Ouch, I thought we didn't want to police the World

They hated the US long before bombs started to fall, the bombs just means that there are fewer of them.

 

Without an extra 30,000 to 70,000 ground troops, this is all the coalition can do. It doesn't look like Iraq can raise that number of troops in their Iraq Security Force (ISF). Hell, ISIS took these cities because the ISF literally saw them coming and decided to abandon their posts.

Right now, the ISF is taking the lead in these cities to reclaim them from ISIS. The Shiite militias are on support operations. From what I understand about this strategy is that Baghdad is pretty much vulnerable. If ISIS attacks Baghdad, do the ISF troops abandon those cities to secure Baghdad?

 

They'd probably fight a bit to hold Baghdad, but this was all pretty predictable, Iraq wasn't anywhere near strong enough to defend themselves when the US chose to abandon them (at their foolish behest).

I don't think ISIS takes Baghdad, but the whole of Iraq will likely suffer for the bad decisions of their young government.

 

What kind of a loose hymen argument is this?

People of all backgrounds rape - however it is met with persecution in civilization. It's marked with a clear WRONG in the moral barometer. In the muslim world, it is a way of life. That's the difference.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/w...-ignore-afghan-allies-abuse-of-boys.html?_r=0

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...the-other-way-when-afghans-rape-children.html

Travel. Get out of your shell. Roll around in bed with a mulatto woman.

You'll be surprised to learn there's a world beyond the mainstream media.

Both. You can withdraw every troop in the M.E, but oil reserves still dictate your economic and political policy. Cut off the Saudi tankers, keep trade to a minimum for basic goods like cotton and stop immigration. The muslim world needs to be forced into reform.

The bombs were intended to topple the existing governments and guerrilla factions, so they served a purpose. The problem is - that purpose was based on an elementary understanding of the region and culture.

I don't have any party affiliation. I couldn't care less about politics, but due to my unavoidable influence and vision, I understand big picture issues and who is most likely to make the changes needed.

 

No, it isn't. You don't know anything about Muslims except what pundits have spoon fed you. Learn something accurate about Muslims for a change.

I did all of that in the '80s and '90s, would bet anything that I've "rolled around in bed" with a LOT more women than you have.

I don't base my opinion on anything from the media. I study issues from all sides and come to my own conclusions. You're projecting because you know you get your opinions spoon fed to you by pundits.

Oil reserves don't have to determine our policy. With a reasonable investment and call to action, we could get off of foreign oil entirely.

Stopping immigration is unnecessary and against everything this country stands for.

Even an elementary understanding of the region and culture is dramatically more than you have exhibited. You just parrot the musings of pundits.

Bullsh!t.

More bullsh!t. If you "couldn't care less about politics," there is no way in hell that you would be in the D&D of a basketball BBS.

ROFL! Narcissist much?

You only understand the portion of the picture that your blinders allow you to see. That picture may appear "big" to you, but that is because your thinking is so small.

 

Who said we didn't want to police the world? Some of us don't, but obviously there are a number of powerful people who sure as hell do.

 

If that is so it's because there making a profit from it.

 

Honestly, I think that's true but there is also more to it. By policing the world, we maintain an environment in which US businesses can operate, which feeds our economy and keeps you and me in comfortable houses with food on the table and iPhones in our pockets. Other guys may be profiting a lot more, but I think it's naive and maybe hypocritical to lambaste others from profiting from our 'police actions' and not recognizing our own complicity in the spoils. These things cost a lot of money and sometimes blow up in our faces, so an argument can be made that we would profit more from nonintervention, but I'd still say we share a little in the spoils.

This thinking does impact our voting somewhat as people will vote for things or people that they believe will strengthen the US economy in the world. And we hesitate to support things on, say, moral grounds, because they would hurt our economic position (why haven't we, for example, taken a harder line on businesses that run sweat shops in foreign countries? Because the cost of our clothes would go up.). But when it comes to bombing people, average joes -- knowing the US is the most powerful country on earth -- do still have a problem with watching severe injustice abroad go unpunished. When you see ISIS burning people alive, or the Taliban blowing up ancient shrines, or Boko Haram enslaving girls, or Assad using nerve gas on his own people, or Gaddaffi saying he's going to exterminate the people of Benghazi like rats, you just want to go bomb the **** out of them. It's hard to know that you have the capacity to deliver justice and deliverance for the oppressed, and sit and do nothing -- even if in your rational brain, you know what you can deliver won't exactly be justice or deliverance, and doing nothing might be the best thing you can do in a bad situation. So, yeah, even for people with no economic interest, even when they in general don't want to police the world, they'll still want to sometimes when the chips are down.

 

it's not your fault he lied to you and everyone else. it will be your fault if you continue to support him however.

 

Give it rest already.

 

These are not the first bombs to fall

Rocket River

 

And yet my comment is still valid.