they know they can outlast us, they're laughing at you military minded fools.
Airstrikes in Syria.
- Thread starter dave1251
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: dave1251
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/syria-u-s-dual-policy-is-recipe-for-more-violence/
UNITED NATIONS -- Syria's foreign minister on Monday blasted the United States' "dual policy" of striking at some militants in Syria while providing money, weapons and training to others, calling it a recipe for more violence and terrorism.
Walid al-Moallem said such behavior creates a "fertile ground" for the continued growth of extremism in countries including Syria, Iraq and Lebanon.
and?
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/syria-u-s-dual-policy-is-recipe-for-more-violence/
UNITED NATIONS -- Syria's foreign minister on Monday blasted the United States' "dual policy" of striking at some militants in Syria while providing money, weapons and training to others, calling it a recipe for more violence and terrorism.
Walid al-Moallem said such behavior creates a "fertile ground" for the continued growth of extremism in countries including Syria, Iraq and Lebanon.
and?
Originally Posted By: dave1251
For some reason and it fits the stereotype of Americans possessing the attention span of kindergarteners many people conveniently ignore or do not research enough to know this fact.
you're right, they know nothing of history, forgot about the lessons of vietnam, Russia in Afghanistan and the last 10 years of US in Iraq and afghanistan. you have every mouth breather croaking about invading the middle east and killing them all
For some reason and it fits the stereotype of Americans possessing the attention span of kindergarteners many people conveniently ignore or do not research enough to know this fact.
you're right, they know nothing of history, forgot about the lessons of vietnam, Russia in Afghanistan and the last 10 years of US in Iraq and afghanistan. you have every mouth breather croaking about invading the middle east and killing them all
Last edited:
Seems to me the reason the west is going after Isis, is because they're a direct threat to the government of Iraq. That wonderful democracy we created??? It's another last ditch effort to fend of the inevitable collapse of Iraq into 3 separate nation states and save face.
I have no clue how the west fixes what we've already screwed up there. Do we use the general Patton model and go all in, or completely leave? The problem is, we won't do either because we're so entrenched militarily, politically, and economically, that the status quo will go on into perpetuity and it will be whack-a-mole of batting jihadists who we [censored] off.
I have no clue how the west fixes what we've already screwed up there. Do we use the general Patton model and go all in, or completely leave? The problem is, we won't do either because we're so entrenched militarily, politically, and economically, that the status quo will go on into perpetuity and it will be whack-a-mole of batting jihadists who we [censored] off.
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Seems to me the reason the west is going after Isis, is because they're a direct threat to the government of Iraq. That wonderful democracy we created??? It's another last ditch effort to fend of the inevitable collapse of Iraq into 3 separate nation states and save face.
I have no clue how the west fixes what we've already screwed up there. Do we use the general Patton model and go all in, or completely leave? The problem is, we won't do either because we're so entrenched militarily, politically, and economically, that the status quo will go on into perpetuity and it will be whack-a-mole of batting jihadists who we [censored] off.
restoring Iraq into three states was Kerry's idea. oddly enough that's the way Iraq was before WWI, before the west meddled with their boundaries and the Ottoman empire
Seems to me the reason the west is going after Isis, is because they're a direct threat to the government of Iraq. That wonderful democracy we created??? It's another last ditch effort to fend of the inevitable collapse of Iraq into 3 separate nation states and save face.
I have no clue how the west fixes what we've already screwed up there. Do we use the general Patton model and go all in, or completely leave? The problem is, we won't do either because we're so entrenched militarily, politically, and economically, that the status quo will go on into perpetuity and it will be whack-a-mole of batting jihadists who we [censored] off.
restoring Iraq into three states was Kerry's idea. oddly enough that's the way Iraq was before WWI, before the west meddled with their boundaries and the Ottoman empire
Read this for 2 expert perspectives on the situation:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29410348
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29410348
Great post Drew.
Unfortunately the end result are more dead Americans with nothing accomplished. Supporting a puppet government is not an accomplishment we should be proud of.
Unfortunately the end result are more dead Americans with nothing accomplished. Supporting a puppet government is not an accomplishment we should be proud of.
Lockheed Martin stock is zooming along quite well. I wonder why?
If Isis didn't have the wests's weapons we gave the Iraqis, the locals could take care of them and they would.
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Seems to me the reason the west is going after Isis, is because they're a direct threat to the government of Iraq. That wonderful democracy we created??? It's another last ditch effort to fend of the inevitable collapse of Iraq into 3 separate nation states and save face.
I have no clue how the west fixes what we've already screwed up there. Do we use the general Patton model and go all in, or completely leave? The problem is, we won't do either because we're so entrenched militarily, politically, and economically, that the status quo will go on into perpetuity and it will be whack-a-mole of batting jihadists who we [censored] off.
This has been my question all along, to what end are we doing this?
Half stepping isn't going to cut it. There has to be a clear objective but defining that that be a big problem in itself.
Do we have the intelligence resources left in the region to accurately determine what we up against? Where will this place Assad, in a strengthened or weakened position?
Will the Russians take advantage of this whole fiasco and finally make a big move on Ukraine?
Do the American public and more importantly for the politicians the voters have the stomach for another military action in the middle east?
I fear the US does not have the leadership necessary for a problem of this magnitude, we have a CIC who refuses to call a spade a spade, a war a war, and terrorist violence is considered workplace violence.
This isn't going to work the way its being playes, it is a recipe for a real fiasco.
Seems to me the reason the west is going after Isis, is because they're a direct threat to the government of Iraq. That wonderful democracy we created??? It's another last ditch effort to fend of the inevitable collapse of Iraq into 3 separate nation states and save face.
I have no clue how the west fixes what we've already screwed up there. Do we use the general Patton model and go all in, or completely leave? The problem is, we won't do either because we're so entrenched militarily, politically, and economically, that the status quo will go on into perpetuity and it will be whack-a-mole of batting jihadists who we [censored] off.
This has been my question all along, to what end are we doing this?
Half stepping isn't going to cut it. There has to be a clear objective but defining that that be a big problem in itself.
Do we have the intelligence resources left in the region to accurately determine what we up against? Where will this place Assad, in a strengthened or weakened position?
Will the Russians take advantage of this whole fiasco and finally make a big move on Ukraine?
Do the American public and more importantly for the politicians the voters have the stomach for another military action in the middle east?
I fear the US does not have the leadership necessary for a problem of this magnitude, we have a CIC who refuses to call a spade a spade, a war a war, and terrorist violence is considered workplace violence.
This isn't going to work the way its being playes, it is a recipe for a real fiasco.
Originally Posted By: Apollo14
I disagree that you are living in the here and now because you and others are imagining ISIS to be a huge threat to us when they are not - "it's coming for us"
Think about it for a moment. ISIS have attracted extremists from around the world. They have done western countries a favor by removing some people from those countries and turning them into cannon fodder in Syria and Iraq.
Additionally, you have ISIS supporters and Assad supporters killing each other. By striking ISIS in Syria, we strengthen the moderate rebels. If we are judicious, then we can weaken ISIS in Syria without strengthening Assad. In Iraq, the airstrikes will help Iraqi ground troops do the job they should have done before.
ISIS are focused on their dream of creating an Islamic state, which they imagine will spread and spread and spread. Their fanaticism makes them ready for this to be an eternal struggle and it makes them delusional like any cult. They are surrounded by forces hostile to them and with western air power against them they cannot expand. Their jihad will turn into a war of attrition.
They can't come for us. Do you see Israel afraid? They're happy their enemies are killing each other and they are next door for cripes sake.
I disagree.
"ISIS is now the largest, richest and most dangerous terrorist organization in history with an estimated 31,500 fighters controlling an extremist sanctuary that exceeds the size of Indiana. Thousands of these terrorists hold Western passports and would require only a plane ticket to arrive in America. Some have expressed ambitions to attack the U.S. homeland."
al-Baghdadi has already stated his intentions and there is a safe heaven in Syria for Al-Qaeda along with ISIS and obviously the example of foreign policy of using air strikes like in Yemen does not equate tangible results.
I disagree that you are living in the here and now because you and others are imagining ISIS to be a huge threat to us when they are not - "it's coming for us"
Think about it for a moment. ISIS have attracted extremists from around the world. They have done western countries a favor by removing some people from those countries and turning them into cannon fodder in Syria and Iraq.
Additionally, you have ISIS supporters and Assad supporters killing each other. By striking ISIS in Syria, we strengthen the moderate rebels. If we are judicious, then we can weaken ISIS in Syria without strengthening Assad. In Iraq, the airstrikes will help Iraqi ground troops do the job they should have done before.
ISIS are focused on their dream of creating an Islamic state, which they imagine will spread and spread and spread. Their fanaticism makes them ready for this to be an eternal struggle and it makes them delusional like any cult. They are surrounded by forces hostile to them and with western air power against them they cannot expand. Their jihad will turn into a war of attrition.
They can't come for us. Do you see Israel afraid? They're happy their enemies are killing each other and they are next door for cripes sake.
I disagree.
"ISIS is now the largest, richest and most dangerous terrorist organization in history with an estimated 31,500 fighters controlling an extremist sanctuary that exceeds the size of Indiana. Thousands of these terrorists hold Western passports and would require only a plane ticket to arrive in America. Some have expressed ambitions to attack the U.S. homeland."
al-Baghdadi has already stated his intentions and there is a safe heaven in Syria for Al-Qaeda along with ISIS and obviously the example of foreign policy of using air strikes like in Yemen does not equate tangible results.
Unfortunately there are some things in life that are complex and cannot be solved neatly and with certainty.
I prefer the pragmatic course of action we are on. Do not risk American lives, build a coalition with Middle Eastern countries to start tackling extremism, get the Iraqi army to where it needs to be, don't support divisive Iraqi leadership and give moderate Syrians the chance to depose Assad.
Will everything work out the way we want in and in a timeframe suitable for our short attention spans? No. But it's clear that this is an area of the world whose problems we've made worse and where we should only get involved in when absolutely necessary.
I prefer the pragmatic course of action we are on. Do not risk American lives, build a coalition with Middle Eastern countries to start tackling extremism, get the Iraqi army to where it needs to be, don't support divisive Iraqi leadership and give moderate Syrians the chance to depose Assad.
Will everything work out the way we want in and in a timeframe suitable for our short attention spans? No. But it's clear that this is an area of the world whose problems we've made worse and where we should only get involved in when absolutely necessary.
Like I said before....
All ISIS needs is a car bomb at JFK, LAX, ATL during a very busy travel season for our government to be asking how could the FBI / NSA not see this attack coming. I hope I'm wrong.
All ISIS needs is a car bomb at JFK, LAX, ATL during a very busy travel season for our government to be asking how could the FBI / NSA not see this attack coming. I hope I'm wrong.
Originally Posted By: Apollo14
Unfortunately there are some things in life that are complex and cannot be solved neatly and with certainty.
I prefer the pragmatic course of action we are on. Do not risk American lives, build a coalition with Middle Eastern countries to start tackling extremism, get the Iraqi army to where it needs to be, don't support divisive Iraqi leadership and give moderate Syrians the chance to depose Assad.
Will everything work out the way we want in and in a timeframe suitable for our short attention spans? No. But it's clear that this is an area of the world whose problems we've made worse and where we should only get involved in when absolutely necessary.
Yes this course of action is working to such great effect. ISIS has an safe heaven and is besieging Baghdad as we speak. Al-Qaeda has a safe heaven in Syria. I have to disagree if a residual security force was left in Iraq ISIS would not be the problem it is, ISIS, and Al-Qaeda would not its room to operate and plan attacks against the U.S. and our allies. Yet again another failure due to politics. Mr. Washington is right again.
Unfortunately there are some things in life that are complex and cannot be solved neatly and with certainty.
I prefer the pragmatic course of action we are on. Do not risk American lives, build a coalition with Middle Eastern countries to start tackling extremism, get the Iraqi army to where it needs to be, don't support divisive Iraqi leadership and give moderate Syrians the chance to depose Assad.
Will everything work out the way we want in and in a timeframe suitable for our short attention spans? No. But it's clear that this is an area of the world whose problems we've made worse and where we should only get involved in when absolutely necessary.
Yes this course of action is working to such great effect. ISIS has an safe heaven and is besieging Baghdad as we speak. Al-Qaeda has a safe heaven in Syria. I have to disagree if a residual security force was left in Iraq ISIS would not be the problem it is, ISIS, and Al-Qaeda would not its room to operate and plan attacks against the U.S. and our allies. Yet again another failure due to politics. Mr. Washington is right again.
"If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known, that we are at all times ready for War."
President George Washington
I share Trav's assessment here. Most Americans are not ready and rather bury their respective heads in the sand.
President George Washington
I share Trav's assessment here. Most Americans are not ready and rather bury their respective heads in the sand.
Originally Posted By: FXjohn
Originally Posted By: dave1251
For some reason and it fits the stereotype of Americans possessing the attention span of kindergarteners many people conveniently ignore or do not research enough to know this fact.
you're right, they know nothing of history, forgot about the lessons of vietnam, Russia in Afghanistan and the last 10 years of US in Iraq and afghanistan. you have every mouth breather croaking about invading the middle east and killing them all
No need to invade...simply sterilize the place with neutron bombs.
Originally Posted By: dave1251
For some reason and it fits the stereotype of Americans possessing the attention span of kindergarteners many people conveniently ignore or do not research enough to know this fact.
you're right, they know nothing of history, forgot about the lessons of vietnam, Russia in Afghanistan and the last 10 years of US in Iraq and afghanistan. you have every mouth breather croaking about invading the middle east and killing them all
No need to invade...simply sterilize the place with neutron bombs.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: dave1251
"If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known, that we are at all times ready for War."
President George Washington
I share Trav's assessment here. Most Americans are not ready and rather bury their respective heads in the sand.
In a way it reminds me a bit of Britain after WWI when rumours of Germany re-arming were spreading 'round. Not that ISIS is anything like the Nazi war machine, but simply touching on the fact that sometimes underestimating people that may or may not be a threat results in a situation that is much worse than what it would have been had you acted on it when it was first mentioned.
"If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known, that we are at all times ready for War."
President George Washington
I share Trav's assessment here. Most Americans are not ready and rather bury their respective heads in the sand.
In a way it reminds me a bit of Britain after WWI when rumours of Germany re-arming were spreading 'round. Not that ISIS is anything like the Nazi war machine, but simply touching on the fact that sometimes underestimating people that may or may not be a threat results in a situation that is much worse than what it would have been had you acted on it when it was first mentioned.
Considering the ties of the Syrian government and Putin this would not be the best course of action. It may be better then the current pipe dream of training and arming "moderate rebels" that are tied with Al-Qaeda.
The thought of initiating M.A.D. does not concern you? Strange considering you do not have the resolve to support the only safe and logical option of the U.S. taking ISIS out with ground troops. Because this "coalition" does not have the resources to move into Iraq let alone a Russian and Iranian supported Syria to eliminate ISIS and these same "allies" have no intention of taking on Al-Qaeda
- Status
