Gaza: Comparing Egypt's blockade to Israel's?

[Alceste]

How would you end isis, without an invading army?
Please don't tell me you'd try to reason with them.

To be honest I would just keep out of it. There are lots of atrocities in the world we keep out of. If I were to make a contribution it would be helping refugees escape from danger. Tis my nature. It's not my job to "end" people.

 

[Avi1001]

How would you end isis, without an invading army?
Please don't tell me you'd try to reason with them.

Assymetric approaches. An army won't succeed anyway.

 

[metis]

Didn't we learn from the past that isolationism can cause more problems, or have we forgotten-- again?

To me, it's not an either/or thingy, and we have to use our heads as to when to engage and when not to. Unfortunately, often our impulse is to make emotional decision, only to find out that our subsequent actions work against us.

If ISIS goes unchecked, there will be hell to pay, not only in the M.E. but also western Europe and North America. Much the same with al-Queda and Hamas, along with some smaller, but not any less deadly, factions.

The threat of radical Islam should not be ignored, nor should we pretend that somehow it's going to go away by itself. The only question for the west and some of the other countries is what's the best way to fight it, and that's not a simple question to answer.

Just imagine for one second if these groups controlled most of the oil production and shipping channels what the could mean in the long run. Imagine what they could do with all that oil revenue coming in and what that could buy in both the short and the long run. Imagine a group like ISIS maybe in a decade or two financing and developing nuclear weapons or buying them from a country like North Korea.

To not take these groups very seriously, or to not be concerned in eliminating them, is just suicide for that region and for the west in the long term especially. Plus, for us Americans, we often tend to think short-term without considering long-term implications.

 

[metis]

BTW, as an addendum to the above post, I would put some pressure on some of the nearby Islamic countries and ask them to commit themselves one way or the other, namely that they either are going to help in the fight against these radical elements or not? If some say they won't, then I would make it clear that if they're attacked or invaded by any of these groups, we ain't coming to their defense. Too many of our "allies" there are getting a free ride at the west's expense, and if these radical groups are going to be eliminated or severely weakened, we need a lot of help from the peoples' who live there.

 

[Alceste]

I don't know, metis. Perhaps the US should stop funding and arming Islamic militants throughout the ME. It's absurd. It went off the rails in Afghanistan, now it's gone off the rails in Syria and Iraq. How do we solve these problems? How about we stop causing them?

 

[metis]

I don't know, metis. Perhaps the US should stop funding and arming Islamic militants throughout the ME. It's absurd. It went off the rails in Afghanistan, now it's gone off the rails in Syria and Iraq. How do we solve these problems? How about we stop causing them?

That's why I said we need to use our heads about this instead of just reacting emotionally. We are sometimes our own worst enemies, and there's no doubt that we and the western Europeans did tremendous damage there, including post 9-11.

For example, how many times did we equip groups and nations with weapons only to have them turned on us and/or others? Most of the weapons used by ISIS are weapons we gave the Iraqi government. And yet we still run across people like John McCain who said we should have supplied the "friendly" rebels against Assad.

In order to successfully eliminate or neutralize these groups we cannot, nor should we, do it all ourselves, and I mean the west as being the "we". The countries in that region that are most affected by these groups must stand up to the plate and do some batting as well. If it's not going to be a joint effort that also involves them, then the west should make it clear that they're on their own.

 

[RitalinOhD]

That's why I said we need to use our heads about this instead of just reacting emotionally. We are sometimes our own worst enemies, and there's no doubt that we and the western Europeans did tremendous damage there, including post 9-11.

For example, how many times did we equip groups and nations with weapons only to have them turned on us and/or others? Most of the weapons used by ISIS are weapons we gave the Iraqi government. And yet we still run across people like John McCain who said we should have supplied the "friendly" rebels against Assad.

In order to successfully eliminate or neutralize these groups we cannot, nor should we, do it all ourselves, and I mean the west as being the "we". The countries in that region that are most affected by these groups must stand up to the plate and do some batting as well. If it's not going to be a joint effort that also involves them, then the west should make it clear that they're on their own.

100% agree.

It's time the ME started handling their own problems. We're going bankrupt and getting nothing out of it.

 

[metis]

100% agree.

It's time the ME started handling their own problems. We're going bankrupt and getting nothing out of it.

Now that we get very little oil from there, we are no where near as reliant on them as we used to be. We are doing it more for the countries there and in western Europe, the latter of which still get most of their oil from there (less so than before, however).

A large part of the problem is that so many in both areas are "gun-shy", thus afraid that by confronting these groups that this will put them into the cross-hairs, and that certainly is true. But to not do so only invites more problems in the long run. Radical Islam shows no signs of going away-- quite the reverse.

Also, we in the west need to realize that groups like ISIS, al-Queda, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Islamic Brotherhood, etc. have much in common even though they're not carbon-copies of each other. We need to understand this this is a global war that if we lose, we and a lot of other countries are going to be in a world of hurt, especially down the road. Remember that related elements can also be found in eastern Asia and northern Africa and, as we've seen, they can do a lot of damage.

When I see some posters blaming Israel for how their responding to Hamas, I want to pull my hair out because they apparently can't see the larger picture that Hamas is just one of the related threads these groups bring, and to just play footsies with them ain't going to solve the problem. This is war, and if those of us in the west don't understand this and get our acts together, there'll be hell to pay.

War's not pretty, and one shouldn't interpret that I'm saying that we and the Israelis don't have to use some restraint, but for all practical purposes this is WWIII, and we'd better win it or else, and the "or else" won't be pretty.

Ever read Clausewitz, btw?

 

[RitalinOhD]

Now that we get very little oil from there, we are no where near as reliant on them as we used to be. We are doing it more for the countries there and in western Europe, the latter of which still get most of their oil from there (less so than before, however).

A large part of the problem is that so many in both areas are "gun-shy", thus afraid that by confronting these groups that this will put them into the cross-hairs, and that certainly is true. But to not do so only invites more problems in the long run. Radical Islam shows no signs of going away-- quite the reverse.

Also, we in the west need to realize that groups like ISIS, al-Queda, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Islamic Brotherhood, etc. have much in common even though they're not carbon-copies of each other. We need to understand this this is a global war that if we lose, we and a lot of other countries are going to be in a world of hurt, especially down the road. Remember that related elements can also be found in eastern Asia and northern Africa and, as we've seen, they can do a lot of damage.

When I see some posters blaming Israel for how their responding to Hamas, I want to pull my hair out because they apparently can't see the larger picture that Hamas is just one of the related threads these groups bring, and to just play footsies with them ain't going to solve the problem. This is war, and if those of us in the west don't understand this and get our acts together, there'll be hell to pay.

War's not pretty, and one shouldn't interpret that I'm saying that we and the Israelis don't have to use some restraint, but for all practical purposes this is WWIII, and we'd better win it or else, and the "or else" won't be pretty.

Ever read Clausewitz, btw?

No, I have not read it.

 

[CMike]

100% agree.

It's time the ME started handling their own problems. We're going bankrupt and getting nothing out of it.

ISIS has threatened to put their flag on the white house.

The enemies that Israel is fighting are the same enemies of the US.

You want to fight them in the middle east or do you want to fight them in the US?

 

[metis]

No, I have not read it.

The reason I bring it up is that his writings on war are considered to be classics, including various strategies under varying conditions. See: On War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I bring this up because on of the things he brings up is how to deal with what we might call "brush-fire wars", namely insurgencies, plus how to counter them. In this case the general approach is to hit them quickly and doggedly keep the pursuit up until the job is finished. To let them fester is a big mistake because they can gather support and grow in a hurry at times, as we're seeing with ISIS.

 

[RitalinOhD]

I'll check it out. Thanks for the suggestion

 

[Phil25]

That's why I said we need to use our heads about this instead of just reacting emotionally. We are sometimes our own worst enemies, and there's no doubt that we and the western Europeans did tremendous damage there, including post 9-11.

For example, how many times did we equip groups and nations with weapons only to have them turned on us and/or others? Most of the weapons used by ISIS are weapons we gave the Iraqi government. And yet we still run across people like John McCain who said we should have supplied the "friendly" rebels against Assad.

In order to successfully eliminate or neutralize these groups we cannot, nor should we, do it all ourselves, and I mean the west as being the "we". The countries in that region that are most affected by these groups must stand up to the plate and do some batting as well. If it's not going to be a joint effort that also involves them, then the west should make it clear that they're on their own.

Its hard for us to just isolate or pull out from ME. Even if we pull out, Islamists will still see West as their enemy and dont forget we have got a more than acceptable number of Islamists here in West itself. So even if we pull out, they will not pull out from us.

 

[metis]

Its hard for us to just isolate or pull out from ME. Even if we pull out, Islamists will still see West as their enemy and dont forget we have got a more than acceptable number of Islamists here in West itself. So even if we pull out, they will not pull out from us.

Absolutely. There are an estimated 100+ American citizens now fighting for ISIS/ISIL and an estimated 500+ Europeans doing the same. The implications of this are significant just in and of themselves.

 

[RitalinOhD]

Absolutely. There are an estimated 100+ American citizens now fighting for ISIS/ISIL and an estimated 500+ Europeans doing the same. The implications of this are significant just in and of themselves.

One can only hope TSA knows the names of these "americans", so they can be dealt with should they try to come back.

 

[metis]

One can only hope TSA knows the names of these "americans", so they can be dealt with should they try to come back.

Amen.

 

[Alceste]

100% agree.

It's time the ME started handling their own problems. We're going bankrupt and getting nothing out of it.

I think the US, Saudi and Western governments might disagree with you there - their strategic aim is to control the energy resources and pipeline routes in the ME to subvert Russian and Iranian access. Their strategy seems to be perpetuating a state of Arab on Arab violence and instability throughout the ME. Whether it has been effective or not is probably something you'd need to look at Big Oil's balance sheets to assess.

 

[CMike]

I think the US, Saudi and Western governments might disagree with you there - their strategic aim is to control the energy resources and pipeline routes in the ME to subvert Russian and Iranian access. Their strategy seems to be perpetuating a state of Arab on Arab violence and instability throughout the ME. Whether it has been effective or not is probably something you'd need to look at Big Oil's balance sheets to assess.

Must be from another commiee meeting.

The interest of the US and Israel is very easy to understand-- survival.

911 has shown that we are vulnerable.

Even though the US may pull out and hide, it doesn't mean the US' enemies will do the same.

 

[CMike]

I don't know, metis. Perhaps the US should stop funding and arming Islamic militants throughout the ME. It's absurd. It went off the rails in Afghanistan, now it's gone off the rails in Syria and Iraq. How do we solve these problems? How about we stop causing them?

I do agree that the US should stop funding Hamas, and dealing with Qatar and Turkey whom fund ISIS and Hamas.

 

[Godobeyer]

I do agree that the US should stop funding Hamas, and dealing with Qatar and Turkey whom fund ISIS and Hamas.

lol, "you agree "

Hamas funding by US , and Israel(through the parasite AIPAC) funding by US !!!:biglaugh: