View Full Version : The Bombs Are About To Drop Against ISIS In Iraq
They say as soon as today. Stand-by ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/obama-weighs-military-strikes-to-aid-trapped-iraqis-officials-say.html?_r=0
http://online.wsj.com/articles/u-s-considers-military-airdrops-to-supply-imperiled-yazidis-in-iraqi-1407427842
NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/american-forces-said-to-bomb-isis-targets-in-iraq.html)
American military forces bombed at least two targets in northern Iraq on Thursday night to rout Islamist insurgents who have trapped tens of thousands of religious minorities in Kurdish areas, Kurdish officials said...
Im liking this. Help the Kurds and Iraqi forces from the air almost eliminates chances of US casualties and could very well help the tide of this war.
Moose-Knuckle
08-07-14, 16:42
Nothing like warning your brothers, oops I mean enemies that they are about to get hit.
platoonDaddy
08-07-14, 16:44
I would be REALLY pleasantly surprised if POTUS does order the bombing of his buddies.
If so, for sure LONG overdue.
Looks like the story above is being denied but even if it's not true it's still coming.
I would be REALLY pleasantly surprised if POTUS does order the bombing of his buddies.
If so, for sure LONG overdue.
Think of how pristine an opportunity this is. Our lame president has a chance to use this to remind the world, particularly Putin, in dramatic fashion what can happen when you piss us off while having an international green light to turn thousands of hardcore terrorists into hamburger.
Doc Safari
08-07-14, 16:55
Obama's not going to bomb his own jihadist troops. He'll wait until they're adequately warned then he'll drop bombs on empty buildings.
Obama's not going to bomb his own jihadist troops. He'll wait until they're adequately warned then he'll drop bombs on empty buildings.
Oh stop. Even if you want to discount the fact that he attended Rev. Wright's church for decades, until this recent threat to the Christian masses most of ISIS's victims have been muslim. Plus as much as I hate Obama he's not a friggin terrorist.
The point is that as loathsome a leader he is he may also be feeling humiliated and boxed in enough to take it out on ISIS. Hoping so because if it were up to me what happened on Highway 80 would be miniscule in comparison.
Doc Safari
08-07-14, 17:10
Oh stop. Even if you want to discount the fact that he attended Rev. Wright's church for decades, until this recent threat to the Christian masses most of ISIS's victims have been muslim. Plus as much as I hate Obama he's not a friggin terrorist.
I'm being partly facetious obviously. But look at his record and a lot of his actions have benefitted Muslims one way or another even to the detriment of other groups. And don't forget that ISIS is Sunni out happily killing Shi'ites. I wouldn't discount that Mr. O has sympathies with Sunni Muslims even though he may not have the stones to show it blatantly.
The point is that as loathsome a leader he is he may also be feeling humiliated and boxed in enough to take it out on ISIS. .
If you were local to me I'd bet you a steak dinner he either doesn't do anything to them, or it's some "trick" like Clinton bombing an aspirin factory. If he does serious, verifiable damage to ISIS, I'll rethink my opinion of his agenda.
Moose-Knuckle
08-07-14, 17:12
Even if you want to discount the fact that he attended Rev. Wright's church for decades, until this recent threat to the Christian masses most of ISIS's victims have been muslim.
It's Shia vs. Sunni.
Plus as much as I hate Obama he's not a friggin terrorist.
His connections to terror groups like The Weather Underground would suggest otherwise.
How would dropping bombs on Iraq benefit the United States of America and it's citizens?
Moose-Knuckle
08-07-14, 17:23
How would dropping bombs on Iraq benefit the United States of America and it's citizens?
Well for one the Industrial Military Complex would profit but I can't say that would equate to the tax payers as we would be funding it all.
Well for one the Industrial Military Complex would profit but I can't say that would equate to the tax payers as we would be funding it all.
War is a Racket. (http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html) ;)
It's Shia vs. Sunni.
Ok but what does that have to do with what I said?
His connections to terror groups like The Weather Underground would suggest otherwise.
Then he's a terrorist. Shame on me.
Doc Safari
08-07-14, 17:41
I still say Benghazi was about supplying what would become ISIS with weapons and they were afraid too many people knew too much.
Moose-Knuckle
08-07-14, 17:50
Ok but what does that have to do with what I said?
This is the focus of ISIS, once their goals are met cleaning house they will focus their attention on Christians, the US, etc.
This is the focus of ISIS, once their goals are met cleaning house they will focus their attention on Christians, the US, etc.
Doc said Obama won't do anything because he won't go after his fellow jihadists (implicating Obama as muslim), then I said ISIS is killing mostly muslims. If you actually disagreed because both of you believe Obama is a jihadist himself then it seems we have little place intellectually left to go.
If they can locate the ISIS forces, I hope they carpet bomb the crap out of them and be done with them once and for all.
Our president is too much of a wimp and will opt for "surgical strikes"
Mo_Zam_Beek
08-07-14, 18:54
http://youtu.be/FdizL4on-Rc
Moose-Knuckle
08-07-14, 19:48
Doc said Obama won't do anything because he won't go after his fellow jihadists (implicating Obama as muslim), then I said ISIS is killing mostly muslims. If you actually disagreed because both of you believe Obama is a jihadist himself then it seems we have little place intellectually left to go.
That is unless of course Barry is Sunni as ISIS is trying to establish a Sunni majority caliphate.
Awesome. Maybe if we would stop supplying them, we wouldn't have to waste more resources bombing them.
I swear if the avg. person is too stupid to get whats going on here, they are REALLY ****ing stupid.
I swear if the avg. person is too stupid to get whats going on here, they are REALLY ****ing stupid.
Then lay it out for us. No shortcuts or copouts, articulate your controversial statement clearly so we can all understand.
That is unless of course Barry is Sunni as ISIS is trying to establish a Sunni majority caliphate.
This doesn't warrant a meaningful response.
Eurodriver
08-07-14, 20:12
I swear if the avg. person is too stupid to get whats going on here, they are REALLY ****ing stupid.
But the average person is just that...average...
Moose-Knuckle
08-07-14, 20:25
This doesn't warrant a meaningful response.
I have yet to discover any post of yours that warrant one.
Mauser KAR98K
08-07-14, 20:32
After their 30+ minute video I watched ...kill them all.
I have yet to discover any post of yours that warrant one.
You mean not one ever? :(
Can you drop the weirdness and allow the thread to develop sensibly? This situation is just getting started, let's talk about it like worthy men.
After their 30+ minute video I watched of theirs...kill them all.
I agree. As inhumane an politically incorrect as this is, I say just nuke the whole damn area.
Belmont31R
08-07-14, 20:40
Obama has authorized air strikes.
Mauser KAR98K
08-07-14, 20:44
I agree. As inhumane an politically incorrect as this is, I say just nuke the whole damn area.
We have neighbors, and their are really good people over there that don't deserve a nuke, or ISIS for that matter (Kurds and Israelis).
We can MOAB, Daisy Cutter, Tomahawk, Hell Fire, straff, or send Rosanne Barr singing to them.
Obama has authorized air strikes.
Wonder what "de-ass the area" is in Arabic?
Moose-Knuckle
08-07-14, 20:49
Can you drop the weirdness and allow the thread to develop sensibly? This situation is just getting started, let's talk about it like worthy men.
My apologies for interjecting any "weirdness" into your thread, maybe James Doolittle should have telephoned the emperor of Japan prior to launching his famous raid . . .
As a worthy and sensible tax payer I find it odd for POTUS, who at the least is an Islamofascist sympathizer would give the very people that his forces are about to bomb a notice before hand. Unless of course it is just some PSYOP.
Obama has authorized air strikes.
Can you imagine, after all these months, being a pilot who was finally loaded up and sent out to engage those maggots? It must be an indescribably wonderful feeling.
Moose-Knuckle
08-07-14, 20:51
Obama has authorized air strikes.
So how long before boots on the ground (not counting the ODA's already deployed) . . .
Belmont31R
08-07-14, 21:07
Funny...in 2008 candidate Obama said genocide is not a reason to be in Iraq: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/19862711/ns/politics-decision_08/t/obama-dont-stay-iraq-over-genocide/
We have neighbors, and their are really good people over there that don't deserve a nuke, or ISIS for that matter (Kurds and Israelis).
We can MOAB, Daisy Cutter, Tomahawk, Hell Fire, straff, or send Rosanne Barr singing to them.
Wonder what "de-ass the area" is in Arabic?
Sending Rosanne is barbaric! But yes maybe nuke is too strong of a word.
Funny...in 2008 candidate Obama said genocide is not a reason to be in Iraq: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/19862711/ns/politics-decision_08/t/obama-dont-stay-iraq-over-genocide/
Sadly, I'd rather have candidate Obama instead of the guy the call President Obama...
It's amazing that the people that voted for him because of his rhetoric aren't rioting since he has hardly done anything he promised...other than that part they seemed to miss about fundamentally transforming America...:(
Funny...in 2008 candidate Obama said genocide is not a reason to be in Iraq: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/19862711/ns/politics-decision_08/t/obama-dont-stay-iraq-over-genocide/
Racist! ;)
Belmont31R
08-08-14, 00:33
Sadly, I'd rather have candidate Obama instead of the guy the call President Obama...
It's amazing that the people that voted for him because of his rhetoric aren't rioting since he has hardly done anything he promised...other than that part they seemed to miss about fundamentally transforming America...:(
They're gearing up for Hillary and Warren.
need to rid the world of all radical muslims and any people that allow this to happen
http://www.catholic.org/news/international/middle_east/story.php?id=56339
now beheading Christian children
Belmont31R
08-08-14, 04:42
27845
to much focus on Israel defending itself ?
yet you hear no real huge outcry over this kinda stuff going on
27845
montanadave
08-08-14, 07:43
An article on Iraq from the NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=LedeSum&module=a-lede-package-region®ion=lede-package&WT.nav=lede-package&_r=0) accurately describes Iraq as "that graveyard of American ambition."
The lead paragraph:
In sending warplanes back into the skies over Iraq, President Obama on Thursday night found himself exactly where he did not want to be. Hoping to end the war in Iraq, Mr. Obama became the fourth president in a row to order military action in that graveyard of American ambition.
Fascinating that the region described as "The Cradle of Civilization" when I was in grade school is now the graveyard of modernity.
montanadave
08-08-14, 08:03
The bombs are falling. Air strikes outside Erbil, a Kurdish city in northern Iraq.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28709530
Doc Safari
08-08-14, 09:02
The bombs are falling. Air strikes outside Erbil, a Kurdish city in northern Iraq.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28709530
IF this is actually true then apparently Barry is willing to attack ISIS. I'm rethinking my position to believe that Barry is a Muslim sympathizer without actual loyalties to any one sect. It may just be that the only god Barry ultimately believes in is....Barry.
They say as soon as today. Stand-by ...
Awesome. I bet the TBMCS operators in the AOC and SUPER busy cramming target data into the system. :lol:
C4
montanadave
08-08-14, 09:15
Given that all we've been seeing for weeks on the tube is convoys of ISIS trucks rolling down the roads chock full of masked gunmen waving their black flag, I can't see why (given we've decided to get in the game . . . again) we don't just turn the whole countryside into a turkey shoot.
**** these ISIS turds.
Given that all we've been seeing for weeks on the tube is convoys of ISIS trucks rolling down the roads chock full of masked gunmen waving their black flag, I can't see why (given we've decided to get in the game . . . again) we don't just turn the whole countryside into a turkey shoot.
**** these ISIS turds.
Yep, Just put AC-130's in constant orbit over the camptured territory and have them run fire missions 24/7 without mercy. Make it our new firing range for all our aircraft. Nothing like live targets to sharpen our pilots skills.
just give those countries glass roads :)
Doc Safari
08-08-14, 09:25
I figure we'll eventually be reading about amnesty for Kurdish and Yazidi immigrants.
Given that all we've been seeing for weeks on the tube is convoys of ISIS trucks rolling down the roads chock full of masked gunmen waving their black flag, I can't see why (given we've decided to get in the game . . . again) we don't just turn the whole countryside into a turkey shoot.
**** these ISIS turds.
When Dave's ready to witness annihilation you know they must be bad. ;)
Couldn't agree more. Mass death on an unprecedented scale, images of destruction that shock even us. Absolute carnage until the straggling ISIS survivors themselves convert to Christianity just to hide from the wrath and conclude "Ok, we better never try that again".
I think that Obama, Biden, Kerry, Clinton, Pelosi, Feinstein, Reid, et al. should go over there and sit down and have a conversation with the leaders with ISIS. Tell them how it isn't nice to behead Christian children. When that is all over, we can go about the whole glass desert thing.
montanadave
08-08-14, 09:47
When Dave's ready to witness annihilation you know they must be bad. ;)
Full disclosure, my Activia really let me down this morning.
Doc said Obama won't do anything because he won't go after his fellow jihadists (implicating Obama as muslim), then I said ISIS is killing mostly muslims. If you actually disagreed because both of you believe Obama is a jihadist himself then it seems we have little place intellectually left to go.
Obama himself said his Muslim faith in an interview and attended quranic studies in Indonesia. He's foldout absolutely nothing but destroying this country.
Belmont31R
08-08-14, 12:11
An article on Iraq from the NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=LedeSum&module=a-lede-package-region®ion=lede-package&WT.nav=lede-package&_r=0) accurately describes Iraq as "that graveyard of American ambition."
The lead paragraph:
In sending warplanes back into the skies over Iraq, President Obama on Thursday night found himself exactly where he did not want to be. Hoping to end the war in Iraq, Mr. Obama became the fourth president in a row to order military action in that graveyard of American ambition.
Fascinating that the region described as "The Cradle of Civilization" when I was in grade school is now the graveyard of modernity.
I was just thinking about how we've gone from Bush Sr to Obama and every one of them has independently bombed or attacked Iraq.
And there will will be 'boots on the ground' there again one day.
Then lay it out for us. No shortcuts or copouts, articulate your controversial statement clearly so we can all understand.
We are funding radical islamics throughout the region. Egypt, Libya, Syria, and more than likely ISIS. We are allies with the Saudi's, who are openly doing the exact same thing that we are doing, funding and supplying the very people we claim to be at war with.
We are feeding the monster we claim to be hunting. Same thing we've done for a few decades actually. Its called perpetuation . If dont prop them up, they wont be there to fight. From the Taliban in the 80's, to Sadam in the 80's-90's, to the radical islamics now. WE ARE FUNDING AND SUPPLYING THEM.
That's what Benghazi was about. It was nothing more than a laundering hub for weapons to these "rebels" (that are lopping heads off of everyone that opposes them). Whistles were going to be blown, so it was dealt with and swept under the rug. I mean seriously, if they are doing it on our own border, they are doing it all over the world (see operation gun runner)
This isn't rocket science, however most people are too busy worried about party lines, homos getting married, and other inconsequential bullshit they wouldn't know their asshole from a hole in the ground.
So go ahead and cheer for perpetual war and conflict, and endless aiding and abetting to the very people we are at war and have conflict with.....because some "conservative" talking head told you it was a great idea.
Doc Safari
08-08-14, 12:59
Bravissimo post, J-Dub.
So, has anyone actually been able to determine if and where alleged bombs are actually falling?
Belmont31R
08-08-14, 13:05
Bravissimo post, J-Dub.
So, has anyone actually been able to determine if and where alleged bombs are actually falling?
We bombed an artillery encampment outside of Erbil.
Yep, Just put AC-130's in constant orbit over the camptured territory and have them run fire missions 24/7 without mercy. Make it our new firing range for all our aircraft. Nothing like live targets to sharpen our pilots skills.
That is what I'd do.
We are allies with the Saudi's because while imperfect they have oil and are the enemy or our greater enemy Iran.
The Taliban in the 80's because it was a proxy war with the Soviets Union, to Sadam in the 80's-90's when he was in constant conflict with our mutual foe Iran, to the radical islamics now (although if I'm referring to Syria then acknowledge it's really a tit-for-tat with Russia as well as Assad). WE HAVE FUNDED AND SUPPLIED THEM when we believed it suited our best interests even though the endeavor was often woefully short-sighted.
So go ahead and cheer for perpetual war and conflict, and endless aiding and abetting to the very people we are at war and have conflict with.....because some "conservative" talking head told you it was a great idea.
There, now you're making sense. Much better except for the part at the end, as your need to degrade others while establishing your intellectual superiority blinds you to the fact that instead of toeing a line many of us are actually doing a far better job of putting the big picture together than others.
In fact it's so bad that the fellow who just congratulated you stated only a few posts before that the reason we won't attack them (Oops!) said we won't do so because he won't hurt his fellow muslims. Wait no, Jihadi muslims. All that does is show how difficult it is to keep up with all the conspiratorial nonsense, unless of course Reagan was also a closet Jihadi.
Doc Safari
08-08-14, 13:45
In fact it's so bad that the fellow who just congratulated you stated only a few posts before that the reason we won't attack them (Oops!) said we won't do so because he won't hurt his fellow muslims. Wait no, Jihadi muslims. All that does is show how difficult it is to keep up with all the conspiratorial nonsense, unless of course Reagan was also a closet Jihadi.
LOLZ. I still say Obama is sympathizing with the Muslims, he just may not be as deep into it as I thought, or there may be other factors that take precedence. I might be able to ratchet down my belief that he supports the Muslims due to a common religion, and simply "settle for" the notion that he is a Muslim sympathizer at the same level as Jimmy Carter. That's as far as I'm willing to concede that I'm wrong.
So far we've heard they've bombed some artillery positions, right? BFD. I thought he said they'd only bomb ISIS "if it approaches" Erbil or another target where US personnel might be threatened. So what's going on?
The only other theory that holds water besides the Muslim-sympathizer conspiracy theory is that the man and his administration are just so flamingly incompetent that they literally cannot do anything in a timely or reasonable manner. So maybe the Jimmy Carter model IS the correct one, after all.
THAT scenario is way scarier in my book...
montanadave
08-08-14, 13:52
The only other theory that holds water besides the Muslim-sympathizer conspiracy theory is that the man and his administration are just so flamingly incompetent that they literally cannot do anything in a timely or reasonable manner. So maybe the Jimmy Carter model IS the correct one, after all.
THAT scenario is way scarier in my book...
Then I think you ought be quakin' in your boots about now.
There, now you're making sense. Much better except for the part at the end, as your need to degrade others while establishing your intellectual superiority blinds you to the fact that instead of toeing a line many of us are actually doing a far better job of putting the big picture together than others.
In fact it's so bad that the fellow who just congratulated you stated only a few posts before that the reason we won't attack them (Oops!) said we won't do so because he won't hurt his fellow muslims. Wait no, Jihadi muslims. All that does is show how difficult it is to keep up with all the conspiratorial nonsense, unless of course Reagan was also a closet Jihadi.
I know I know, as long as you say "conspiracy" it automatically makes anything that opposes your view as "kooky". But it doesnt change anything.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2013/07/06/us-backed-coup-hijacks-egypts-revolution/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-libya-usa-order-idUSTRE72T6H220110330
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/04/real-benghazi-story.html
The list could go on for a few pages. Its the exact same thing we've been doing for decades. Fund and supply who we want in power, because we need to perpetuate war. Its called the military industrial complex has made trillions off of these bullshit wars, and is continuing to make tons of cash as we ship arms to rebels across southwest Asia. And of course it also fuels the terrorism fear, I mean this wouldn't be post 9/11 'Merica if you didn't have to take your shoes off at an airport like a buffoon.
Again, its not rocket science, pretty standard practice actually. Smoke and mirrors. Say one thing, "war on terrorism" while funding terrorism around back behind the curtain. But I know, I know, el rushbo didn't lay this out for you today......oh no...its all Obamars fault and the Republicans will save the day!
The only other theory that holds water besides the Muslim-sympathizer conspiracy (Actually it's leaking badly. Quick, grab the Flex Seal!) theory is that the man and his administration are just so flamingly incompetent that they literally cannot do anything in a timely or reasonable manner. So maybe the Jimmy Carter model IS the correct one, after all.
THAT scenario is way scarier in my book...
Knew you were in there somewhere. Now be afraid...be very afraid.
Eurodriver
08-08-14, 14:04
Me agreeing with J-Dub is getting so common, it's becoming routine.
We need some more "Cop beats up old lady for lunch money" threads to restore sanity.
montanadave
08-08-14, 14:06
Me agreeing with J-Dub is getting so common, it's becoming routine.
We need some more "Cop beats up old lady for lunch money" threads to restore sanity.
That old biddy made a furtive movement and you know it!
Doc Safari
08-08-14, 14:07
Knew you were in there somewhere. Now be afraid...be very afraid.
I still firmly believe the man set out to systematically destroy what we recognize as America.
His administration is in bed with the Muslim Brotherhood, and this has been reported by many sources.
He also seems to have a knack for always siding with Israel's enemies against Israel.
It's not at all unreasonable to see that the man is an Islamic sympathizer, even if it doesn't rise to the level of him being a Muslim himself.
Benghazi, not living up to the "red line" he drew in Syria, ISIS, having Kerry call for a ceasefire with Gaza when it just happened to favor HAMAS instead of Israel..etc., etc., it all adds up.
To my mind the ONLY area that suggests mere incompetence rather than ideology is the way that relations with Russia a la Ukraine have been botched.
To those people who bring up the IRS scandal, Fast & Furious, or other scandals: it seems like those were botched due the incompetence of other people, not Barry himself. Foreign policy is the one area that lands firmly in Barry's lap. Much as I despise John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, I truly think both of them are too smart to have made their monumental gaffes without orders from above.
Agree, or disagree, I think I'm right about his sympathies for Islamic Jihad.
Belmont31R
08-08-14, 14:38
ISIS has taken hundreds of women captive: http://bit.ly/1mukcCK
Belmont31R
08-08-14, 14:56
They also apparently just defeated Brigade 93 in Syria and captured a key base.
On principle alone, we need to bomb ISIS back to the stone age; So as bad as the President has screwed the pooch with this in the first place, I'm glad we are doing it - of course, until, they manage to shoot someone down and we have to go in after them...
What I'm wondering is what happened to the Peshmerga - they were some bad asses and would have thought they could handle ISIS. I still want to know who is backing ISIS with money and weapons...they didn't make this stuff, someone gave/sold it to them...
They also apparently just defeated Brigade 93 in Syria and captured a key base.
So were are the Russians? Why aren't they helping Assad? Oh wait, they're busy getting ready to invade Ukraine and wreak further international havoc.
Doc Safari
08-08-14, 15:19
So were are the Russians? Why aren't they helping Assad? Oh wait, they're busy getting ready to invade Ukraine and wreak further international havoc.
I think you probably nailed it. Russia isn't quite the powerhouse it used to be. Putin may see Ukraine as "doable" and Syria as a "quagmire."
All those natural gas pipelines and wheat fields are probably more valuable to the Russians at this point than a warm-water port.
If they can locate the ISIS forces, I hope they carpet bomb the crap out of them and be done with them once and for all.
Our president is too much of a wimp and will opt for "surgical strikes"
And this is exactly what he's going to do. Oooh, we've dropped a whopping 8 laser guided bombs! :mad:
If we really wanted to send a message to ISIS about their barbaric Caliphate, we's start with about a dozen of these:
http://eyreinternational.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/moab.jpg?w=681&h=427
Then we'd follow up with a few dozen of these:
https://sp1.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.608035866054428033&pid=15.1&P=0
Then sprinkle a few of these on top:
http://www.cloud9photography.us/Military-Aviation-Photo-M-Z/ORDNANCE-RELEASE-Dynamic/OR-00005-A-USAF-Rockwell-B-1B/428420289_oES4m-M.jpg
As a matter of fact, I think I'd turn the whole thing into a massive command and control exercise to see how many ordinance drops I could fit into that airspace.
FML, where's Teddy when we need him?
https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.608044550473254256&pid=15.1&H=159&W=160&P=0
Me agreeing with J-Dub is getting so common, it's becoming routine.
We need some more "Cop beats up old lady for lunch money" threads to restore sanity.
I agree. This scares me more than ISIS, that J-Dub has me nodding in agreement...Thanks Obama!
Now something that seems to be missing from the discussion is the absolute hypocrisy and futility of this action alone.
First, I find it odd how fast everyone changed their stance based on the what name the victims of ISIS call "God". When they were slaughtering tens of thousands in the last two years, it was all well and good. Savages the whole lot of em, right? Woman and children too, that's what they get for being Stone Age cave dwelling idiots! WOOOHOOOOO let the blood flow! And then they kill some Christians who are demographically the same as every other victim this far except for their religion, and suddenly we have to do something...
"We"...LOL.
So we go with this bombing and we get really excited that we're finally killin us some moooooslims, which is all most right-leaning Americans seem to care about...what exactly does that accomplish? For those who think war is the same as a three-gun match I'll try to clarify; all action taken must have long term follow through before it can be deemed a success. This is why, no matter how many bumper stickers you have that say it would work, you'll probably never see a war won by bombing runs. It doesn't work like that, it just isn't plausible.
Infantry without Air Support is any mans game, while tactics may decide small battles, ultimately the biggest force will win a war of attrition.
Air Support without infantry is a fools game. When you target armor/fixed guns/bunkers/etc, you're softening a target but what will seal a victory is to take the ground. Can't do that from the air. Then you have to hold the ground and, again, you can't do that from the air.
If anyone is going to support an aerial campaign, do so knowing that it will cost us a lot of money and accomplish nothing. Or, support of a long term aerial campaign will lead to boots on the ground, at which time I hope to see all the bloodlusting moooooslim haters at the recruiting station when we all go back.
And in the gray area, while America is wary of war but wants to do something (emotional politics) about Iraq, we'll likely design any future operations strictly to target ISIS. Bad news folks, they exist because three times in the last decade the US has created a massive power vacuum and the most brutal climes on top of the pile. There's always an ISIS, or an AQI, or a JAM, or a MA, or IRG/Baathists....shall I go on? As long as we topple a regime and leave nothing in it's place I can guarantee you we'll be having American sons coming home in flag draped coffins.
I agree. This scares me more than ISIS, that J-Dub has me nodding in agreement...Thanks Obama!
Now something that seems to be missing from the discussion is the absolute hypocrisy and futility of this action alone.
First, I find it odd how fast everyone changed their stance based on the what name the victims of ISIS call "God". When they were slaughtering tens of thousands in the last two years, it was all well and good. Savages the whole lot of em, right? Woman and children too, that's what they get for being Stone Age cave dwelling idiots! WOOOHOOOOO let the blood flow! And then they kill some Christians who are demographically the same as every other victim this far except for their religion, and suddenly we have to do something...
"We"...LOL.
So we go with this bombing and we get really excited that we're finally killin us some moooooslims, which is all most right-leaning Americans seem to care about...what exactly does that accomplish? For those who think war is the same as a three-gun match I'll try to clarify; all action taken must have long term follow through before it can be deemed a success. This is why, no matter how many bumper stickers you have that say it would work, you'll probably never see a war won by bombing runs. It doesn't work like that, it just isn't plausible.
Infantry without Air Support is any mans game, while tactics may decide small battles, ultimately the biggest force will win a war of attrition.
Air Support without infantry is a fools game. When you target armor/fixed guns/bunkers/etc, you're softening a target but what will seal a victory is to take the ground. Can't do that from the air. Then you have to hold the ground and, again, you can't do that from the air.
If anyone is going to support an aerial campaign, do so knowing that it will cost us a lot of money and accomplish nothing. Or, support of a long term aerial campaign will lead to boots on the ground, at which time I hope to see all the bloodlusting moooooslim haters at the recruiting station when we all go back.
And in the gray area, while America is wary of war but wants to do something (emotional politics) about Iraq, we'll likely design any future operations strictly to target ISIS. Bad news folks, they exist because three times in the last decade the US has created a massive power vacuum and the most brutal climes on top of the pile. There's always an ISIS, or an AQI, or a JAM, or a MA, or IRG/Baathists....shall I go on? As long as we topple a regime and leave nothing in it's place I can guarantee you we'll be having American sons coming home in flag draped coffins.
Great points. What would you do?
When they were slaughtering tens of thousands in the last two years, it was all well and good. Savages the whole lot of em, right? Woman and children too, that's what they get for being Stone Age cave dwelling idiots! WOOOHOOOOO let the blood flow!
Beyond expressing justifiably hopeless frustration, who here has ever specifically endorsed killing women and children? You, of all people as a repeated self-proclaimed veteran, are deliberately warping fact. This is something you shouldn't be doing here or anywhere else.
"We"...LOL.
Go ahead, make fun of those who weren't there while spouting your disdain. A sure fire way to earn an extra ear.
So we go with this bombing and we get really excited that we're finally killin us some moooooslims, which is all most right-leaning Americans seem to care about...
Incredible.
Infantry without Air Support is any mans game, while tactics may decide small battles, ultimately the biggest force will win a war of attrition.
Air Support without infantry is a fools game. When you target armor/fixed guns/bunkers/etc, you're softening a target but what will seal a victory is to take the ground. Can't do that from the air.
The goal is to greatly reduce capability and inflict casualties against a very worthy enemy. Somehow someone has to explain this to you.
If anyone is going to support an aerial campaign, do so knowing that it will cost us a lot of money and accomplish nothing.
Delivering critical blows to an incredibly hostile enemy rapidly gaining momentum in an internationally sensitive area amounts to nothing? Could you possibly be serious?
Bad news folks, they exist because three times in the last decade the US has created a massive power vacuum and the most brutal climes on top of the pile. There's always an ISIS, or an AQI, or a JAM, or a MA, or IRG/Baathists....
So it's our fault...yet they've always been there waiting to implode. Call me what you will but I'd expect better from you.
Great points. What would you do?
I would secure our border. But, dropping a few bombs half a world away takes the attention off of the problems we are having at home.
Whiskey_Bravo
08-08-14, 16:41
O I still want to know who is backing ISIS with money and weapons...they didn't make this stuff, someone gave/sold it to them...
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/29/Experts-Estimate-ISIS-is-Making-up-to-3-Million-a-Day-Selling-Oil-from-Captured-Fields
The terrorist group Islamic State, formerly the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), could be making up to $3 million a day in illicit oil sales using captured oil fields in Iraq and Syria. Iraqi officials are warning that the jihadists are selling their own oil in ISIS-controlled areas and shipping it out to shady buyers in nearby countries.
I would secure our border. But, dropping a few bombs half a world away takes the attention off of the problems we are having at home.
Good point.
Doc Safari
08-08-14, 17:03
... dropping a few bombs half a world away takes the attention off of the problems we are having at home.
AHA... And now we have the possibility of having discovered something more important than Mr. O helping his Muslim compadres. It makes you wonder if the bombing was to get people talking about something other than....ebola. Maybe all this talk of ebola potentially getting loose in CONUS sounded too much like another scandal this close to the election.
But then again we shouldn't give credence to conspiracy theories. :nono:
Good point.
AHA... And now we have the possibility of having discovered something more important...
It's happened many, many times in the past with Clinton, Bush, etc. Bad stuff in the news you don't want the public talking about, switch it up, short attention spans, follow the bouncing ball...
I'm not saying that is the reason, but it is a definite possibility. I still don't know the answer to this question:
How would dropping bombs on Iraq benefit the United States of America and it's citizens?
Doc Safari
08-08-14, 17:20
To those who won't accept, or can't stomach, the idea that a sitting President of the United States might actually have loyalties to someone or something other than the USA, I have to tell you that I used to believe that kind of thing was tinfoil hat stuff, too.
My experience with scoffing at conspiracy theories goes all the way back to Clinton.
--When they said that Waco was a deliberate act of murder, I didn't believe it.
--When they said that Ron Brown was assassinated because he was getting ready to expose Clinton's crimes, I didn't believe it.
--When people said that 9/11 was an inside job, I didn't believe it.
--When people said that we never walked on the moon, I didn't believe it.
--When they tried to make us believe any of a number of other fanciful conspiracy theories, I thought people were listening to too much Alex Jones or Coast-to-Coast AM.
And then a little thing called Fast & Furious happened. OUR OWN GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, probably going all the way to the president, deliberately conspired to allow firearms to end up in the hands of criminals in Mexico ostensibly as a vehicle to promote a political agenda.
And now conspiracy theories don't necessarily sound too far-fetched, do they?
Okay, that example not good enough for ya?
It's pretty much been PROVEN that the IRS targeted conservative groups for harassment. Whether Lois Lerner goes to prison or not, her actions pretty much confirm she has more to hide than her big, white, middle-aged ass. Are you telling me that the go-ahead for that didn't come from the highest office? I've heard more than one analyst suggest that something like that would not have been done without some very powerful permission.
Yet, we refuse to believe that our own POTUS could be loyal to radical Islam instead of his own country? Right?
This is the president that sent Winston Churchill's bust back to England. He allowed himself to be photographed in a gesture insulting to Israelis while on the phone to Netanyahu. He's allowed enough illegal aliens into the country to literally remake the USA into Northern Central America.
He's whispered to Putin that, in effect, he's on his side and will be able to show it after he gets re-elected. He's bowed to every two-bit Muslim dictator he could find on visits overseas. Oh, and how many visits has he made to Muslim countries but not one visit to Israel (if I'm not mistaken)?
No, Barry couldn't possibly be more loyal (at least in spirit) to radical Islamic factions than to his own country.
I wouldn't put anything at all past ANY U.S. administration at this point. Regardless, I think my point in this thread would be that if there is anyone, anywhere in the world right now that is worth killing en masse, wouldn't ISIS fit the bill?
SafetyHit,
I think what I wanted to convey came across wrong and was probably lost in the delivery. It wasn't meant to be as snarky as it, admittedly in hindsight, certainly reads. I meant no elitism in my post.
To cover a few of the questions you asked or counter-points you made;
- I know nobody here is advocating the killing of women and children. What I meant was (this isn't a reference to this veteran-heavy board, but the country in general) we have been fairly uninterested in many of these conflicts where women and children are among those slaughtered by bad guys. And just like in Nigeria, and other countries before that, we really seem to only care when it's Christians getting killed. When it's between tribes or sects of Islam, it's somehow less worthy of ANY efforts or military action because they're not Christian. I'm not warping any truths, that's just how it is. What was the consensus for intervention is Syria? Nigeria? Rwanda? It's a bias, and as humans it's natural. It's just worth mentioning because in this particular situation it has many in America completely reversing their stance on the current POTUS.
- I stand by the comment that ground troops without support assets will eventually succumb to numbers, no matter the tier of Operator we send in. Enough bullets in the air will eventually find their target. If we're to effectively target these guys, we need someone on the ground distinguishing between friendlies and baddies. And there are a LOT of friendlies.
- I understand the concept of striking strategic targets (artillery, armor, etc) but our involvement will guarantee a new supply line and influx of resources and equipment. As soon as we get our hands in the Iraqi quicksand, we are involved in another Proxy War and our less than loving friends all across the world will support ISIS to keep us involved their, sinking in debt, and it will cost American lives. At some point to effectively cut the numbers down, someone has to take and own that ground. Whether it be the Iraqi Army or the Kurds or our guys, unclaimed turf is going to be claimed quick.
- We can't really dig up Saddam and plop him back in the chair. But clearly Maliki, who kicked us out and refused to allow us to oversee stability in the country, was just as much the sectarian prick as Saddam. If we're ever going to get out of there, we have to swallow the jagged pill that comes with commitment. 20+ years of presence to change the way of thinking. A President/PM who is moderate, who isn't selected for his weakness and assumed dependance but for his previous success in similar exploits.
Also, my "WE" comment wasn't directed at anyone here. It was in reference to the amount of able bodied Americans all across the country who hooted and whooped for the chance to go kick some ass, but never found their way down to MEPS. The ones who would hang up when recruiters called because it's okay for us to be at war as long as someone else's kids go. How quickly we forget the cost of war when we are still at war this moment. Also, it was a crack at the liberals and Dems who wanted heads to roll for treason for military action in Iraq, supporting yet another military action because "their guy" is CinC.
Thanks for your reply though, I expect better of myself as well and am appreciative of a callout now and then.
I still firmly believe the man set out to systematically destroy what we recognize as America.
His administration is in bed with the Muslim Brotherhood, and this has been reported by many sources.
He also seems to have a knack for always siding with Israel's enemies against Israel.
It's not at all unreasonable to see that the man is an Islamic sympathizer, even if it doesn't rise to the level of him being a Muslim himself.
Benghazi, not living up to the "red line" he drew in Syria, ISIS, having Kerry call for a ceasefire with Gaza when it just happened to favor HAMAS instead of Israel..etc., etc., it all adds up.
To my mind the ONLY area that suggests mere incompetence rather than ideology is the way that relations with Russia a la Ukraine have been botched.
To those people who bring up the IRS scandal, Fast & Furious, or other scandals: it seems like those were botched due the incompetence of other people, not Barry himself. Foreign policy is the one area that lands firmly in Barry's lap. Much as I despise John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, I truly think both of them are too smart to have made their monumental gaffes without orders from above.
Agree, or disagree, I think I'm right about his sympathies for Islamic Jihad.
+1. Quite honestly I wish we'd work on getting him and the people who put him there out of power before worrying about the rest of the world. We're apparently brave enough to fly into other countries but too chicken to get rid of the real problem in our own house right now? Honestly I think this whole Middle East thing is another "Wag the Dog" distraction to keep us from focusing on the slimeball that got put in the White House instead of in the mouth of a large shark or alligator like he deserves.
The fact he slipped up one time about defending his Muslim faith spilled the beans !
As a Christian guy no way would I ever say that ! No way !
Need to go into all mosques and see what's going on in out own country and clean house before we do it elsewhere any mosque found to have ties to any terrorist gets demolished
wildcard600
08-09-14, 00:50
My .02 is that we should support the Kurds with weapons and materials to level the playing field for them to at least keep that region stable. Secondly throw some logistical support behind Baghdad and air power to them as an act of good faith. If Baghdad don't want to play ball and get their own boots on the ground to re-take lost ground, pull our support and give those resources to the pesh merga who would likely appreciate any extra support we can give them.
Unfortunately give the geopolitical situation and the fear of Kurdish independence for whatever reason this is very unlikely to happen. In my opinion a strong Kurdish state/ally in the area would be a huge asset in the vein of Israel.
Of course I'm just some random guy on the internet with absolutely no experience in these matters so take it for what its worth.
........we really seem to only care when it's Christians getting killed.
Uh, remember Bosnia?
How are we going to pay for another war in Iraq?
How are we going to pay for another war in Iraq?
Print more money?
Do I win a prize?
montanadave
08-09-14, 06:27
How are we going to pay for another war in Iraq?
Same way we paid for the last one.
Oh, right. :suicide:
Do I win a prize?
How about a beer? It has to be collected in Vegas. :)
Same way we paid for the last one.
Oh, right. :suicide:
Swimming in debt...
I wouldn't put anything at all past ANY U.S. administration at this point. Regardless, I think my point in this thread would be that if there is anyone, anywhere in the world right now that is worth killing en masse, wouldn't ISIS fit the bill?
Definitely the ISIS deserves to be treated as roaches at this point.
I'd prefer to see a huge flight of B2 Bombers from Whiteman AFB wing their way over there and carpet bomb the living S**T out of those scum.
Definitely the ISIS deserves to be treated as roaches at this point.
I'd prefer to see a huge flight of B2 Bombers from Whiteman AFB wing their way over there and carpet bomb the living S**T out of those scum.
I don't know they seem like a nice group of guys to me.
http://shoebat.com/2014/08/07/isis-releases-new-photos-showing-mass-crucifixions-beheadings-cruel-executions/
...am appreciative of a callout now and then.
Me too, and if I recall correctly it's happened before. :eek:
It took a big man to write that response so my friend you certainly have my respect. Still please remember it's not about me having to be right, rather it's far more about the confusion many of us feel (the one's with a heart specifically) when we see what we see, express outrage and also a legitimate desire to witness retaliation because it's just too much, and are then demonized by some because it becomes so bad we then badly want to see heads rolling.
If they could develop a weapon of mass destruction that would spare children and the non-psychotic women then I'd personally send in a donation for project funding and use that as an excuse to call every other day bugging them for status updates of deployment. But for now anyway it isn't there, yet something drastic still needs to be done.
The ones in my camp believe that while we do want to see mass casualties we also want the innocent spared (innocent as in their rational minds still have not been stolen from them yet), but reality is often our greatest foe. That said a solution must still be achieved, or instead of us killing innocents with our fire sporadically they will be killed en masse as a matter of procedure by the enemy. Pick your poison and try not to taste it while it goes down, because brother it's going down like it or not.
Lastly anyone who wants women and children to die simply because they're muslim would have no place whatsoever in our group. They could be the greatest fighter our cause has but still remain a repugnant cast-out in my eyes. If anyone on the team wants to join them in banishment then don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
Moose-Knuckle
08-09-14, 16:39
So we go with this bombing and we get really excited that we're finally killin us some moooooslims, which is all most right-leaning Americans seem to care about...what exactly does that accomplish? For those who think war is the same as a three-gun match I'll try to clarify; all action taken must have long term follow through before it can be deemed a success. This is why, no matter how many bumper stickers you have that say it would work, you'll probably never see a war won by bombing runs. It doesn't work like that, it just isn't plausible.
Infantry without Air Support is any mans game, while tactics may decide small battles, ultimately the biggest force will win a war of attrition.
Air Support without infantry is a fools game. When you target armor/fixed guns/bunkers/etc, you're softening a target but what will seal a victory is to take the ground. Can't do that from the air. Then you have to hold the ground and, again, you can't do that from the air.
If anyone is going to support an aerial campaign, do so knowing that it will cost us a lot of money and accomplish nothing. Or, support of a long term aerial campaign will lead to boots on the ground, at which time I hope to see all the bloodlusting moooooslim haters at the recruiting station when we all go back.
Well it worked when the Enola Gay and Bockscar dropped their ordance on Hiroshima and Nagasaki . . .
And in the gray area, while America is wary of war but wants to do something (emotional politics) about Iraq, we'll likely design any future operations strictly to target ISIS. Bad news folks, they exist because three times in the last decade the US has created a massive power vacuum and the most brutal climes on top of the pile. There's always an ISIS, or an AQI, or a JAM, or a MA, or IRG/Baathists....shall I go on? As long as we topple a regime and leave nothing in it's place I can guarantee you we'll be having American sons coming home in flag draped coffins.
Geo-politics, the Grand Chess Board, and all that queue up the Military Industrial Complex.
BoringGuy45
08-09-14, 18:55
ISIS is now daring us to send in our infantry, telling us to stop being cowards and attacking them from the air. I say we oblige; drop a company of Rangers on one of their camps, blow a few things up, and get out before the echo fades, then say, "**** with us again, we dare you."
Of course, this is Obama, so never mind
It appears McCain has a history with these guys.
http://topconservativenews.com/2014/06/isis-brags-about-links-to-us-senator-john-mccain/
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
It appears McCain has a history with these guys.
http://topconservativenews.com/2014/06/isis-brags-about-links-to-us-senator-john-mccain/
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Just imagine how much better off we'd be if he won in 2008...:rolleyes:
Just came across two photos of a beheaded what looked to be about a 10 year old girl. Kind of hard to tell, and I didn't look very long. How one could possibly think that brutally murdering children in such a fashion is just beyond my ability to even contemplate.
I've watched my fare-share of ISIS videos, and I don't mean the youtube ones. Almost too many. But, this is the world we are living in and these are the "people" we're up against. I don't think putting our heads in the sand and pretended this isn't happening is doing anyone a favor. These pieces of shit need to be exterminated.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zSht3SBXblw
Vid from a drone of a strike on ISIS
one report basically doing it in front of the parents and throwing the body parts on them and then killing them of course
yes its the Christians that our gov thinks we have to worry about
Just came across two photos of a beheaded what looked to be about a 10 year old girl. Kind of hard to tell, and I didn't look very long. How one could possibly think that brutally murdering children in such a fashion is just beyond my ability to even contemplate.
I've watched my fare-share of ISIS videos, and I don't mean the youtube ones. Almost too many. But, this is the world we are living in and these are the "people" we're up against. I don't think putting our heads in the sand and pretended this isn't happening is doing anyone a favor. These pieces of shit need to be exterminated.
Moose-Knuckle
08-09-14, 20:55
It appears McCain has a history with these guys.
http://topconservativenews.com/2014/06/isis-brags-about-links-to-us-senator-john-mccain/
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
He wanted us to arm and train these guys fighting Assad in Seria.
He wanted us to arm and train these guys fighting Assad in Seria.
Just another in a LONG line of reasons McCain should never be trusted. He's way overdue to be put out to pasture!
The handling of ISIS is and has been a complete clusterfuq by our leadership. They waited too long and are just now doing too little to combat that mistake. The reasons that they have done so don't really matter. At what point is Obama and his entire cabinet deemed unfit to lead? Bombing a couple artillery targets and pickups amount to squat. Oh yeah, have a great vacay at Martha's Vineyard, dickhead in chief!
ISIS gains strength and numbers everyday. As they grow exponentially over there, you can bet that there are sympathizers here in this country, and shit will happen here. I have seen claims of westerners with US passports fighting with ISIS already. They will waltz right back into this country with no questions asked. ISIS has every intention of bringing this to our doorstep. It has been said that ISIS has seized wealth in excess of a billion dollars (like a couple billion).
BoringGuy45
08-10-14, 00:25
Just came across two photos of a beheaded what looked to be about a 10 year old girl. Kind of hard to tell, and I didn't look very long. How one could possibly think that brutally murdering children in such a fashion is just beyond my ability to even contemplate.
I've watched my fare-share of ISIS videos, and I don't mean the youtube ones. Almost too many. But, this is the world we are living in and these are the "people" we're up against. I don't think putting our heads in the sand and pretended this isn't happening is doing anyone a favor. These pieces of shit need to be exterminated.
+1
They don't fight wars the way the West has been fighting wars for the past 400-500 years. By principal, we tend to only fight wars when there is no diplomatic option in solving a dispute. As the dispute is only supposed to be between the feuding parties, only those in direct support of the enemy can legitimately be targeted under the rules of warfare and gentlemanly behavior, care is taken to provide a reasonable amount of humane treatment to those who surrender, non-combatants, and those unlucky enough to be caught in the middle. The war is resolved when one party surrenders to the other or when mutual terms for a ceasefire are agreed upon. Once the war is over, it is generally expected that both sides will resume some form of relations, and that both sides can maintain dignity, whether they won or lost. If there is any kind of forced leadership change or occupation of the loser by the winner, it is understood that civilians will be treated kindly if they are cooperative, and even the defeated military will be given their due respect and humane treatment. This has been the case in just about every war since the end of the Middle Ages and even the Wehrmacht in WWII were generally honorable in their conduct (though the SS was another story, obviously).
The rest of the world, particularly Africa and the Middle East, is still stuck at about 700 BC in the way they conduct warfare. In the old style of warfare, both sides went for total war, and almost psychopathic brutality in their conduct. When they fight wars, they do so to either enslave, rape, and brutalize their enemies, or put them all to the sword. While the West fights wars to settle disputes, the rest of the world fights wars to slaughter their enemies and pillage all they leave behind. They have not advanced past the Assyrian or Babylonian Empires in terms of their worldview on warfare. We cannot reason with them, we will never see eye to eye with them, and no amount of wondering what quarrel they have with us is going to help us come to a mutual understanding with them.
There's only one way to deal with ISIS, and that's to do it their way: Slaughter them all. Wipe them from the face of the Earth. Yes, more will come and others will take their place, so we just have to keep killing them. It's the only way.
wildcard600
08-10-14, 00:38
snip....
There's only one way to deal with ISIS, and that's to do it their way: Slaughter them all. Wipe them from the face of the Earth. Yes, more will come and others will take their place, so we just have to keep killing them. It's the only way.
"If ya want yer friend to hear ya, you'll have to talk a lot louder than that" - Darren
The handling of ISIS is and has been a complete clusterfuq by our leadership. They waited too long and are just now doing too little to combat that mistake. The reasons that they have done so don't really matter. At what point is Obama and his entire cabinet deemed unfit to lead? Bombing a couple artillery targets and pickups amount to squat. Oh yeah, have a great vacay at Martha's Vineyard, dickhead in chief!
Man do I hear you loud and clear. He could make up for the tardiness to the show via significant initial impact and effect but even that's too much to ask for the shockingly inept man.
Painful as this is for us as thinking citizens in the long run 8 years of Obama may be just what the doctor ordered. Everyone is getting sick of him and he still has over two years left. Think of the further damage damage he can do to the democratic and progressive causes by then. Hillary senses it and has already been eluding to Obama's poor decision making in interviews.
http://m.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/hillary-clinton-failure-to-help-syrian-rebels-led-to-the-rise-of-isis/375832/
ForTehNguyen
08-10-14, 09:12
region was more stable with saddam in charge. He wasnt a good guy but the alternative, letting ISIS run around, is worse.
Whiskey_Bravo
08-10-14, 09:35
The things these people are doing is absolutely evil. I am not sure how to fix it, but I do know that ISIS shouldn't be able to take a step outside or drive down the road without a 500lb bomb being jammed up their ass.
Warning: The below link has some seriously disturbing images of children and women, crucified men, etc. The story is first, then the pictures but they aren't that far down.
Edit: Seriously, these images suck. Beheaded children so please be warned. I wish for my sake that I had not looked but feel that they deserved to have people know what happened to them.
http://www.catholic.org/news/international/middle_east/story.php?id=56481
Two times in my life has an image brought me to tears and taken my breath away- that was one of them. I can't comprehend that. I can't reconcile it. I couldn't even transfer hatred onto someone's child if that person had harmed my own family. I will pray harder, and I can't imagine the strength it takes to not turn from God in the face of your own death when your ordered to convert. Heartbreaking.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Two times in my life has an image brought me to tears and taken my breath away- that was one of them. I can't comprehend that. I can't reconcile it. I couldn't even transfer hatred onto someone's child if that person had harmed my own family. I will pray harder, and I can't imagine the strength it takes to not turn from God in the face of your own death when your ordered to convert. Heartbreaking.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
x2, the shear steadfast will and faith that must take...
I'll levy no comment on the rest.
Two times in my life has an image brought me to tears and taken my breath away- that was one of them. I can't comprehend that. I can't reconcile it. I couldn't even transfer hatred onto someone's child if that person had harmed my own family. I will pray harder, and I can't imagine the strength it takes to not turn from God in the face of your own death when your ordered to convert. Heartbreaking.
I can't imagine the cowering weakness it takes to fly off to yet another two week vacation at the Vineyard while knowing full well what is transpiring in a country where we as a nation have expended so much blood & treasure. I can only hope that the youth of America are finally beginning to understand what Obama is, and what he represents, you don't put creatures such as an Obama, Biden, or Clinton in power without experiencing horrifying consequence....Yet, judging by the responses over at some other forums, its clear that America's self-absorbed youth really could care less, "none of our business, whats important is smoking dope, or buggering another boy," yes those are the important issues of the day....Men such as myself warned all who would listen as to what Obama was going to be ushering in, we were mocked and ridiculed over the past six years in thanks...Maybe we can send some of our new and fearsome transvestite troops over there to deal with the horror, yes I'm sure of it, that will take care of things right quick....
Two times in my life has an image brought me to tears and taken my breath away- that was one of them. I can't comprehend that. I can't reconcile it. I couldn't even transfer hatred onto someone's child if that person had harmed my own family. I will pray harder, and I can't imagine the strength it takes to not turn from God in the face of your own death when your ordered to convert. Heartbreaking.
For the love of God if their children's lives are at stake they should say they will friggin convert and then get the f**k out of dodge any way possible so your kids have a chance and you can live to kill them another day.
And don't look at any more images. We know the deal, the rest will just poison your soul. If you want to pray then do so for mass retaliation and that more will write their local congressmen in support of action. Don't normally do so but tomorrow I'm calling all my local congressman and both US senators to ask why I am not seeing them on TV expressing their outrage and concern.
http://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=bsCZzpmbEcs
http://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=jzCAPJDAnQA
http://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=tdTNm54UHkA
So, should the U.S. invade now or wait 3 years until there is a new POTUS and this situation has gotten even further out of control?
For the love of God if their children's lives are at stake they should say they will friggin convert and then get the f**k out of dodge any way possible so your kids have a chance and you can live to kill them another day.
And don't look at any more images. We know the deal, the rest will just poison your soul. If you want to pray then do so for mass retaliation and that more will write their local congressmen in support of action. Don't normally do so but tomorrow I'm calling all my local congressman and both US senators to ask why I am not seeing them on TV expressing their outrage and concern.
Yep, I'm there. I've seen enough. I clicked the link above but didn't go any further than the AK47 barrel pointed at a toddler. I already mentioned the headless 10ish year old girl I saw pictures of. I have an issue with "curiosity killed the cat," but I am done.
I can't even put into words how inconceivable their actions are. Death is too good for them. I got..... nothing. Just speechless.
William B.
08-10-14, 14:37
http://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=bsCZzpmbEcs
http://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=jzCAPJDAnQA
http://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=tdTNm54UHkA
Those links only took me to the YT home page.
Those links only took me to the YT home page.
They were probably removed from YT... that would be my guess.
This is an interesting documentary on ISIS:
https://news.vice.com/video/the-islamic-state-part-1
I'd rate it at R. It's part one of a five video series and I believe only two have been released thus far. There are some images of headless men, but it doesn't actually show it happening.
Part two is how they're already conditioning the kids to become one of them.
Yep, I'm there. I've seen enough. I clicked the link above but didn't go any further than the AK47 barrel pointed at a toddler. I already mentioned the headless 10ish year old girl I saw pictures of. I have an issue with "curiosity killed the cat," but I am done.
I can't even put into words how inconceivable their actions are. Death is too good for them. I got..... nothing. Just speechless.
Same here. I couldn't, and didnt want to see any more. I hope there is a special place in hell for these animals. I hope they get sent there soon. Children of all things...
The only thing Muslims like better than killing Jews is killing other Muslims.
William B.
08-10-14, 15:00
This is an interesting documentary on ISIS:
https://news.vice.com/video/the-islamic-state-part-1
I'd rate it at R. It's part one of a five video series and I believe only two have been released thus far. There are some images of headless men, but it doesn't actually show it happening.
Part two is how they're already conditioning the kids to become one of them.
Interesting stuff. The wife and I spent some time watching parts 1 & 2 yesterday. That journalist has some balls. I wouldn't touch those guys with a 10ft pole.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/07/vice-islamic-state_n_5656202.html
Those links only took me to the YT home page.
They were probably removed from YT... that would be my guess.
They work fine for me :confused:
The first 2 are part 1 & 2 of the Vice News series about the rise of ISIS/ISIL ans the 3rd one is an interview of a British jihadist that went to Syria to fight for ISIS.
William B.
08-10-14, 15:01
They were probably removed from YT... that would be my guess.
Surprise, surprise...
They work fine for me :confused:
Just tried again. Still not working for me. What was it? Executions and what-not?
Question, for those who may know. Does anyone else on the friggen planet care about this other than those directly effected and us? You'd think more of the world would be outraged by this and other countries could do something to help.
http://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=fxDuENvxw_o
Vice News has quite a few good videos on YouTube on these barbarians.
Surprise, surprise...
Just tried again. Still not working for me. What was it? Executions and what-not?
The two part thing from Vice News that Talon167 posted.
Question, for those who may know. Does anyone else on the friggen planet care about this other than those directly effected and us? You'd think more of the world would be outraged by this and other countries could do something to help.
A fantastic question. Why is Russia, waging their own proxy war against ISIS, not dropping a few bombs to both protect their fellow Christians and display the prowess they so desperately seem to crave? Why not an air strike from French or British forces? Europe is far more vulnerable to these maggots if they continue to expand yet they have been silent beyond French humanitarian airdrops.
I'd say they are wisely allowing militants to kill each other off, but non-violent civilians are being slaughtered here so the inaction makes little sense on a variety of levels. It's like a case study in what not to do when faced with a growing and unusually hostile threat.
Europe is to muslim already if they did something they could have some serious blowback on the non muslim citizens who of course have no way to protect themselves from the armed muslims in the country
considering Russia is what over %25 muslim ? they are going to have to once again go down in history for genicide if they want to stop the problem
when bad people say they are going to kill you and grow in numbers time to get rid of them much like mice in your home or cockroaches time to get rid of all of them and that does not mean release them in the field next door ! it means rid them gone and get rid of all in the field next to your home
Warning: The below link has some seriously disturbing images of children and women, crucified men, etc. The story is first, then the pictures but they aren't that far down.
http://www.catholic.org/news/international/middle_east/story.php?id=56481
I will never understand how someone is capable of the atrocities that these animals have committed against their fellow man.
montanadave
08-10-14, 17:41
We need to recognize an independent Kurdistan, give them both military and humanitarian aid, and feed al Malaki to the sharks.
They work fine for me :confused:
None of the links you've posted work for me either. They take me to my YT homepage.
Next time try using the "share" feature and copy & paste that code instead. You can also post the video into your comment by using the lil' filmstrip looking thing.
I will never understand how someone is capable of the atrocities that these animals have committed against their fellow man.
Par for the course for humanity from day one. Nothing new here to see in terms of what human being are capable and willing to do to teach other under various justifications and logic used. It's of course disheartening in the extreme that in large parts of the world, in 2014, human behavior no different than it was 1,000 years ago or 10,000. Brutal slaughter over religion(s), tribes, resources, etc, etc.
We are highly violent animals with weapons and big brains, and that makes for a bad outcome under the right circumstances. It's also why no four words in all human history has lead to the death of more people than "It can't happen here"
Whiskey_Bravo
08-10-14, 19:28
I will never understand how someone is capable of the atrocities that these animals have committed against their fellow man.
Yep, I am left without anything to say after looking at just that link. I could not research any more. It has affected me all day. I wish that I wouldn't have looked, but I feel that for their sake I had to. I think that maybe my first reaction was that of shock and it didn't hit me to what I had really seen until later. My utter disgust and hatred for them and anyone who doesn't completely distance themselves from them I believe knows no bounds.
Whiskey_Bravo
08-10-14, 19:29
We need to recognize an independent Kurdistan, give them both military and humanitarian aid, and feed al Malaki to the sharks.
I agree 100%.
Whiskey_Bravo
08-10-14, 19:30
It's also why no four words in all human history has lead to the death of more people than "It can't happen here"
Very true words.
Very true words.
I wish it were not so, but denial seems to be the most pervasive human emotion of them all and I don't see that changing any time soon.
None of the links you've posted work for me either. They take me to my YT homepage.
Next time try using the "share" feature and copy & paste that code instead. You can also post the video into your comment by using the lil' filmstrip looking thing.
That's what I did. I don't know why they don't work.
I wish it were not so, but denial seems to be the most pervasive human emotion of them all and I don't see that changing any time soon.
It isn't that simple for very good reason. We know what humans have been capable of and we also know that they have evolved in tremendous, nearly inexplicable strides compared to other species. We can and should do better as our civilization develops. There is no longer any excuse and therefore better standards should be enforced by those fortunate enough to be capable of doing so.
In other words no turning our backs on mass slaughter anymore because it's how it was before, inconvenient to acknowledge or seems far away. The world is merging in many ways so like it or not and before overpopulation alone kills us off (ironic in context I know) we better find a way to co-exist or else. Hiding in the corner isn't an option.
It isn't that simple for very good reason. We know what humans have been capable of and we also know that they have evolved in tremendous, nearly inexplicable strides compared to other species. We can and should do better as our civilization develops. There is no longer any excuse and therefore better standards should be enforced by those fortunate enough to be capable of doing so.
In other words no turning our backs on mass slaughter anymore because it's how it was before, inconvenient to acknowledge or seems far away. The world is merging in many ways so like it or not and before overpopulation alone kills us off (ironic in context I know) we better find a way to co-exist or else. Hiding in the corner isn't an option.
It is that simple. That does not mean I don't agree with all you have said. What happened to "Never again" ?
Only words that got ignored due to usual priorities of human beings. I agree on all fronts, but I also have little faith it will change. Does not mean we shouldn't try per se. The world has stood by and watched mass slaughter before, is doing so now, will do is in the future. Here's an excellent article for the times:
The Next International Right
Thursday, October 17, 2002
By Glenn Harlan Reynolds
The past century was one of barbarism and mass murder, one in which the world stood by while large populations were exterminated by governments bent on power and possessed of the means of killing.
After World War II, the "international community" determined that the most important goal of the new international system created for the post-war era would be the prevention of genocide. "Never again," we were told, and nations signed the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in large numbers.
Among the nations who signed were Cambodia (1950), the Congo (1962) and Rwanda (1975), though Rwanda was originally covered by Belgium’s agreement in 1952, when Rwanda was a Trust Territory administered by Belgium.
These three nations, of course, went on to become the greatest sites of genocide in the second half of the 20th century. (China's mass murders and starvation under Mao are more properly called "democide," as they did not single out a particular group or culture.)
In every case, the "international community" stood aside while the genocide took place unimpeded by the parchment barriers of international agreement. Tea, sympathy and peacekeeping forces were provided after the killing was done, but no action was taken to seriously inconvenience the killers while they were at work. International agreeements, and the international community, have proved as useless as the League of Nations was in confronting Mussolini's invasion of Ethiopia.
As one article on the Rwandan genocide in Foreign Affairs puts it:
As reports of genocide reached the outside world starting in late April, public outcry spurred the United Nations to reauthorize a beefed up "UNAMIR II" on May 17. During the following month, however, the U.N. was unable to obtain any substantial contributions of troops and equipment. As a result, on June 22 the Security Council authorized France to lead its own intervention, Operation Turquoise, by which time most Tutsi were already long dead.
Nor have efforts to deter genocide by trying killers after the fact done very well. As the magazine Legal Affairs reports, Rwandan killers have turned up actually on the payroll of the "International Court" designated to try war criminals. It is, said one observer, as if Klaus Barbie had turned up on the staff at Nuremberg. Pol Pot, meanwhile, apparently died in bed.
This has led some observers to suggest that genocide isn’t something that can be addressed by international conventions or tribunals. A recent article in the Washington University Law Quarterly argues that the most important thing we can do to prevent genocide is to ensure that civilian populations are armed:
The question of genocide is one of manifest importance in the closing years of a century that has been extraordinary for the quality and quantity of its bloodshed. As Elie Wiesel has rightly pointed out, "This century is the most violent in recorded history. Never have so many people participated in the killing of so many people."
Recent events in the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and many other parts of the world make it clear that the book has not yet been closed on the evil of official mass murder. Contemporary scholars have little explored the preconditions of genocide. Still less have they asked whether a society's weapons policy might be one of the institutional arrangements that contributes to the probability of its government engaging in some of the more extreme varieties of outrage.
Though it is a long step between being disarmed and being murdered--one does not usually lead to the other--but it is nevertheless an arresting reality that not one of the principal genocides of the twentieth century, and there have been dozens, has been inflicted on a population that was armed. (Emphasis added).
The result, conclude law professor Daniel Polsby and criminologist Don Kates, is that "a connection exists between the restrictiveness of a country's civilian weapons policy and its liability to commit genocide."
Armed citizens, they argue, are far less likely to be massacred than defenseless ones, and armed resistance to genocide is more likely to receive outside aid. It is probably no accident that the better-armed resistance to genocide in Bosnia and Kosovo drew international intervention, while the hapless Rwandans and Cambodians did not. When victims resist, what is merely cause for horror becomes cause for alarm, and those who are afraid of the conflict’s spread will support (as Europe did) intervention out of self-interest when they could not be bothered to intervene out of compassion.
It is no wonder that genocide is so often preceded by efforts to disarm the people.
Current events in Zimbabwe appear to be playing out in the fashion that Polsby and Kates warn against. If this is the case, then surely the human rights community could be expected to take on the subject of armed citizens, particularly as the right to arms is far closer to the individual rights that make up the "first generation" of internationally recognized human rights.
After all, the human rights community has long argued that all sorts of dramatic changes in international law are justified if they might make genocide unlikely and has been nothing less than flexible in discovering such "post-first-generation" human rights as "developmental rights," "environmental rights" and a "right to peace."
In fact, the human rights community has addressed the issue -- but from the wrong side. They seem generally supportive of U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s effort to put in place a global gun control regime "including a prohibition of unrestricted trade and private ownership of small arms."
In other words, in the face of evidence that an armed populace prevents genocide, the human rights community has largely gotten behind a campaign to ensure that there will be no armed populaces anywhere in the world.
It seems to me that the human rights community has things exactly backward. Given that the efforts of the international community to prevent and punish genocide over the past several decades have been, to put it politely, a dismal failure, perhaps it is time to try a new approach. International human rights law is supposed to be a "living" body of law that changes with the needs of the times in order to secure important goals -- chief among which is the prevention of genocide. Given that the traditional approaches of conventions and tribunals have failed miserably, the human rights community should be prepared to endorse a new international human right: the right of law-abiding citizens to be armed.
It may seem odd to make such an argument at a time when D.C. is being terrorized by a mysterious gunman. But no one should pretend that rights do not have costs. We recognize the right to free speech not because we believe that speech does no harm, but because we believe that free speech has benefits that outweigh the harm. We recognize the right to abortion not because we believe that it is costless, but because the cost of having the state supervise women’s pregnancies is seen as worse. And we recognize the freedom of religion not because religion is safe -- it can and does lead to violence, as the worldwide epidemic of Islamic terrorism demonstrates -- but because having the government prescribe what is orthodox is worse.
Similarly, an armed populace might conceivably lead to more crime (though the criminological evidence suggests otherwise). But even if one believes that widespread ownership of firearms by law-abiding citizens leads to somewhat more crime, that is not by itself an argument against creating such a right, merely a cost to be set against the increased protection from genocide that such a right would provide.
Given the high value that we (supposedly, at least) place on preventing genocide, it seems unlikely that minor increases in crime rates could justify eliminating such a protection.
I wonder if the Bush administration’s diplomatic corps will have the nerve and the integrity to push this argument at the U.N. and elsewhere, not merely as an argument in opposition to global gun control, which they have been making already, but an argument in favor of a positive right to be armed as part of international human rights law? Perhaps they will, if enough Americans encourage them to.
Glenn Harlan Reynolds is a law professor at the University of Tennessee and publishes InstaPundit.Com. He is co-author, with Peter W. Morgan, of The Appearance of Impropriety: How the Ethics Wars Have Undermined American Government, Business, and Society (The Free Press, 1997).
Moose-Knuckle
08-11-14, 01:38
Par for the course for humanity from day one. Nothing new here to see in terms of what human being are capable and willing to do to teach other under various justifications and logic used. It's of course disheartening in the extreme that in large parts of the world, in 2014, human behavior no different than it was 1,000 years ago or 10,000. Brutal slaughter over religion(s), tribes, resources, etc, etc.
We are highly violent animals with weapons and big brains, and that makes for a bad outcome under the right circumstances. It's also why no four words in all human history has lead to the death of more people than "It can't happen here"
This is spot on.
I have volumes of history books that I have read since I was a child, a passion really. How did the Incas treat their enemies? Or the Apaches? Vlad Tepes (aka Dracula), the Romans? In the Ebola thread I linked two Vice News documentaries showing cannibalism during the civil war in Liberia. Just ate the son-of-a-bitchs right there in the street where they shot them, raw and uncooked. A common practice in Liberia was to butcher a small child (alive) and drink their warm blood prior to going into a gun-fight. Syria, yup cutting the heart out of a soldier loyal to Assad and eating it. And I know the pictures posted in thread are evil but just know that they do much worse to some of them. Killing is an escape compared to what others suffer. I won't even get into the sexual stuff here.
These are the savages that Obama, McCain, and company wanted to support in Syria, these are the bastards Obama praised for the "Arab Spring". The Coptic Christians have been suffering this sort of thing in Egypt ever since.
So what would you guys have us do? As terrible a situation as it is, I feel there are only two very shitty real options in Iraq. Either we try to focus on our own issues at home and watch in horror as it goes on until something changes, or we invade for the third time, get more of our troops killed, maybe make a difference (probably not, and even if we did it'd be impossible to actually measure), and just piss off more people.
This is spot on.
I have volumes of history books that I have read since I was a child, a passion really. How did the Incas treat their enemies? Or the Apaches? Vlad Tepes (aka Dracula), the Romans? In the Ebola thread I linked two Vice News documentaries showing cannibalism during the civil war in Liberia. Just ate the son-of-a-bitchs right there in the street where they shot them, raw and uncooked. A common practice in Liberia was to butcher a small child (alive) and drink their warm blood prior to going into a gun-fight. Syria, yup cutting the heart out of a soldier loyal to Assad and eating it. And I know the pictures posted in thread are evil but just know that they do much worse to some of them. Killing is an escape compared to what others suffer. I won't even get into the sexual stuff here.
These are the savages that Obama, McCain, and company wanted to support in Syria, these are the bastards Obama praised for the "Arab Spring". The Coptic Christians have been suffering this sort of thing in Egypt ever since.
But that too, what we have always done. Taking a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" approach without consideration for what you're releasing onto the world or if you'll be able to control it when/if you arm, or fund, or train them. OBL and his ilk, death squats and narco terror groups in SA, or Russia during WWII, etc, etc. who once done combating our mutual interest, turn their attention to us and or allies, and have to be dealt with.
Would these "freedom fighters" not be in that category? Yes. There's nothing new to see here in terms of human behavior or even US policy, which is no different than that of other countries really.
I agree with Safety, in that maybe its time the human race steps up and does better. Now what?
Now what? Now act. What's a more noble cause than stopping the beheadings of children and the rape of women. I get it's happened in history, the Aztecs did horrible crap; but this is now, and we have real time reports on the atrocities. It doesn't matter to me what role the US has had to get to this point, the murder of children and genocide is wrong.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don’t think any of us are naive enough to believe this is the first time people have been slaughtering people in the name of [insert reason here]. But, just because it happened in the past that doesn’t mean we should turn a blind eye. Especially since we (and other world powers) can do something about it. I don’t claim to have the answers; in fact I’ll be the first to admit I am not sure what to do. Do we put troops on the ground and subject them to possibly the same fate as the civilians in Iraq/Syria? That’d be a tough pill to swallow. I don’t even want to think about what would happen to one of our men/women if ISIS got a hold of them. I’d think being burned alive and hanged from a bridge would be the least of their worries at that point.
Do we keep it up with air attacks? That’s probably the safest route. Of course it’s kind of hard to do that with numerous civilians close. Hello rock, meet hardplace. :-/ Ugh.
montanadave
08-11-14, 08:58
http://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=fxDuENvxw_o
Vice News has quite a few good videos on YouTube on these barbarians.
And those videos got another endorsement this morning when Politico's Mike Allen linked them under the heading "If you only watch one thing" in his daily Playbook column, which gets A LOT of traffic.
I don’t think any of us are naive enough to believe this is the first time people have been slaughtering people in the name of [insert reason here]. But, just because it happened in the past that doesn’t mean we should turn a blind eye. Especially since we (and other world powers) can do something about it. I don’t claim to have the answers; in fact I’ll be the first to admit I am not sure what to do. Do we put troops on the ground and subject them to possibly the same fate as the civilians in Iraq/Syria? That’d be a tough pill to swallow. I don’t even want to think about what would happen to one of our men/women if ISIS got a hold of them. I’d think being burned alive and hanged from a bridge would be the least of their worries at that point.
Do we keep it up with air attacks? That’s probably the safest route. Of course it’s kind of hard to do that with numerous civilians close. Hello rock, meet hardplace. :-/ Ugh.
US starts arming Kurds:
Senior US officials say the Obama administration has begun directly providing weapons to Kurdish forces, AP reports.
The US previously had insisted on only selling arms to the Iraqi government. The officials wouldn’t say which US agency is providing the arms or what weapons are being sent, but one official said it isn’t the Pentagon. The CIA has historically done similar arming operations.
Officials say the administration is close to approving plans for the Pentagon to arm the Kurds. Recently the US military has been helping facilitate weapons deliveries from the Iraqis to the Kurds, who had been losing ground to the Islamic State.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2014/aug/11/iraq-crisis-us-air-strikes-help-kurds-retake-territory-live-updates#block-53e87971e4b00a39438522be
montanadave
08-11-14, 09:38
Perhaps it's time that we, as in the United States, officially abandoned whatever cockamamie plans we ever had about "nation building" in Iraq and embraced some realpolitik strategies in this most ****ed-up region on the planet (for which we deservedly share a large amount of the blame). Time to recognize an independent Kurdistan, consolidate our efforts to insure its survival, and let the rest of Iraq hash it out in establishing separate Shiite and Sunni autonomous regions.
Perhaps if the Sunnis have their chunk of turf, they will be less inclined to throw their support behind the murderous ISIS horde running roughshod over the countryside.
And would someone please hand al Maliki over to ISIS? If anybody deserves whatever atrocity they want to commit next, it's that turd.
US starts arming Kurds:
Senior US officials say the Obama administration has begun directly providing weapons to Kurdish forces, AP reports.
The US previously had insisted on only selling arms to the Iraqi government. The officials wouldn’t say which US agency is providing the arms or what weapons are being sent, but one official said it isn’t the Pentagon. The CIA has historically done similar arming operations.
Officials say the administration is close to approving plans for the Pentagon to arm the Kurds. Recently the US military has been helping facilitate weapons deliveries from the Iraqis to the Kurds, who had been losing ground to the Islamic State.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2014/aug/11/iraq-crisis-us-air-strikes-help-kurds-retake-territory-live-updates#block-53e87971e4b00a39438522be
Good! Too bad the rest of the Iraqi army doesn't have half the guts the Kurds do.
Good! Too bad the rest of the Iraqi army doesn't have half the guts the Kurds do.
I have always heard the Kurds tend to be good dedicated fighters. Maybe those here who have had more direct interaction with them can comment. I'd think with some improved arms and some air support by us, ISIS can be reduced to red mist as they should. Us arming and supporting the Kurds will make many in the region (Turks especially I'd think) very unhappy, but what have they done to step up? Not a damn thing as far as I know.
Intervening sounds very noble. However, I'm torn between the two for what I consider good reasons.
When should we go to Africa? Hell, Cuba's a little island 70 miles off of our coast and we couldn't fix that.
montanadave
08-11-14, 10:30
Us arming and supporting the Kurds will make many in the region (Turks especially I'd think) very unhappy, but what have they done to step up? Not a damn thing as far as I know.
The Turks have modified their position on the Kurds quite a bit in recent years. They might not be first in line to recognize an independent Kurdistan, but their relationship with the Kurdish leadership is much better than in the past and they seem more amenable to granting the Kurdish people greater autonomy (particularly if it's based on carving up a chunk of Iraq rather than Turkey).
Intervening sounds very noble. However, I'm torn between the two for what I consider good reasons.
When should we go to Africa? Hell, Cuba's a little island 70 miles off of our coast and we couldn't fix that.
That's the point. We always seem to find moral outrage where/when it happens in places we have national interests (oil in this case) and in places we don't, not so much. We generally find good reasons not to intervene in places like Africa (where the slaughter makes ISIS activities look tame...) and bad reasons to intervene in places like Iraq. That lack of moral consistency, again, par for the course and degrades our world standing. It's not remotely unique to the US, but the US tends to stand out as the country most concerned with Human Rights and beacon of justice and all that.
I don't know what the right answer is, but asking the hard questions might finally get to that answer.
It seems to be a blindingly simple formula that many refuse to acknowledge. In the Fertile Crescent, the atrocities of autocratic dictators leading a secular government, always pale in comparison to the atrocities committed by fanatical religious sects bent on overthrowing the autocrats.
When dictators rule, oil flows, hospitals and schools are built food is plentiful and religious terrorists are suppressed. When religious fanatics rule, we get destroyed historical sites, beheadings, rapes, starvation, refugees fleeing and a complete breakdown of the society.
We simply don’t like Assad because he’s Putin’s dictator, not ours. Before we hated Saddam, we liked him. We liked the Shah of Iran. We liked Hosni Mubarak. We tolerated Gaddafi once he learned not to mess with us. We get along very well with the secular government of Turkey. In short, strict secular regimes offer stability that the religious fanatics never will. We get along great with the strict rule of the King of Jordan. Even the Saudi royalty understands the needs of Saudi Arabia and the region are more important than the religious needs of Wahhabi fanaticism.
So, when will we learn our lesson? There is no perfect solution in the Fertile Crescent. Given Democracy/mob rule, they will always choose the path that leads to their own destruction. Along the way, they’ll take down anyone else they don’t care for. Their natural capacity for hatred far outweighs their capacity for nurturing. Someday, we really need to learn that the more we meddle in their affairs, the worse the results. I’m all for killing the bloodthirsty savages that attack innocent people, but the nation building crap has to stop. :(
This is an interesting documentary on ISIS:
https://news.vice.com/video/the-islamic-state-part-1
Anyone else get a chuckle at the PR guy saying how they "humiliated" us in Iraq, then going and hip firing his AK into the sky in a firefight? ****ing morons.
Anyone else get a chuckle at the PR guy saying how they "humiliated" us in Iraq, then going and hip firing his AK into the sky in a firefight? ****ing morons.
If a kill ratio of 20:1 (or what ever it was) is what he means by "humiliate" us, then I guess we were "humiliated" :rolleyes:
And remember, air strikes are for cowards, but IEDs are how real soldiers fight...
Great post GlockToGo –
The involvement we have had up until now should elicit a response in my opinion. That’s the difference to me. I don’t expect the US to continent hop in order to provide peacekeeping missions resulting in US lives at risk at the sake of just having the resources to prevent mass genocide. The fact that we had a hand in some form or fashion should result in a need for intercedence, and a lack of purports complicity on this level of cruelty. Correct me if Im wrong, but we didn’t provide training or arms to the Hutu on the level that we have in the current conflict. The intent is water under the bridge at this point when there is a damn park that the IS has placed the heads of children on the fence in order to reinforce their hardline to younger recruits. Cant we find a common detonator of humanity and the protection of innocents? If my own brother started murdering Muslims in Houston in the name of Christianity, I would active seek to crush him…seeing as how I have spent time teaching him to shoot better, my earnest would be exponentiated.
Doc Safari
08-11-14, 11:44
And remember, air strikes are for cowards, but IEDs are how real soldiers fight...
Excellent point.
But it's all macho posturing anyway, and anyone with better than a fourth-grade (or 7th century) education can see that.
BoringGuy45
08-11-14, 11:48
Unfortunately, I don't think it's an issue of whether or not we have a moral obligation to defend people other than our own. It's now an issue of whether or not letting them destroy what few allies or at least moderates there are in the region, consolidate power and technology, and actually become a military threat to the West. No one wants to get involved in another war in Iraq, no one wants to get involved in any war, period. It's an awful thing. I don't believe we should be the police of the world either and keep throwing money and American lives at stopping every genocidal struggle that has been going on since before recorded history.
But, whether we like it or not, this world is completely interconnected, and even with all our resources, we can't just say screw it, we're pulling the plug on all international relations and we're going to be completely self-sustaining. There's two major issues of why we have no choice but to be committed to wiping out ISIS.
First: As I said before, they want to take over the world. They said so, they've been saying so since bin Laden declared jihad almost 20 years ago. They want the world map to look like it did in about 700 AD, and then they want to expand their empire beyond that. Once they take Iraq and Syria, they will have resources to make them a regional power, plus many supporters who will aid them when they invade Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.
Second: Even if they were to be contained to Iraq, they would control many trade routes plus huge oil reserves. They could cripple our economy. Yeah, maybe we have enough oil to sustain ourselves, but if we were to finally wise up and start taking in more domestic oil, it would still take many years to make up the gap, which would be long enough to drive us into an even deeper recession.
Bush and Obama screwed up Iraq big time. Now, do I think it's time to launch an all out war and we should put boots and tanks on the ground tomorrow. No, but I do think absolutely all options, ALL options, need to be on the table and seriously considered, rather than this half ass "We're going to do airstrikes, but don't worry America and ISIS, we won't do too many and it's all we're going to do," crap. The fact of the matter is, it's not 1800 anymore, and I don't think we have the luxury of only getting involved in a war when the enemies are actually dropping paratroops into Colorado and establishing a beachhead on the Atlantic seaboard. I don't think it's time yet, but I think we may need to accept the fact that we're going to start another full war.
ISIS loyalist arrested in U.S. (http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/suspected-american-militant-isis-supporter-held-bail-article-1.1898788)
A Brooklyn judge ordered a suspected American militant who pledged allegiance to the terrorist leader of ISIS held without bail after he was arrested at Kennedy Airport, the Daily News has learned.
FBI agents nabbed Donald Ray Morgan, a 44-year-old ex-convict from North Carolina, on Aug. 2 when he returned to the United States after an eight-month stay in Lebanon, where his wife lives.
Morgan, who has a previous conviction for firing a gun, had allegedly been brokering deals for military-grade weapons and ammo in his home state and was indicted for being a felon in possession of a firearm...
“Allah give me martyrdom wherever I may be,” Morgan tweeted last month.
He also referred to himself as a mujahedeen , or jihad fighter.
"Allah you brought me here and I need the rest of my journey to join the ranks withthe most beautiful brothers on Earth."
“To the brothers inside Syria and Iraq be humble and grateful many of us are trying to come as some are arrested and others delayed,” he tweeted...
the judge said the tweets had “clearly implied to me that he is trying to go to Syria or Iraq as the next step and trying to be actively engaged.”
It is that simple. That does not mean I don't agree with all you have said. What happened to "Never again" ?
Only words that got ignored due to usual priorities of human beings. I agree on all fronts, but I also have little faith it will change. Does not mean we shouldn't try per se. The world has stood by and watched mass slaughter before, is doing so now, will do is in the future. Here's an excellent article for the times:
Good read Will. Relevant and of course the first thing most of us think of when we hear the word "genocide" is Rwanda. In response to that two quick things, first being that I over-simplified in my last post. While we are merging to an extent as a world it isn't practical or even possible for just the US to extinguish each potential genocidal scenario, but that doesn't mean we should ever be complacent sharing a world with those that stand by and watch either. Bottom line is the rest of the world needs to get it's shit together bigtime and the red-taped bound, inept UN isn't doing much to stabilize anything anywhere.
Still some scenarios are worse than others and have different international implications so for now if we as a nation go case by case so be it. This particular scenario demands action immediately because it's as bad as it gets beyond being on our own continent. Most here know the ramifications of these animals being successful are exorbitant to the world in general via international terror funding and training, mass instability, increased oil prices, etc.
Add to that them documenting their atrocities with such unfathomable glee and arrogance and they have now spawned a genuine hatred for them and their cause, even among the peace loving. People across the spectrum are now willing to see the US involved in conflict yet again because they loathe what they are seeing everyday, therefore the more ISIS/ISIL puts out there the more will be in favor of war against them. Would be lying if I said it hasn't worked on me to an extent as well, but again there is more to it than just that.
Why don't we shut down the terrorist training camps here in America as a start? As an example:
http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Terrorist_Map_of_the_US.jpg
We broke it, we own it! I am sick of hearing about Bush being responsible for this or for that, he is not responsible for this catastrophe, that rests solely upon the shoulders of "Mr Affirmative Action himself," who purely out of political spite & expediency, chose to toss the Iraqi nation under the bus, period! Bush may or may not have had justification for entering Iraq, he certainly screwed up in the aftermath with the dismantling of Iraq's forces, or rather his douche bag ambassador did, and that is why he ordered the surge, which worked almost to perfection! Iraq was well in hand as Bush handed it off to Obama, not perfect but well in hand, it was Obama who left it to the machinating of Iran, and their proxy prime minister...We had no business leaving Iraq when we did, it was akin to leaving Nazi Germany just prior to the Soviet Blockade, further it was Obama's obviously "pro-islamist" anti-constitutional actions in Libya which have directly led to this horror! To this day, his Libyan action, much as his Egyptian position taken against Mubarak, remain perfectly incoherent, incoherent that is if he actually thought he was protecting our best interest, because it remains just as likely that he was not!
We own Iraq if for no other reason then all of young men we sacrificed for it, for such little return. To leave it at this stage to its own devices is to spit upon the sacrifice of all of those young men who died for it, ostensibly on our behalf! I wonder, what would Obama's response have been if these were Muslims being slaughtered by Christians? I rather imagine we would have eradicated their army from the face of the earth by now, in fact thats indisputable.....I would prefer to arm the Kurds, however, that brings our Turkish NATO ally into the mess, and most likely not in a favorable fashion. All roads lead to US troop deployments, and frankly speaking, we had no business pulling them out in the first place, this was all so predictable...
We warned you what Obama was, what he would do, currently he is leading Islamofascism from behind, directly to the United States....
edited....better to not get involved in this.
ISIS is a direct consequence of either an incoherently weak Obama foreign policy, or a deliberate Obama intention to weaken the USA, to degrade its position of power in the world, either way Bush was completely innocent of Obama's remarkably devastating decisions(dumping Mubarak in Egypt, supporting AQ in Libya & Syria, the latter pair of actions leading directly to the current horror in Iraq), while Obama is not, Obama made them! Obama is either an incompetent, or a deliberate saboteur, take your pick, there's plenty of Obama to go around either way....To quote his longtime spiritual guide, Obama's chickens have come home, they are his chickens, not Mr Bushes... now they are our chickens. Obama is responsible, nobody held a gun to his head, this is a man who upon being disgracefully elected to the US senate from Illinois, immediately began a campaign for the presidency, accomplishing nothing at any point along the way, not a single contribution to the national interest, pure unadulterated self-aggrandizement & nothing else, no vision, no concerns, nothing but lies and rhetoric....
We are currently reaping the harvest of that obscenity...
I would be REALLY pleasantly surprised if POTUS does order the bombing of his buddies.
If so, for sure LONG overdue.The only thing Muslims like better than killing Jews is killing other Muslims.
ISIS is a direct consequence of either an incoherently weak Obama foreign policy, or a deliberate Obama intention to weaken the USA, to degrade its position of power in the world, either way Bush was completely innocent of Obama's remarkably devastating decisions(dumping Mubarak in Egypt, supporting AQ in Libya & Syria, the latter pair of actions leading directly to the current horror in Iraq), while Obama is not, Obama made them! Obama is either an incompetent, or a deliberate saboteur, take your pick, there's plenty of Obama to go around either way....To quote his longtime spiritual guide, Obama's chickens have come home, they are his chickens, not Mr Bushes... now they are our chickens. Obama is responsible, nobody held a gun to his head, this is a man who upon being disgracefully elected to the US senate from Illinois, immediately began a campaign for the presidency, accomplishing nothing at any point along the way, not a single contribution to the national interest, pure unadulterated self-aggrandizement & nothing else, no vision, no concerns, nothing but lies and rhetoric....
We are currently reaping the harvest of that obscenity...Both Bushes sucked as well. So did the Clintons.
Doc Safari
08-11-14, 17:20
So, I've watched some of the bombing footage. It's pretty unimpressive compared to some of the Gulf War footage showing a variety of things blowing up. I think my jaw dropped when most of the bombing videos of attacks on ISIS appear to be maybe "two trucks" getting blown up here, a couple other vehicles there, etc.
I haven't seen any footage of entire ISIS convoys being annihilated.
Is it just that I haven't seen it (or they're not showing it)? Or is it that this is just a Mickey Mouse attack on a few token targets?
I'm actually not being snarky: I'd like to know WTF we are really doing.
ISIS needs its collective ass kicked, and I'm already uncomfortable that once again this is mostly talk and very little action.
Both Bushes sucked as well. So did the Clintons.
Fortunately, or unfortunately, that has little to nothing to do with the current state of affairs, all of which are consequences of Obama's seemingly childish grasp of world affairs. The responsibility for Obama's actions are not the fault of either Bush, or of Bill Clinton(though Clinton's wife Hillary is clearly implicated in these humiliating failures), they are the responsibility of Obama and those that continue to enable him to present sub-moronic as being somehow magically "gifted!" It was an enormous blunder to have withdrawn entirely from Iraq, and an act of pure political spite courtesy of Obama and his political party, the democrats.....
So, I've watched some of the bombing footage. It's pretty unimpressive compared to some of the Gulf War footage showing a variety of things blowing up. I think my jaw dropped when most of the bombing videos of attacks on ISIS appear to be maybe "two trucks" getting blown up here, a couple other vehicles there, etc.
I haven't seen any footage of entire ISIS convoys being annihilated.
Is it just that I haven't seen it (or they're not showing it)? Or is it that this is just a Mickey Mouse attack on a few token targets?
I'm actually not being snarky: I'd like to know WTF we are really doing.
ISIS needs its collective ass kicked, and I'm already uncomfortable that once again this is mostly talk and very little action.
It is without a doubt the weakest, lamest response to a war atrocity I've ever witnessed. It would literally be better if we said we couldn't do anything and then did nothing. This merely proves we could absolutely do something, but chose to do the least amount possible. :mad:
Moose-Knuckle
08-12-14, 03:40
As far as what should we do, well who took Saddam out of power? Who removed Gaddafi? Both those despots warned the West what would happen if they were removed, just so happens the West are the ones who backed both of them and put them in power to begin with. We supplied Saddam with arms and cash to fight Iran, etc. Who says "we" didn't want this to happen, i.e. chaos via orchestrated crisis = geo-politics.
Why didn't we go into Rwanda? Because the "war rape", butchering, and dismembering of 1,000,000 Tutsi's had no geo-political importance to the powers at be.
alienb1212
08-12-14, 08:40
As far as what should we do, well who took Saddam out of power? Who removed Gaddafi? Both those despots warned the West what would happen if they were removed, just so happens the West are the ones who backed both of them and put them in power to begin with. We supplied Saddam with arms and cash to fight Iran, etc. Who says "we" didn't want this to happen, i.e. chaos via orchestrated crisis = geo-politics.
Why didn't we go into Rwanda? Because the "war rape", butchering, and dismembering of 1,000,000 Tutsi's had no geo-political importance to the powers at be.
This. We don't care about the actual atrocities, only the ones that our "owners" have some kind of motivation to "fix"
Sometimes I think bombing these guys is like going after a swarm of bees with a 9mm.
skijunkie55
08-12-14, 09:30
Why don't we shut down the terrorist training camps here in America as a start? As an example:
http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Terrorist_Map_of_the_US.jpg
Related to this map...
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/11/isis-supporters-reportedly-post-photo-of-the-groups-black-flag-with-an-ominous-message-in-front-of-the-white-house/
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/isis-phone-white-house.jpg
https://twitter.com/Sunna_rev/statuses/498239066635124736
Fun times ahead...
Related to this map...
Fun times ahead...
That's no good.
Interesting timeline.
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2014/08/presidential%20bombings_0.jpg
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-12/if-you-your-boots-ground-heres-more-obama-plans-send-75-more-advisers-iraq
I don't doubt they are here but that tweet sounds off given the "sooooooon"- that feels strangely like US culture internet slang.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't doubt they are here but that tweet sounds off given the "sooooooon"- that feels strangely like US culture internet slang.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And they are not Americans because...?
Good point-
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As far as what should we do, well who took Saddam out of power? Who removed Gaddafi? Both those despots warned the West what would happen if they were removed, just so happens the West are the ones who backed both of them and put them in power to begin with. We supplied Saddam with arms and cash to fight Iran, etc. Who says "we" didn't want this to happen, i.e. chaos via orchestrated crisis = geo-politics.
Why didn't we go into Rwanda? Because the "war rape", butchering, and dismembering of 1,000,000 Tutsi's had no geo-political importance to the powers at be.
Ya lets not get into the facts, the facts scare people.
Quote Originally Posted by Moose-Knuckle View Post
As far as what should we do, well who took Saddam out of power? Who removed Gaddafi? Both those despots warned the West what would happen if they were removed, just so happens the West are the ones who backed both of them and put them in power to begin with. We supplied Saddam with arms and cash to fight Iran, etc. Who says "we" didn't want this to happen, i.e. chaos via orchestrated crisis = geo-politics.
Why didn't we go into Rwanda? Because the "war rape", butchering, and dismembering of 1,000,000 Tutsi's had no geo-political importance to the powers at be.
Not to forget Mubarak being tossed in Egypt! Egypt came within a curly short hair length of going full on islamofascist, in fact it can be argued that in truth it actually did, until the military stepped in and eliminated Obama's hand picked Muslim brotherhood elites....It was Obama, and his administration that engineered the Muslim brotherhood's ascent to power, it was his gig!
Moose-Knuckle
08-12-14, 15:25
Related to this map...
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/11/isis-supporters-reportedly-post-photo-of-the-groups-black-flag-with-an-ominous-message-in-front-of-the-white-house/
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/isis-phone-white-house.jpg
https://twitter.com/Sunna_rev/statuses/498239066635124736
Fun times ahead...
I've been expecting attacks like we saw in Nairobi and Mumbai in CONUS on soft targets; malls, thearters, schools, churches, et al. Also on vital infrastructure such as our antiquated power grid, municipal water supplies, food distribution, etc. . .
9/11 shut us down for days imagine if every major city got hit at once and then you have "SS Werewolf" type secondary attacks to keep everyone occupied.
Moose-Knuckle
08-12-14, 15:29
Not to forget Mubarak being tossed in Egypt! Egypt came within a curly short hair length of going full on islamofascist, in fact it can be argued that in truth it actually did, until the military stepped in and eliminated Obama's hand picked Muslim brotherhood elites....It was Obama, and his administration that engineered the Muslim brotherhood's ascent to power, it was his gig!
Yup, from post #143 on page 8 of this thread:
These are the savages that Obama, McCain, and company wanted to support in Syria, these are the bastards Obama praised for the "Arab Spring". The Coptic Christians have been suffering this sort of thing in Egypt ever since.
I've been expecting attacks like we saw in Nairobi and Mumbai in CONUS on soft targets; malls, thearters, schools, churches, et al. Also on vital infrastructure such as our antiquated power grid, municipal water supplies, food distribution, etc. . .
9/11 shut us down for days imagine if every major city got hit at once and then you have "SS Werewolf" type secondary attacks to keep everyone occupied.
You and me both. I think it might be a game changer in terms of the amount of people CCW'ing.
Moose-Knuckle
08-12-14, 15:53
You and me both. I think it might be a game changer in terms of the amount of people CCW'ing.
Yeah I just hope .gov doesn't use it as an excuse to green light EO's/NDAA/etc. and delcare war on the rest of us . . .
http://shoebat.com/2014/08/07/isis-releases-new-photos-showing-mass-crucifixions-beheadings-cruel-executions/
Warning, the posted link is a very graphic depiction of the consequences of having elected a man not qualified to run a convenience store, as president of the United States, all of the horror and gore comes to you courtesy of one Barack Hussein Obama, and his posse of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, the entire democratic party, and a few in the republican one.....Remember, Obama and his posse engineered this, this is the real Arab spring in all of its gory glory....
Bolt_Overide
08-13-14, 08:07
Wont ever make the main stream media, makes the anointed one look bad.
So...WHEN is someone in the MSM going to say, "Could this be the result of this Administration's, in it's haste to make political points, leaving Iraq before they were ready, and now we're goign to have to spill more American blood for his lack or foresight?
Getting REALLY DIFFICULT to blame this on GWB anymore - even though there are those trying really hard to....
Will Congress declare war against ISIS?
Yeah I just hope .gov doesn't use it as an excuse to green light EO's/NDAA/etc. and delcare war on the rest of us . . .
I have no illusions that it will result in anything less than Marshall Law.
Will Congress declare war against ISIS?
They need to. It can no longer wait. The majority of the public doesn't want the military back in Iraq and I get that. But many fail to realize how bad this situation is and how rapidly it will get much worse. How much longer do we wait? Until they have taken over the Green Zone and killed all the American personell? Do we wait until they have invaded and taken over Jordan with a clear shot at Isreal? Or until they have wiped Isreal completely off the map? Or maybe wait until there is a faction in Egypt and they take control of the Suez? Or perhaps wait until they get into Saudi Arabia and the oh so precious crude oil we are so dependant on stops flowing? Or better still we should wait until they take over Iran and capture their nukes. Maybe then it will be time to act. You know, once it becomes too late...
Sadly I doubt we will see any real action from the Vactioner in Cheif on this and that it will get far worse and be the next guy's problem in 2017...
Obama Plans "Non-Boots-On-The-Ground Humanitarian-Adviser-Marines-Led" Yezidi Rescue Mission In Iraq:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-13/obama-plans-non-boots-ground-humanitarian-adviser-marines-led-yezidi-rescue-mission-
Exclusive: Islamic State militants grab new weapon - Iraqi wheat:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/13/us-iraq-security-islamicstate-wheat-idUSKBN0GD14720140813
They need to. It can no longer wait...
I think it's hypocritical for everyone to bemoan Obama making unilateral decisions, imposing executive orders and circumventing the Constitution when it jives with their viewpoint but not when it comes to making decision about going to war. Congress should declare war, it is their responsibility, and they should be held accountable.
I think this article by Pat Buchanan (http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/08/patrick-j-buchanan/the-latest-neocon-lies-for-war/) has some salient points.
Graham says no force in the Mideast can stop ISIL without us. Is this true?
Turkey, a nation of 76 million, has the second-largest army in NATO, equipped with U.S. weapons, and an air force ISIL does not have.
If President Recep Tayyip Erdogan wanted to crush ISIS, he could seal his border to foreign fighters entering Syria and send the Turkish army to assist President Bashar Assad in annihilating ISIS in Syria.
The jihadists of the Islamic State may be more motivated, but they are hugely outnumbered and outgunned in the region.
The Syrian government and army, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia-dominated government of Iraq, a Shia Iran of 70 million, and the Kurds in Syria and Kurdistan are all anti-Islamic State and willing to fight.
All are potential allies in a coalition to contain or crush ISIS, as is Vladimir Putin’s Russia, if U.S. diplomacy were not frozen in the 1980s.
Only last August, McCain and Graham were attacking Obama for not enforcing his “red line” by bombing Syria’s army, the most successful anti-ISIL force in the field.
The threat of the Islamic State should not be minimized. It would provide a breeding and training ground for terrorists to attack us and the West. But it should not be wildly exaggerated to plunge us into a new war.
For wherever ISIS has won ground, it has, through atrocities and beheadings, imposition of Sharia law, and ruthless repression, alienated almost everyone, including al-Qaida.
Should ISIS succeed in holding northern Syria and western Iraq, who will recognize this caliphate? Who will trade with it? How will it hold the allegiance of peoples upon whom it is even now imposing terrorist rule?
The Sunni of Iraq are already chaffing against ISIS rule. How long will Turks, Syrians, Iraqis, Kurds and Iranians tolerate a Talibanized Islamic State right next door? And should ISIS attack the United States, we have more than sufficient means to retaliate, without sending in American troops.
Let Middle Easterners take the lead in fighting this newest Middle East war.
MountainRaven
08-13-14, 21:03
Obama Plans "Non-Boots-On-The-Ground Humanitarian-Adviser-Marines-Led" Yezidi Rescue Mission In Iraq:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-13/obama-plans-non-boots-ground-humanitarian-adviser-marines-led-yezidi-rescue-mission-
Seems like he's a bit late, since Kurdish Syrians launched an attack into Iraq to give the Yazidis a safe path out of Iraq and into territory in Syria controlled by the Kurds. Apparently the Iraqi peshmerga haven't done too well, while the Syrian peshmerga basically just smashed the ISIS forces they ran into.
BoringGuy45
08-13-14, 23:32
Don't know if this is a credible source or not, but if true, it's a step in the right direction. If true, FINALLY Obama does something that makes sense and sends in what I'm assuming are Army Special Forces to do what they are supposed to do: Train and lead allies in fighting a common enemy.
Special Forces deployed to Kurdistan (http://www.funker530.com/us-special-ops-deployed-in-iraqi-kurdistan/)
Seems like he's a bit late, since Kurdish Syrians launched an attack into Iraq to give the Yazidis a safe path out of Iraq and into territory in Syria controlled by the Kurds. Apparently the Iraqi peshmerga haven't done too well, while the Syrian peshmerga basically just smashed the ISIS forces they ran into.
More on this:
U.S. says rescue mission for Iraq's Yazidis less likely after visit:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/14/us-iraq-security-usa-military-idUSKBN0GD1KS20140814
montanadave
08-14-14, 07:57
Given that ISIS (ISIL, IS, whatever) would give their left nut to get their hands on an American serviceman (much like Hamas and the IDF), wouldn't it make sense that if the U.S. were to assist in the efforts to extract the Yazidi refugees we'd get in, get out, and then and only then acknowledge our role . . . or not?
Given that ISIS (ISIL, IS, whatever) would give their left nut to get their hands on an American serviceman (much like Hamas and the IDF), wouldn't it make sense that if the U.S. were to assist in the efforts to extract the Yazidi refugees we'd get in, get out, and then and only then acknowledge our role . . . or not?
One would think, however it seems to be amatuer hour on the Potomac so...no...
It amazes me that they kept Operation Neptune Spear quiet.
One would think, however it seems to be amatuer hour on the Potomac so...no...
It amazes me that they kept Operation Neptune Spear quiet.
More like amateur decade...
Agreed.
Fortunately, or unfortunately, that has little to nothing to do with the current state of affairs, all of which are consequences of Obama's seemingly childish grasp of world affairs. The responsibility for Obama's actions are not the fault of either Bush, or of Bill Clinton(though Clinton's wife Hillary is clearly implicated in these humiliating failures), they are the responsibility of Obama and those that continue to enable him to present sub-moronic as being somehow magically "gifted!" It was an enormous blunder to have withdrawn entirely from Iraq, and an act of pure political spite courtesy of Obama and his political party, the democrats.....
I only wanted to be fair about the the middle east fiasco.
Yeah I just hope .gov doesn't use it as an excuse to green light EO's/NDAA/etc. and delcare war on the rest of us . . .
That is probably part of the plan.
Warning, the posted link is a very graphic depiction of the consequences of having elected a man not qualified to run a convenience store, as president of the United States, all of the horror and gore comes to you courtesy of one Barack Hussein Obama, and his posse of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, the entire democratic party, and a few in the republican one.....Remember, Obama and his posse engineered this, this is the real Arab spring in all of its gory glory....
The churches IN my opinion are keeping their flocks exactly like sheep . They should be stocking up on necessary goodies and arming up to preserve as they can.
I will never understand how someone is capable of the atrocities that these animals have committed against their fellow man.It is the gang mentality. The government officials,the police ,military. criminal gangs. There are always those who like killing or blindly follow orders or the pay and retirement is just to good to have a conscience about the dirty deeds done.
Moose-Knuckle
08-14-14, 20:31
The churches IN my opinion are keeping their flocks exactly like sheep . They should be stocking up on necessary goodies and arming up to preserve as they can.
Well the Mormons are ahead of the curve in this regard.
MountainRaven
08-14-14, 21:09
Looks like Syrian and Iraqi Kurds are in talks to form a sort of Kurdish union and Yazidi tribesmen have joined up with the Kurds to fight the Islamic State.
How Kurdish Militias Have Successfully Fought Off the Islamic State - Vice News (https://news.vice.com/article/how-kurdish-militias-have-successfully-fought-off-the-islamic-state?utm_source=vicenewsfb)
American reporter beheaded:
http://i1259.photobucket.com/albums/ii551/PalmguyFL/foley_zpse0aa491b.png
American reporter beheaded:
http://i1259.photobucket.com/albums/ii551/PalmguyFL/foley_zpse0aa491b.png
Well, that sucks.
A second reporter has apparently been kidnapped and threatened as well.
http://i1259.photobucket.com/albums/ii551/PalmguyFL/sotloff_zps107349cb.png
It's hard to see anything positive coming from this, but it almost seems ISIS is able to be the one threat that virtually unites common enemies regionally, who may realize there is something worse than X enemy and some working relationship worth it to stabilize the region. I know, dream world on my end but some times the "we hate each other, but we hate those guys even more" approach (similar to "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" approach only with more animosity!) can lead to a stability after the large scale ugliness is done.
American reporter beheaded:
http://i1259.photobucket.com/albums/ii551/PalmguyFL/foley_zpse0aa491b.png
Isn't this the guy whose been missing for a couple years now?
Doc Safari
08-19-14, 17:09
It's hard to see anything positive coming from this, but it almost seems ISIS is able to be the one threat that virtually unites common enemies regionally, who may realize there is something worse than X enemy and some working relationship worth it to stabilize the region. I know, dream world on my end but some times the "we hate each other, but we hate those guys even more" approach (similar to "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" approach only with more animosity!) can lead to a stability after the large scale ugliness is done.
It's not a dream world. I hear rumblings from various sites and radio programs that Saudi Arabia and Egypt both are quietly supporting Israel in its battle against HAMAS. So uniting against ISIS would not be outside the realm of possibility.
Isn't this the guy whose been missing for a couple years now?
Yes, he's been missing since late 2012
MorphCross
08-19-14, 17:32
American reporter beheaded
And what will this achieve for their fine vision of a huge Islamic state? Scare off any legitimate reporters from ever speaking to them? Either way ISIS seems to be pissing on a lot of peoples feet. Only a matter of time before they go too far with the kind of people who would kill them, their family members, pets, and anyone who ever had business relations with them.
And what will this achieve for their fine vision of a huge Islamic state? Scare off any legitimate reporters from ever speaking to them? Either way ISIS seems to be pissing on a lot of peoples feet. Only a matter of time before they go too far with the kind of people who would kill them, their family members, pets, and anyone who ever had business relations with them.
I for one hope it nets them some intensive and unrelenting U.S. bombing. To the point they literally get blown off the face of the planet. Time to arm the B-52's with 500 pounders and have a good old fashioned bombing campaign. :mad:
MorphCross
08-20-14, 01:32
I for one hope it nets them some intensive and unrelenting U.S. bombing. To the point they literally get blown off the face of the planet. Time to arm the B-52's with 500 pounders and have a good old fashioned bombing campaign. :mad:
Are you thinking along the lines of the payload doors opening, and the next day satellite photography shows that a mountain formerly loaded with ISIS fighters disappeared? If only they were dumb enough to mass themselves for a bombing campaign like good little state soldiers. Unfortunately, they aren't stupid as they've been fighting as effectively as many enemies with leaders that have either taken their western college educations back to these war zones or have been baptized in the fires of Insurgency campaigns across Eurasia and Africa.
Are you thinking along the lines of the payload doors opening, and the next day satellite photography shows that a mountain formerly loaded with ISIS fighters disappeared? If only they were dumb enough to mass themselves for a bombing campaign like good little state soldiers. Unfortunately, they aren't stupid as they've been fighting as effectively as many enemies with leaders that have either taken their western college educations back to these war zones or have been baptized in the fires of Insurgency campaigns across Eurasia and Africa.
They are sectarian in nature. Anywhere they find safe haven between attacks should be carpet bombed. These men have families somewhere. They shouldn't be safe either.
our leader will write a letter maybe do a couple bombings for good PR and that is it he will let it go slide past and then talk about the line in the sand
reality his line is in a sand trap and if it interrupts his golfing with celebrities he orders a few drone strikes then heads off on vacation
just look at the official statement ? no teeth in it at all
like any other thread the muslim lovers here and other places will step in and say you can persecute muslims ? yet none are standing up to this and speaking out in mass ?
they need to be wiped from the face of the earth the ones here in this country need to be hunted down and exterminated and the message sent when the bomb doors open the dead bodies of all ISIS members from this country should also fall out sending them back home
This is nothing more than the execution of the floated plan to divide Iraq in three.
There is a plan to conduct a natural pipeline from the Iranian Pars Field through northern Iraq into northern Syria (Homs) and then into Europe.
The day the contract was inked war was planned by the Western-backed Muslim Brotherhood-linked FSA rebels.
Look up "Islamic Pipeline" to find proposed maps.
As for ISIS/ISIL/IS... they are Western supported mercenaries. Simple and Plain.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
This is nothing more than the execution of the floated plan to divide Iraq in three.
There is a plan to conduct a natural pipeline from the Iranian Pars Field through northern Iraq into northern Syria (Homs) and then into Europe.
The day the contract was inked war was planned by the Western-backed Muslim Brotherhood-linked FSA rebels.
Look up "Islamic Pipeline" to find proposed maps.
As for ISIS/ISIL/IS... they are Western supported mercenaries. Simple and Plain.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
Western supported mercenaries hired to do what? Destabilize the region?
Western supported mercenaries hired to do what? Destabilize the region?
Please read more than the last sentence.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
Please read more than the last sentence.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
I did, which is why I'm asking. Can you please elaborate?
Who is going to wage the war to SECURE the proposed pipeline route? US soldiers? NATO soldiers? Israeli soldiers?
This is nothing more than a continuation of a Brzezinski-"created" Al Qaeda; US-created FSA on a much larger scale and has been reported in the foreign press for several years now.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
Alpha Sierra
08-28-14, 05:42
This is nothing more than the execution of the floated plan to divide Iraq in three.
There is a plan to conduct a natural pipeline from the Iranian Pars Field through northern Iraq into northern Syria (Homs) and then into Europe.
The day the contract was inked war was planned by the Western-backed Muslim Brotherhood-linked FSA rebels.
Look up "Islamic Pipeline" to find proposed maps.
As for ISIS/ISIL/IS... they are Western supported mercenaries. Simple and Plain.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
Why do you continue to make shit up?
Why do you bury your head in the sand?
This is *ALL* found in the public record. Quit searching sports and porn and behave as if you really do care. Or not. It's your life.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
Alpha Sierra
08-28-14, 10:13
Why do you bury your head in the sand?
This is *ALL* found in the public record. Quit searching sports and porn and behave as if you really do care. Or not. It's your life.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
You continually post bullshit like that as if you are "in the know" about some ultra vast conspiracy. Then when challenged on it you roll out platitudes like "do your own research" or "it's in the public domain" or some other lame crap.
Get over yourself. You no more know of some vast world wide conspiracy than I know about extra terrestrial life.
I know a bullshit artist when I see one.
You continually post bullshit like that as if you are "in the know" about some ultra vast conspiracy. Then when challenged on it you roll out platitudes like "do your own research" or "it's in the public domain" or some other lame crap.
Get over yourself. You no more know of some vast world wide conspiracy than I know about extra terrestrial life.
I know a bullshit artist when I see one.
Keep in mind that you're arguing FOR the position of Obama and McCain in this debate. Do you really believe them? :rolleyes:
Another American, possibly. (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/28/us-looking-into-report-2nd-american-killed-fighting-with-isis-in-syria/)
A second American reportedly killed fighting with the Islamic State group in Syria has been identified as Abdirahmaan Muhumed, of Minneapolis, two sources told Fox News late Wednesday.
KMSP-TV in Minneapolis reported that Muhumed was killed in the same battle as Douglas McAuthur McCain, who grew up outside Minneapolis in the town of New Hope and most recently lived in San Diego. The State Department confirmed McCain's death earlier this week, but spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Wednesday that the U.S. has no independent confirmation of the second American's death. "We're looking into it," she said...
Federal investigators believe that approximately 100 Americans have traveled to Syria to join Islamist groups. Most of them are disaffected young men targeted by recruitment videos like those one put out by the Somali-based, Al Qaeda-linked group al-Shabaab that praised Minnesota's "martyrs." One such "martyr" was Troy Kastigar, a high school classmate of Douglas McCain and a Muslim convert who was killed in Somalia in 2009.
Abdi Bihi, a leader in the Twin Cities' Somalian community, told KMSP that ISIS has recently begun trying to recruit young women from the Twin Cities to their cause.
"They are brainwashing them to marry them off to jihadists," he said. "They call them to help out as nurses, help out the wounded -- but the real catch is they will be sexually exploited."
Alpha Sierra
08-28-14, 16:46
Keep in mind that you're arguing FOR the position of Obama and McCain in this debate. Do you really believe them? :rolleyes:
I am not. I am simply tired of one particular poster's continuous noise insinuating that he is "in the know" and that we are too stupid/lazy to know what he knows about some uber conspiracy.
I couldn't give two ****s about ISIS right now. When they get here I'll do something about it.
I am not. I am simply tired of one particular poster's continuous noise insinuating that he is "in the know" and that we are too stupid/lazy to know what he knows about some uber conspiracy.
I couldn't give two ****s about ISIS right now. When they get here I'll do something about it.
It's a free country! :rolleyes:
Brilliant. (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/28/obama-admits-isil-dilemma-we-dont-have-strategy-ye/)
President Obama said Thursday he doesn’t have a strategy yet for defeating Islamist militants in Syria.
“I don’t want to put the cart before the horse,” Mr. Obama said in a news conference at the White House. “We don’t have a strategy yet. As our strategy develops, we will consult with Congress.”
Alpha Sierra
08-28-14, 16:54
Brilliant. (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/28/obama-admits-isil-dilemma-we-dont-have-strategy-ye/)
Yeah, no shit....some Commander In Chief we got ourselves here.......
Yeah, no shit....some Commander In Chief we got ourselves here.......
That's because they're still trying to wrap their minds around the fact that they have the exact same regional goals as IS, but for different reasons. The Obama team is playing checkers while everyone else is playing chess. :(
You continually post bullshit like that as if you are "in the know" about some ultra vast conspiracy. Then when challenged on it you roll out platitudes like "do your own research" or "it's in the public domain" or some other lame crap.
Get over yourself. You no more know of some vast world wide conspiracy than I know about extra terrestrial life.
I know a bullshit artist when I see one.
You merely prove how little you know.
I've told you nothing you cannot verify and to be candid you should know by now.
It's your life and your time. Do with them whatever you will. The numbers are legion who make similar CHOICES as you. Good luck with that.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
SeriousStudent
08-28-14, 21:00
Lower the temperatures, or the thread goes away.
You merely prove how little you know.
I've told you nothing you cannot verify and to be candid you should know by now.
It's your life and your time. Do with them whatever you will. The numbers are legion who make similar CHOICES as you. Good luck with that.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
I agree with Alpha Sierra, you should post something with some meat on it after multiple teasers.
I agree with Alpha Sierra, you should post something with some meat on it after multiple teasers.
I've posted tons of material that few wished to hear and they STILL don't wish to hear. How many times do I need to mention "Zbigniew Brzezinski"? How many times do we have to dig up articles and links and the thread goes quiet as they don't read with comprehension or they don't take the time to dig into the material? And I'm not the only person who has ALREADY PROVIDED links in the past only to have the same folks whining and growling.
Here is your link: go read the book titled The Grand Chessboard. It's written by Brzezinski. Go get the book Full Spectrum Dominance by F. William Engdahl. Go see what you can find about "Saudi Arabia, Jordan, FSA Rebels" and how they are armed, trained and supported by us - same as we did with the Mujihadeen in the war with Russia in Afghanistan and admitted to by Hillary Clinton.
That's all I'm willing to provide, brother. I no longer do heavy lifting for folks. Enough can be found from the little I've posted. Sierra didn't even bother to read what I wrote because his question was answered in my initial post. Surprise, surprise...
Let the dead bury the dead and all that.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
I've posted tons of material that few wished to hear and they STILL don't wish to hear. How many times do I need to mention "Zbigniew Brzezinski"? How many times do we have to dig up articles and links and the thread goes quiet as they don't read with comprehension or they don't take the time to dig into the material? And I'm not the only person who has ALREADY PROVIDED links in the past only to have the same folks whining and growling.
Here is your link: go read the book titled The Grand Chessboard. It's written by Brzezinski. Go get the book Full Spectrum Dominance by F. William Engdahl. Go see what you can find about "Saudi Arabia, Jordan, FSA Rebels" and how they are armed, trained and supported by us - same as we did with the Mujihadeen in the war with Russia in Afghanistan and admitted to by Hillary Clinton.
That's all I'm willing to provide, brother. I no longer do heavy lifting for folks. Enough can be found I the little I've posted. Sierra didn't even bother to read what I wrote because his question was answered in my initial post.
Let the dead bury the dead and all that.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
Fair enough, plenty of material and topics to research. Maybe I'll learn something.
Fair enough, plenty of material and topics to research. Maybe I'll learn something.
I have to say that my independent and extensive research has led me to the same conclusion as his. I didn't archive all the sources so I could crow about it later. Part of it was for a term paper in my Homeland Security course and mostly just because I am seriously interested in what makes us meddle in middle eastern affairs so incessantly. Losing good friends in the "War on Terror" has caused me to question our intentions, seeing as how the goals are ill defined and rarely achieved.
The goals don't always have to be ours and they aren't always clear on the surface. They will always wind up being in our favor, either directly or indirectly. For some interesting reads, Google: Trans-Arabian Pipeline; Trans-Syrian pipeline; Iran-Iraq-Syria; Arab Gas Pipeline; Qatar-Turkey pipeline; Qatar pipeline through Syria, etc. You get the idea and none of it is a secret. The problem is that it runs counter to interests that control the mainstream media, so they aren't going to give you the background on the why of it all. Besides, they'd much rather push "A Humanitarian Crisis" because it fits their ideals and lofty goals. Smoke and mirrors and it's so easy because no one cares enough to call them on it. :(
I have to say that my independent and extensive research has led me to the same conclusion as his. I didn't archive all the sources so I could crow about it later. Part of it was for a term paper in my Homeland Security course and mostly just because I am seriously interested in what makes us meddle in middle eastern affairs so incessantly. Losing good friends in the "War on Terror" has caused me to question our intentions, seeing as how the goals are ill defined and rarely achieved.
The goals don't always have to be ours and they aren't always clear on the surface. They will always wind up being in our favor, either directly or indirectly. For some interesting reads, Google: Trans-Arabian Pipeline; Trans-Syrian pipeline; Iran-Iraq-Syria; Arab Gas Pipeline; Qatar-Turkey pipeline; Qatar pipeline through Syria, etc. You get the idea and none of it is a secret. The problem is that it runs counter to interests that control the mainstream media, so they aren't going to give you the background on the why of it all. Besides, they'd much rather push "A Humanitarian Crisis" because it fits their ideals and lofty goals. Smoke and mirrors and it's so easy because no one cares enough to call them on it. :(
The last sentence seems to sum up a lot of people's complaints with the current administration.
NPR reported today that the USA has conducted 110 bombing missions against USUL, so far.
I wish it wax 1000, but I am glad my tax dollars have helped pay for even thus many under Obummer
Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk
wildcard600
08-29-14, 22:47
Don't know if this was posted before, but seems to be relevant to some of the discussion in this thread. Certainly very though provoking -
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-29/time-ripe-false-flag-attack-american-soil
Don't know if this was posted before, but seems to be relevant to some of the discussion in this thread. Certainly very though provoking -
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-29/time-ripe-false-flag-attack-american-soil
You're tracking, brother.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
Don't know if this was posted before, but seems to be relevant to some of the discussion in this thread. Certainly very though provoking -
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-29/time-ripe-false-flag-attack-american-soil
All well stated propaganda omitting critical fact over and over. Had my fill of it in one minute which was one minute too long. Do we really have to revert to this primordial state again?
All well stated propaganda omitting critical fact over and over. Had my fill of it in one minute which was one minute too long. Do we really have to revert to this primordial state again?
A light year ahead of the swill you're drinking from the mainstream media which has an axe to grind against Russia that predates both you and I.
No worries. The nukes will arrive on time as will the bio and chem... just as the so-called Holy Books have warned. Unless, of course, the US public-at-large shakes itself from its self-induced coma.
-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."
MountainRaven
08-30-14, 16:32
Don't know if this was posted before, but seems to be relevant to some of the discussion in this thread. Certainly very though provoking -
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-29/time-ripe-false-flag-attack-american-soil
"Before his imprisonment, Baghdadi's friends and family reported him to be a “quiet, studious fellow who was also a talented soccer player”. Only one year after being released from U.S. detention, however, he was a fanatical Islamic extremist who would go on to command the ISIS caliphate."
Two things: One is that most serial murderers are described as being 'quiet, studious fellows'. Two is that our prisons have a tendency of vacuuming up non-violent drug offenders and spitting out hardened criminals. So the idea that a nice guy who is smart and good at soccer might walk out of a prison and suddenly become a violent terrorist isn't that far out there from what happens in this country every day. Now add being arrested for what the article seems to make out as being no apparent reason and being locked up with a bunch of Islamofascists... and you, too, might come out wanting to wage jihad against those who have unjustly imprisoned you, on behalf of those who befriended you in prison.
"Despite this horrifying development, Barack Obama is STILL seeking over $500 million in aid to Syrian rebels, though the rhetoric now specifies that funds and arms will only go to “moderate and well-vetted” insurgents. As far as I can tell, there are no “moderate” insurgents in Syria; insurgents that are now moving into Iraq and bringing their distinct brand of barbarism with them."
Uh... what about the Kurds? Folks with a lot of similarities to us, a lot of common interests, who are pretty moderate, even leading rescue missions into the mountains of Northern Iraq to rescue Christian Iraqis... and whose operations in Syria were designated - by this administration - as being terrorist organizations.
"The CFR acknowledges that the goal of Al-Qaeda operatives in Syria is not necessarily to overthrow Assad, but to establish an Islamic state. Despite this, the CFR still continues its support of the strategy to overthrow Assad."
In 1942, we supported Communists against Nazis, Fascists, and ultra-nationalist imperialists. In 1952, we supported the latter three (governments of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi's Iran, Chiang Kai-shek's China, Syngman Rhee's Korea, and Hirohito's Japan - among others) against the first. The war wasn't even over in 1944 and 1945 and we were already getting pally-pally with Nazis and Japanese imperialists. So not that unusual that we might side with one enemy against another.
"With all this hype circling ISIS, I have to suggest that maybe, just maybe, we are being given the ultimate scapegoat for the ultimate false flag attack. When building the narrative of a traditional story, the hero is really a secondary character, because the hero is only as impressive as the villain he must eventually defeat. If you look at mainstream media and geopolitics as a theater script, rather than a series of random events, it appears as though ISIS is being built up as a villain so pervasive and devious the group could accomplish ANYTHING."
Except the same Kurds we've been putting on the back burner for a decade, the same Kurds we've declared to be terrorists, who haven't really received much of anything from the US until recently have effectively stopped ISIS and even beaten them back in places (admittedly with the assistance at times of US air power).
If ISIS were as powerful as the article thinks that TPTB wants us to think that it is, they would have bulldozed the Kurds in Iraq and Syria, they wouldn't have stopped just outside of Baghdad, but would have blitzed all the way to Basra. Assad wouldn't be in power any longer and the Islamic State would stretch from the borders of Syria to the borders of Iraq. They would be menacing long-time US allies Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, and Turkey (and one-time friend turned frenemy Iran) with the threat of invasion. They would have allies in North Africa uniting Libya and Morocco and Tunisia and driving on Egypt, looking to link up with ISIS somewhere around Tel Aviv. But they aren't and they don't.
The government needs ISIS for a false flag like it needs a hole in the head. It has plenty of scapegoats, many of whom post on this forum. It didn't need a scapegoat to get us to go along with FISA or USA PATRIOT. It didn't even need the false flag.
I'm also somewhat disappointed that the article didn't point out better known false flags. Like the sinking of the USS Maine and the Gulf of Tonkin incident.
Outlander Systems
08-30-14, 17:05
A slightly more long-term strategy was pioneered by Latin American revolutionary Carlos Marighela. The strategy involved using terror tactics to force a government to become so repressive as to cause its citizens to turn against it in the form of popular revolt. Widespread bombings and killings would force the government to infringe on civil liberties in order to more effectively combat the terrorist threat. Eventually citizens would see the government as their enemy, an even greater threat than the terrorists. So with this strategy, terrorists attempt to foment popular opposition to the government and revolution. From the 1960's to the 1980's the Tupamaros successfully used this strategy to affect change in Uruguay. To a lesser degree, Peru's Shining Path and Ulster's PIRA are currently making use of this strategy with little appreciable results.
http://www.towson.edu/polsci/ppp/sp97/terror/goals.html
Thus, it would behoove us to simply kick ass, and take names, and not alter our domestic "security" apparatus to become more...Orwellian.
If we, as a society, shiver in our boots, and enact more draconian, oppressive legislation, we are, essentially, falling right into one of the outcomes terror attacks seek to bring about.
Walk it off, shake it off, and cowboy the **** up. Anything else is band aids on gunshot wounds.
http://youtu.be/TMCKe_EpJJk
As far as I am concerned, like Denzel Washington's character, when you look back over the last 13 years, they have already won.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.