at what cost? at what guarantee? a lot none And, the one thing that makes alliances out of enemies is a common enemy that threatens them both. I read today that Saudi has a 300 plane air force. Our friend Qatar gave ISIS their seed money. Assad has the only ground troops, they are Russian supplied, Israel keeps taking land. All those dudes need to get together or ISIS is going to be bad for all of them. Just like a forcibly partitioned Ukraine is going to be bad for NATO countries. Germany is stepping up, that always makes Russians nervous.
How so? Let's face it, what treeman posted is a coherent argument that makes a lot more sense than the random blurbs you keep throwing out there. The one problem I see with both of your posts, unfortunately, is that you both seem to assume that IS can be dealt with as a completely separate entity. I agree with everything you say except that I think you will not solve the problem even if you kill every IS person currently active in Iraq and Syria (I still agree that this needs to be pursued anyway, before the cancer spreads further). In my opinion, the root cause of the problem is in Saudi Arabia (and Qatar and some of the neighboring countries). The root cause is the brand of Islam that is promoted from there, and the money they can put behind it. As Dubious correctly pointed out, Qatar has been involved in funding IS (funds and help also came and come from other Sunni Islamists in Saudi Arabia, other neighboring countries, and from Sunni Islamist Erdogan). The problem will only ever be solved when the West realizes that these people are the actual ideological enemy, and not an ally. These people, although all funded by us through oil and gas money, are fighting a proxy war against non-Sunni Muslims and against the West through IS and other such extremists (as the Taliban, Boko Haram, etc. etc.). Their assets need to be frozen, their terror funding activities need to be made transparent, and they need to pay for what they have done - rather than giving them more money and weapons. You are correct in pointing out Qatar's involvement. But it is extremely naive to think that the Saudis, Qatar, Assad and Israel will work together. The Saudis and Qatar have been funding IS! They are their pawns. If you think that you can expect them to handle IS militarily, you are mistaken. You might actually be right when you say that they are starting to realize that they have created a threat to themselves. But I still don't think they would ever work with Assad. It's a really messed up situation all-around. I think we are better off by - crushing IS militarily in a joint effort with whoever is willing to contribute to this effort, regardless of whether they just happen to be in Iraq or Syria, these borders are rather random anyway - supporting the Kurds in a way that hopefully ensures that any weapons supplied to them will help crush IS and will not ultimately end up in the hands of IS - not trusting Erdogan, who has been supporting IS - eventually stopping to fund the brand of extremist Sunni Islam in Saudi Arabia and Qatar - economically punishing those who have been funding terror out of these countries - stopping to deliver weapons to Saudi Arabia - leaving Assad in power, regardless of his awful human rights record. I might be wrong, but that's my current understanding of how to make the "best" out of a really messed up situation. I don't think doing nothing is an option at this point.
"At what cost?" is always a legitimate question to ask when pondering military action. It's a necessary one. And the answer depends upon what responses you are contemplating. The more troops, planes, and other assets you put into it the less the human cost (casualties) and the faster it's over, but the greater the economic cost. We could do this without significant casualties on our part (there will be some no matter what we do). But the longer we wait, the tougher the nut is to crack. "At what guarantee?" is the dumbest possible question one can ask in such circumstances. There are ZERO guarantees in war. It is ALWAYS a gamble. That is war's nature, and to expect differently is to misunderstand war's nature. And to predicate your actions upon such "calculations" is a recipe for inaction. Every. Single. Time. You either take chances, you don't play, or you lose. Especially when the war is not of your own choosing - and you can't choose to not play in those cases. And the odds of them getting together *without American leadership* are exactly ZERO. No one does crap over there without an American leading them. The ONLY coalitions not led by the US in that region are the periodic attempts to murder the Jews, but that's obviously not what we're looking at here (yet). I have written several times already that Obama is being presented with a historic opportunity to build a grand coalition on this one, as combating ISIS is about the only think that everyone agrees upon. But he is waffling. Dithering. As usual. Just like how he waited for a month after we received intel on Foley's position; by the time he had made the decision, Foley was gone, and he lost his head for all to see because of it. dithering gets people killed. Waiting for the perfect plan is not a plan.
No argument here. You and I are in complete agreement on what the source of the problem here is. Wahabbiism is the root of 90% of the islamist movements we've seen there recently, and it comes straight out of Saudi, backed by an army of clerics and an endless river of cash. Qatar and Turkey are playing a dangerous game as well. I am not hopeful that any of this gets solved anytime soon, mainly because most people - our government included - refuse to acknowledge the problem, mainly out of fear of offending anyone (or spurring lawsuits). We pretend that it's just a few crazy jerks causing all of the problems, and while that's partly true, there are many more who silently support it or who do not oppose it. They are, after all, just doing what the suras tell them to do. No, I get it. But as you said, one thing at a time. We've got to put this fire out first before the other ones can be dealt with, because if we don't this one will burn the whole goddamned subdivision down.
Really has nothing to do with Obama. They kill us because we are an evil empire. We pillage whatever we want. Engage in economic assassinations. Topple governments. Destroy infrastructure. Drone civilians. Etc etc etc. We brought this on ourselves.
it's time for some shock and awe ffs Obama, get your ass off the golf course and party circuit and do something No doubt King Putt will show some feigned outrage, then jet off to a fundraiser.
Is that the conservatives' answer for everything? Poorly planned "shock and awes" are the reason ISIS exists in the first place. Foreign policy is an intricate matter that requires acute handling and access to all information available. There is simply no way that a random person such as yourself can say that shock and awe is the best course of action. You have no knowledge of the situation other than news articles.
This is the most American citizens will do. This isn't even a DEM or GOP issue but an American issue. Americans care more about defending the rights of female celebrities than the lives of Americans and innocent families in Syria and Iraq. #BringBacktheGirls remember?
Well you know all about fundamental ignorance I'm surprised you didn't go further and suggest that women wouldn't get raped if they weren't wearing sexy clothes instead of a Hijab. Siding with terrorists who behead civilians for propaganda purposes isn't really a good look, you might consider re-thinking your life.
I know what we can do? Ice bucket challenge to stop Isis? How about Ice Bucket challenge to help poor african children with no drinking water?
Obama could call in congressional leadership and get a use of force authorization against ISIS passed in a few days. Then he could order the military to wipe ISIS out, and they would, and he would be rightly applauded by the public for doing so.
Lol. You seem to think this congress cares. They have more important business, like midterm elections. And I've seen more public uproar from Americans over Apple iCloud than ISIS beheading people?
