A stretch to say that Cathage's destruction was the cause. Plenty of other countries & civilizations have prospered after overthrowing great rivals and nearly blotting them from history.
The multi-cultist cultural marxists have worked so hard to tamp down western self-regard and making any such expression outside the purview of peaceful and orderly politics. We ought not be surprised then that when it does burst forth, it will manifest itself as violent. Leave no legal & respectable outlets and you guarantee what comes next is illegal and disrespectable.
-
Apparently the US has carried out airstrikes against ISIS (which our CINC insists on calling ISIL*) near the Haditha Dam.
Haditha Dam... when I first read that my mind saw it as "Haiphong Harbor."
* Levant, meaning to include Israel. Funny that coming from Obama.
-
Apparently the US has carried out airstrikes against ISIS (which our CINC insists on calling ISIL*) near the Haditha Dam.
Haditha Dam... when I first read that my mind saw it as "Haiphong Harbor."
* Levant, meaning to include Israel. Funny that coming from Obama.
Official State Department name is ISIL so he is correct.
On 14 May 2014, the United States Department of State announced its decision to use "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant" (ISIL) as the group's primary name. The debate over which acronym should be used to designate the group, ISIL or ISIS, has been discussed by several commentators.
On 29 June 2014, the establishment of a new caliphate was announced, and the group formally changed its name to the "Islamic State".
In late August 2014, a leading Islamic authority Dar al-Ifta al-Misriyyah in Egypt advised Muslims to stop calling the group "Islamic State" and instead refer to it as "Al-Qaeda Separatists in Iraq and Syria" or "QSIS", due to the militant group's un-Islamic character.
From the Wiki.
-
Official State Department name is ISIL so he is correct.
Seems to me we'd do better to just start assigning offensive epithets as the official names of groups like this when they gain full terrorist status. After all, why should we care what they want to be called at that point?
-
Seems to me we'd do better to just start assigning offensive epithets as the official names of groups like this when they gain full terrorist status. After all, why should we care what they want to be called at that point?
Because we don't want to offend them. We might even be called racist.
(Given the state of affairs in this country, I am not being entirely sarcastic.)
-
Because we don't want to offend them. We might even be called racist.
But Satan's Harem sounds so much catchier than ISIS, don't you think?
For Hamas, I was thinking Rampant Pedophilia, just to see how many of their supporters are willing to go on record with that.
-
I just refer to them as ISIL P$$$ies at every opportunities.
Or ISIL Cowards.
Iraqi Army Advances, ISIL Cowards Run Away (http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/09/11/378363/iraq-army-says-pushed-back-isil/)
Free Syrian Army attacks ISIL Cowards (http://www.aawsat.net/2014/09/article55336390)
-
I just refer to them as ISIL P$$$ies at every opportunities.
Or ISIL Cowards.
Iraqi Army Advances, ISIL Cowards Run Away (http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/09/11/378363/iraq-army-says-pushed-back-isil/)
Free Syrian Army attacks ISIL Cowards (http://www.aawsat.net/2014/09/article55336390)
The first link is an iranian news network:
Press TV takes revolutionary steps as the first Iranian international news network, broadcasting in English on a round-the-clock basis.
And in the linked story they make the claim regarding ISIS:
The terrorist group has links with Saudi intelligence, and is believed to be supported by the Israeli regime.
That's not something I've seen asserted before. How likely is it to be true? Israel supporting an anti-semitic group seems unlikely.
-
That's not something I've seen asserted before. How likely is it to be true? Israel supporting an anti-semitic group seems unlikely.
Especially one that wants to take over Israel as soon as they're done with their current atrocities.
-
On the other hand, Wahhabi Saudi supporters would not be surprising in the least.
-
Something that annoys me about this mess. Two jo-urinal-ists get killed and it's a big deal but two years ago we had four Americans murdered including an ambassador and it was no big deal. Wasn't terrorism, no real response from Obama.
"Bomb them back to the stone age" comes to mind but that would be an improvement for most of the goat pokers. Pull our people and equipment out and let them butcher themselves into oblivion. Anything or anyone leaving a designated region without express permission gets blown to hell RFN.
-
IRAQI Army strikes from the air, ISIL cowards die. (http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/09/11/378446/iraq-airstrike-kills-30-isil-militants/)
Peshmerga advance, ISIS cowards run away. (http://basnews.com/en/News/Details/IS-Retreats-in-the-Face-of-Peshmerga-Attacks-/33720)
-
Something that annoys me about this mess. Two jo-urinal-ists get killed and it's a big deal but two years ago we had four Americans murdered including an ambassador and it was no big deal. Wasn't terrorism, no real response from Obama.
"Bomb them back to the stone age" comes to mind but that would be an improvement for most of the goat pokers. Pull our people and equipment out and let them butcher themselves into oblivion. Anything or anyone leaving a designated region without express permission gets blown to hell RFN.
Oh, but Obama did say Benghazi was terrorism. Anyway, that's what Candy Crowley said defending Obama in his debate with Romney. And Obama promised to bring the perpetrators to justice. I don't know if he meant civil court or juvenile court.
-
Oh, but Obama did say Benghazi was terrorism. Anyway, that's what Candy Crowley said defending Obama in his debate with Romney. And Obama promised to bring the perpetrators to justice. I don't know if he meant civil court or juvenile court.
I agree with RKL (and you). While the beheadings are barbaric, the fact that you have to be the right demographic for this administration to even start to talk about doing something is ridiculous. The fact that an Ambassador is not the right demographic is despicable.
I just read today that the prosecution via the criminal system of the little Benghazi fish they caught is not going as swimmingly as they thought (duh). I also heard Obama yesterday mention that there had been no attacks on US soil in 11 years. Whose soil are our embassies on?
-
I agree with RKL (and you). While the beheadings are barbaric, the fact that you have to be the right demographic for this administration to even start to talk about doing something is ridiculous. The fact that an Ambassador is not the right demographic is despicable.
I just read today that the prosecution via the criminal system of the little Benghazi fish they caught is not going as swimmingly as they thought (duh). I also heard Obama yesterday mention that there had been no attacks on US soil in 11 years. Whose soil are our embassies on?
When was the Boston Marathon bombing?
-
When was the Boston Marathon bombing?
Or the dude at LAX? Or The "workplace violence" at Ft Hood? Or the spoiled attacks in NYC and Dallas? Or...
-
When was the Boston Marathon bombing?
11 years and 7 months after 9/11.
-
Or the dude at LAX? Or The "workplace violence" at Ft Hood? Or the spoiled attacks in NYC and Dallas? Or...
Beltway Sniper - 2002
Seattle Jewish Federation shootings - 2006
Times Square Recruiting Office bombed - 2008
Little Rock Recruiting Office shootings - 2009
Fort Hood shootings - 2009
And that's just the ones with confirmed Middle Eastern ties.
-
Beltway Sniper - 2002
Seattle Jewish Federation shootings - 2006
Times Square Recruiting Office bombed - 2008
Little Rock Recruiting Office shootings - 2009
Fort Hood shootings - 2009
And that's just the ones with confirmed Middle Eastern ties.
The Boston Marathon bombing had Muslim ties.
-
You are including in this a failed bombing with a blackpowder bomb that killed nobody and injured nobody.
Also, another ISIS commander is dead. (http://rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/120920141)
-
You are including in this a failed bombing with a blackpowder bomb that killed nobody and injured nobody.
It went boom and caused damage to the target. That sounds like a successful bombing to me.
Is it not an attack if someone shoots at you and misses?
-
It went boom and caused damage to the target. That sounds like a successful bombing to me.
Is it not an attack if someone shoots at you and misses?
I don't think it really is worth including in terms of measuring how scary and threatening the terrorists are to me.
...unless you want to mock?
-
You are including in this a failed bombing with a blackpowder bomb that killed nobody and injured nobody.
Also, another ISIS commander is dead. (http://rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/120920141)
Which one are you saying was failed bombing?
-
The Times Square bombing.
-
The Times Square bombing.
Still counts as a terrorist attack. Simply because of IIRC, bad chemistry and dumb luck that we did not have another earth-shattering kaboom with that one.
-
British this time. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2754934/ISIS-release-video-claiming-beheading-British-hostage-David-Haines.html)
-
America strikes from the air, ISIL cowards' advance halted. (http://online.wsj.com/articles/airstrikes-have-halted-islamic-state-in-iraq-u-s-says-1410729692)
-
I'll stick with my contention that ISIS is not a function of some massive new scary threat, merely that of the power vacuum in the Middle East in this area. The Kurds are still holding their own. As is anyone capable of organizing and fighting.
Turkey would kick their ass, Iran would kick their ass. Jordan would kick their ass. Saudi Arabia would kick their ass. Egypt would kick their ass.
Israel would kick their ass, then grind the remaining ass chunks to dust, use the dust to make some sort of solid concrete out of them so they could then blow it up again.
The U.S. would vaporize them (non nuclear) and make the Iraq War I "highway of death" look like a minor skirmish. Except that we'd be hamstrung by some sort of crappy ROE.
-
I'll stick with my contention that ISIS is not a function of some massive new scary threat, merely that of the power vacuum in the Middle East in this area. The Kurds are still holding their own. As is anyone capable of organizing and fighting.
Turkey would kick their ass, Iran would kick their ass. Jordan would kick their ass. Saudi Arabia would kick their ass. Egypt would kick their ass.
Israel would kick their ass, then grind the remaining ass chunks to dust, use the dust to make some sort of solid concrete out of them so they could then blow it up again.
The U.S. would vaporize them (non nuclear) and make the Iraq War I "highway of death" look like a minor skirmish. Except that we'd be hamstrung by some sort of crappy ROE.
Turkey and Iran perhaps, but Jordan and (especially) Saudi Arabia would be less certain, and Egypt would have a considerable (and probably terminal) internal security problem if it came to the point where it was IS vs the Sisi regime.
-
I'll stick with my contention that ISIS is not a function of some massive new scary threat, merely that of the power vacuum in the Middle East in this area. The Kurds are still holding their own. As is anyone capable of organizing and fighting.
ISIL/ISIS is an invention of our CIA/State Department. They are the ones that let the genie out of the bottle, its too bad that American servicemen are going to be the ones that are going to have to mop up the mess. The whole Benghazi debacle was to cover up the transactions where the American government was arming these radicals.
http://rare.us/story/did-john-mccain-take-selfies-with-isis/
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.wonkette.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F06%2Fmccain-ISIS.jpg&hash=11c7d082a184fdab9acca0a438c7ad59ce1d7e10)
Some are speculating that some of the people in this picture might now be members of the Islamic State of Iraq and The Levant (ISIL or ISIS), the extremist group now taking over major cities in Iraq. - See more at: http://rare.us/story/did-john-mccain-take-selfies-with-isis/#sthash.rLeq62Td.dpuf
-
No, these are not ISIL/McCain selfies. (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/12/world/middleeast/try-as-he-may-john-mccain-cant-shake-falsehoods-about-ties-to-isis.html?_r=0)
-
Now you gonna spoil it with facts? Kill joy.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Kurds advance against ISIL in Syria. (http://news.yahoo.com/kurdish-fighters-advance-against-jihadis-syria-112221960.html)
-
Kurds advance against ISIL in Syria. (http://news.yahoo.com/kurdish-fighters-advance-against-jihadis-syria-112221960.html)
Are we for or against the Kurds right now? It's so hard to keep up :lol:
-
Are we for or against the Kurds right now? It's so hard to keep up :lol:
Yep, hard to know which whey to go with the Kurds.
-
Yep, hard to know which whey to go with the Kurds.
No holes in that argument. This place wouldn't be the same without the cheesy puns.
-
No, these are not ISIL/McCain selfies. (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/12/world/middleeast/try-as-he-may-john-mccain-cant-shake-falsehoods-about-ties-to-isis.html?_r=0)
I say good anyway. Republicans like McCain do more damage than the Left.
-
No holes in that argument. This place wouldn't be the same without the cheesy puns.
Indeed, a ban on cheesy puns would curdle the atmosphere. Enough so that some would be feta'd up with it before long.
-
Peshmerga advance, ISIL cowards run away! (http://www.christianpost.com/news/kurds-boot-isis-fighters-from-christian-villages-kill-senior-commander-us-supplies-guns-and-bullets-126615/)
-
Iraqi Army advances, ISIL cowards run away! (http://www.abna.ir/english/service/middle-east-west-asia/archive/2014/09/14/637597/story.html)
-
America strikes from the air! ISIL cowards die! (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/09/18/air-strike-isil-iraq/15844883/)
-
Indeed, a ban on cheesy puns would curdle the atmosphere. Enough so that some would be feta'd up with it before long.
Meh, it's all gouda.
-
America strikes from the air, ISIL cowards' advance halted. (http://online.wsj.com/articles/airstrikes-have-halted-islamic-state-in-iraq-u-s-says-1410729692)
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
-
People who claim to be willing to die for their god, and yet often surrender, run away, etc. when faced with the remotest resistance, are cowards.
-
People who claim to be willing to die for their god, and yet often surrender, run away, etc. when faced with the remotest resistance, are cowards.
There seems to have been evidence of plenty of ISIS folk being sent to the afterlife. Also, withdrawing to fight and commit atrocity another day is not necessarily cowardice.
FTR, Evil != Cowardice.
-
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/danieldoherty/2014/09/19/report-isis-urging-lone-wolves-to-target-us-soldiers-n1894046?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
There seems to have been evidence of plenty of ISIS folk being sent to the afterlife. Also, withdrawing to fight and commit atrocity another day is not necessarily cowardice.
Do you not think it'd have been a bit different if ISIL were, instead, Chechen guerillas from 1999?
-
Do you not think it'd have been a bit different if ISIL were, instead, Chechen guerillas from 1999?
Sure. It would also be different if ISIL were made of Irish milkmaids.
1. Yes, were ISIL made of caucasian hill-folk with that especial combination of bellicosity and banditry that European hill-country types bring to the field of battle, it would be different. (Andrew Jackson and Nathan Bedford Forrest were unavailable for comment.)
2. Your point pretty much holds for all Arab fighting organizations. None are particularly robust. Heck, goofballs in the US thought the Israeli Army was made of super-bad-ass folk...until we fought an Arab army in 1990 and got a taste. (Yes, some in the US still hold to these views, hence the fetishization of "Israeli" this & that. ;/ PT Barnum's adage applies. ) Also, my Turkish acquaintances don't exactly have much respect for Arab folks and their armies, either.
=============
My point is not that ISIL or any Arab army is particularly effective. It is that those that comprise it may be evil rat bastards and still be courageous. Evil and courage are not mutually exclusive. And just because a particular organization gets the stuffing beat out of them does not mean the individual soldiers are cowards. I think the evidence of ISIL members dying in battle proof enough that they were willing to risk death to achieve their objectives. That is proof enough for me that many of them are not cowards.
FTR, I have no sympathy for ISIL. Were all slaughtered and left for the scavengers I would not lose any sleep.
-
Many people are willing to go into battle. THe question is how many of them will stay once the shooting starts. I'm not saying that any level under 100% is not is unacceptable.
ISIS/ISIL was able to have military success when the IRaqi Army was literally too disorganized to fight at all.
Right now they're grinding to a halt at the very best. Many of them (hundreds, we are told, and perhaps more, and some of the key leadership among them) are abandoning the field and fleeing - even when their opponent is the very same Iraqi Army.
This shows, I think, that their reputation of omnihardcore Islamic warriors is overrated.
Then again so is the reputation of many omnihardcore Islamic warriors.
On the other hand, I'd like to say in the defense of the Arabs that some elements of the Egyptian military used to be fairly good (primarily their artillerymen).
-
Maybe the reason that IS-whatever was able to over-run the Iraqi Army was that the damn throttles stuck open on their Toyota pickups ? =D
-
Kurds begin offensive to recapture Mosul. (http://www.aawsat.net/2014/09/article55336775)
-
France Strikes from the air, 75 Islamists dead. (http://basnews.com/en/News/Details/French-Warplanes-Kill-75-IS-Militants-Near-Mosul/34758)
-
I would think they are regrouping and will show up in the cities and start resorting to IED attacks and ambushes.
-
That is in addition to the continuous fighting between Mosul residents and IS militants. Many IS militants have been killed as a result.” added Mamuzini. (http://basnews.com/en/News/Details/IS-Bombs-Four-Main-Mosul-Bridges/34745)
-
German Muslims Hold Day of Protest Against ISIS (http://rt.com/news/189168-german-muslims-protest-isis/)