Is this going to be a threat to the entire Middle East

[MD]

For one thing, it is a sure-fire way of multiplying their numbers.

I addressed that in my prior post already, it depends on the political context within which they are killed. Tomahawks and raining down missiles = bad idea.

 

[LuisDantas]

I addressed that in my prior post already, it depends on the political context within which they are killed. Tomahawks and raining down missiles = bad idea.

Sorry, I can't really think of a politically correct way of commiting politically motivated slaughter.

But never mind me. I'm pretty sure that the Middle Easterners will not be very trusting or very grateful to people coming with the wisdom of superior firepower and a desire to kill and them part ways.

Not that I can blame them for that. I'm pretty alergic to the idea, myself.

 

[MD]

Sorry, I can't really think of a politically correct way of commiting politically motivated slaughter.

But never mind me. I'm pretty sure that the Middle Easterners will not be very trusting or very grateful to people coming with the wisdom of superior firepower and a desire to kill and them part ways.

Not that I can blame them for that. I'm pretty alergic to the idea, myself.

Lol did you even bother to read my post? I would guess not. For one I wasn't calling for the slaughter of middle easterners.

I was saying that by pitting ISIS against the Shia extremist groups in Iraq they can eliminate each other and allow other government or secular groups to gain more power, like the Kurds or the national troops. Not only will there be loss of life within extremist groups if they go against each other, but ammo and funding as well. It's the best situation, and something a lot of intelligence agencies will work towards (although many of them will want different outcomes).

Iraq has been a horribly violent country and the middle east is built on a history of blood. It's not sunshine and lollipops like the liberal illusion, the blood history is passed down from generation to generation. It's a middle eastern thing.

 

[oldbadger]

They will have a lot of crap to deal with,

Adversity is their test........ overcoming it is their existence...

for one a lot of their natural resources will have been used up by that point.

Their resources will never be used up...... they will take what they need.

I don't see them uniting for a long time, if at all.

I see it differently...... I think it's too late already.....

If they did, it would really depend what they united under.

They already are united.......

An Islamic state? A pan arab confederacy? Economic trade group?

Do you think that fighting groups like ISIS will want to form an Economic trade group?

 

[columbus]

These terrorists want the world and I say we need to really give it to them.
Air strike them until there is nothing left.
From the footage, there is nothing but flat ground that they are marching on.
Hello?
like shooting fish in a barrel

The military solution has been tried. And every time it somehow results in yet more, worse, disasters

If we would send a huge and well trained, equipped, and funded army to fight against AIDS, unsafe drinking water or illiteracy or something like that we'd at least have something to show for it. Instead we keep repeating the mistakes that got us where the human family is now.

Tom

 

[kashmir]

One of us is tragically mistaken about the basic nature of the situation or at least of the realistic solutions, Kashmir.

From my perspective you are talking nonsense. Can you even recall any time when "killing terrorists" did not amount to creating even more rebellion, mistrust and, yes, even more terrorists?

Then what do you suggest?
Their own leader asked us for an airstike

For one thing, it is a sure-fire way of multiplying their numbers.

Leaving them to continue to march and take over city after city, is also multiplying their numbers, ammo, moneys, etc

again, what do you suggest?

The military solution has been tried. And every time it somehow results in yet more, worse, disasters

If we would send a huge and well trained, equipped, and funded army to fight against AIDS, unsafe drinking water or illiteracy or something like that we'd at least have something to show for it. Instead we keep repeating the mistakes that got us where the human family is now.

Tom

IDK, but how is going and fighting other problems not still creating mistakes?
Our help worked, if the 10,000 solders didnt drop their weapons and run, and fought for their land, this wouldn't be going on, they had them completely out numbered.

My idea is to kill the terrorists, to protect the innocents.
Claiming that that will fuel more hate is not even relevant.
They already hate us, not doing anything allows them to grow, airstriking them displaces them, destroys their weapons and funding.

I don't see how turning our backs helps anything.
What that does is tells them they don't have to worry about us and can continue to grow.

If every few years we have to airstrike them to displace them after they regroup again, to not allow them to organize, is necessary, that is what is done.

If we just wash our hands of it, years from now, we will have a very strong army, well funded, well organized and 10000 times more harder to stop.

Do we wait until it's too late and they have the means to become a real problem for us and others when it becomes millions of them instead of a few thousand?

That is the part I fail to see, its only 1500 or so of them.
This is nothing atm to completely displace and stop dead in their tracks

 

[LuisDantas]

Lol did you even bother to read my post? I would guess not. For one I wasn't calling for the slaughter of middle easterners.

Excuse me, but you don't expect me to take that seriously, now do you?

 

[LuisDantas]

Then what do you suggest?
Their own leader asked us for an airstike

Whose leader? Not that of the people being airstriked, I'm certain.

 

[jimniki]

What has fighting, conflict and murder got to do with a forum promoting religion and the acceptance of god ... oh , that's right.... EVERYTHING!

geez, you don't see too many agnostics killing each other these days! what lost souls they are!

 

[Flankerl]

It seems they have completely taken over what USA has helped the others regrow.

No its not that bad because the USA has not helped to grow anything in Iraq. Apart from growing Islamists of course.

Good job btw!

Why does everyone just sit back and let them do this?

Well fly to Iraq with a few hundred US Dollars and fight them. AK-47s arent that expensive.

No one is stopping you.

The army we helped them build just dropped their weapons and ran, billions of dollars down the drain and now the enemies have the weapons too.

Well the US destroyed a rather good Army(good for an Arab nation) and cleansed the Officers.
You really think that this can be undone by pouring money and weapons into it?

I say screw the ground troops and just Tomahawk Cruise Missile the heck out of them, and make it rain fire all over their butts.
Pretty sure the half a million innocents that left, leave not many civilians left throughout the towns, they ones left are dead anyway.

Yes lets throw bombs on them. Because bombing Insurgents is so easy. After all Vietnam is a democratic country today.
Right?

And obviously all civilians that might be hit are terrorist supporters. Duh!

Let them grow and grow until they have nukes?

Oh my.

 

[MD]

Excuse me, but you don't expect me to take that seriously, now do you?

Again you didn't read my post and continue and blabber on. I'm part middle eastern and lived in a middle eastern country for many years.

To put things in your perspective I met a nurse in America who worked in a hospital near a favela. She said many of the gangsters were highly sociopathic and described them as animals. She was happy when describing some sort of intervention by the army where many of them were killed, saying there was no rehabilitation possible for them. Now applying your logic she wanted all Brazillians dead.

 

[esmith]

Edited by me to address only the below.

Well the US destroyed a rather good Army(good for an Arab nation) and cleansed the Officers.
You really think that this can be undone by pouring money and weapons into it?.

Not exactly true. Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki is responsible for the collapse of the Iraqi army. He purged the very well trained officers that assisted the US by putting his flunkies in their place. The US left a well trained cadre of officers and non-coms. The only problem was that the officers were Sunni. Suggest you read the following articles:
The capture of Mosul: Terror
Opinion: Who's to blame for Iraq crisis - CNN.com

Yes lets throw bombs on them. Because bombing Insurgents is so easy. After all Vietnam is a democratic country today.
Right?

And obviously all civilians that might be hit are terrorist supporters. Duh!

Oh my.

Redirection is an invalid argument in comparing Vietnam to Iraq. So, let me ask you and others a very simple question.
What role should the US take in the current situation in Iraq? Now I am not advocating for or against the direct involvement of the US. However, it would be advisable to look at the current situation and consider:
What the outcome would be if the ISIS established a enclave in a large part of Iraq?
Would it be a mistake to allow Iran to establish greater ties with Iraq?
Is it foreseeable that the ISIS, which was expelled from al-Qaeda for being too extreme, expands their members and exports their terror to the rest of the world?

So, what are the options?

 

[kashmir]

Edited by me to address only the below.

Not exactly true. Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki is responsible for the collapse of the Iraqi army. He purged the very well trained officers that assisted the US by putting his flunkies in their place. The US left a well trained cadre of officers and non-coms. The only problem was that the officers were Sunni. Suggest you read the following articles:
The capture of Mosul: Terror
Opinion: Who's to blame for Iraq crisis - CNN.com


Redirection is an invalid argument in comparing Vietnam to Iraq. So, let me ask you and others a very simple question.
What role should the US take in the current situation in Iraq? Now I am not advocating for or against the direct involvement of the US. However, it would be advisable to look at the current situation and consider:
What the outcome would be if the ISIS established a enclave in a large part of Iraq?
Would it be a mistake to allow Iran to establish greater ties with Iraq?
Is it foreseeable that the ISIS, which was expelled from al-Qaeda for being too extreme, expands their members and exports their terror to the rest of the world?

So, what are the options?

+1
some people view this is a way to belittle others, not an actual discussion.
Of course they have no real answers, they are too used to belittling religious people by hiding behind science.
Science has no answers for them now, so they just belittle with random non relevant statements.

I been here long enough to realize that.

I have to say this, some here neglect to realize that tens of thousands of armed men, dropped their weapons and ran for 800 guys.
Obviously, they are not hard core killers and ran.
These 800 guys, behead, and prob rape 4 yr olds and eat the remains.
Go figure the that we should just leave them grow and grow.
800 guys, just do not take um out?
Oh we cant, thats wrong.

 

[LuisDantas]

Again you didn't read my post and continue and blabber on. I'm part middle eastern and lived in a middle eastern country for many years.

To put things in your perspective I met a nurse in America who worked in a hospital near a favela. She said many of the gangsters were highly sociopathic and described them as animals. She was happy when describing some sort of intervention by the army where many of them were killed, saying there was no rehabilitation possible for them. Now applying your logic she wanted all Brazillians dead.

I take it that this was supposed to be a refutation?

If so, I must say that it failed.

 

[LuisDantas]

again, what do you suggest?

Take a look at my post here:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/political-debates/164352-what-do-think-about-happen-iraq.html

 

[MD]

I take it that this was supposed to be a refutation?

If so, I must say that it failed.

To be honest I don't care if you think it failed. You know nothing about the middle east aside from probably some readings. Your 'analysis' and 'solution' in the other thread were pretty sad and typical of a naive liberal. Religion is the identity of the middle east. Blood history and vengeance are common. It's nothing you liberals could ever hope to be familiar with.

 

[dust1n]

If you want to kill and bomb people, go do it.

But you're not getting any resources from me.

Good luck out there.

 

[dust1n]

Religion is the identity of the middle east. Blood history and vengeance are common. It's nothing you liberals could ever hope to be familiar with.

I'm not sure why anyone would ever hope to be familiar with blood history and vengeance.

 

[Tiapan]

I think let them go for it. The allies of WW1 divided the middle east up into arbirary states. The state of Kurdistan should have been created then. It seems the kurds are hated in Iran, Iraq and Turkey because of this.

Iraq was Sunni run with an Iron fist alala Sadam Insane. Then the yanks arrived and put the democratic but incompetent majority ie the Shia in charge. The shia have been steeped in typically middle eastern primitive tribalism totally ignoring Sunni requests and needs.

So now the ISIL have taken advantage of this making huge territorial gains with little or no resistance. There has to be a re calibration in the middle east. It looks like it is about to become very bloody and cathartic.

Eventually the survivors will make a peace and seek retribution and hunt down and execute the ISIL war criminals that are presently "liberating them". But key to this may be a readjustment of borders more representative of the regions religio-political geography.

Remember from past experience when you try to help these people they often just turn around and bite you. Stay out of it and be vigilant of any one from that region in future.

 

[xkatz]

Unfortunately, this shows why democracy doesn't not work in a country rife with sectarian strife. Democracy doesn't work when a group of people use it to marginalize another group based on religious differences, which is why ISIS was able to challenge the Iraqi government in the first place. I think the best bet for the US right now IMO is to aid the Kurds, as they are not as strongly motivated by sectarianism and they have proven both past and present that they are at least decent in warfare and governance.