War against Isis?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-02-2015, 01:08 PM
RE: War against Isis?
(13-02-2015 05:57 AM)Dom Wrote:  And last not least, he did take out the brain behind 9/11. Nice and quietly. So he's got some good people working for him. A president is only as good as the people who work for him.

The brain behind 9/11 was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and he was already in Guantanamo by the time Obama was in office. I'll assume you're referring to Osama Bin Laden, whose main role in 9/11 was about the same as Obama's role in taking him out. He pretty much just gave the okay to go ahead with it.

As for quiet, the immediate result was an international incident and compromise of relations with Pakistan (which I can live with) and the introduction of Seal Team 6 into the public eye. Glad he was taken out, of course, but it was done in a manner that was everything but nice and quiet.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 02:28 PM
RE: War against Isis?
(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  The ground to ground skirmish is not. It has changed, but it is still at the root of all operations.
At the route of all operations needs to be a focused strategy.
In the Muslim Arab nations the West need to tread very carefully, they are seen with disdain as an unwanted, invading presence. If China or Russia had a military presence in USA, with weapons and gung ho attitude, going in to right the wrongs that they perceive are happening on US soil, do you think many US citizens are going to be cheering for them?

(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  All the more reason to do it face to face and be less reliant on randomly lobbing in "smart" weapons.
Why is this USA's fight? Why are the West invading in the affairs of the Arabs?
USA stood by while Mugabe killed the white farmers in Zimbabwe but gets all righteous when it comes to the affairs of the oil nations.

Why do you think these ISIS are burning people alive, chopping heads off on video. Don't you think they are beconning, (goading even) the USA into combat?
Why would they want the USA to get gung ho?

(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  That goes both ways. Do you have any idea of what is happening as a result of the lack of an international response?
There is an international response.

It is one based on combating terrorism, one based on intelligence (spying on the threats), based on hunting down the key players, freezing funds, training the local forces how to combat the insurgents. It's working, the ISIS are getting desperate. But it will amount to nothing if USA go with their guns blazing. If they do this and chop of the head of ISIS then over the next decade many more heads will replace it.


(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  This predominantly ground fight is happening whether the U.S. or any other country chooses to be a part of it or not,
We are all part of it, we have no choice. But we need to think out where our involvement needs to be. White faces with Yankee accents and military guns is an unwelcome sight in the Middle East.


(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  These terrorists are occupying territory and infrastructure and controlling its flow of resources. What would you propose in place of grunts? Publicly condemning their actions and asking them to please stop?
If ground forces are needed then these ground forces need to be Arabs.

(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  If government forces do not get involved, citizens will do so on their own accord. So long as we have a vested interest in the outcome of the conflict, it is counterproductive to not control that outcome.
At the moment ISIS are a hated group. People see them doing horrific things, the local hate them. If USA invade then the locals will hate USA more than they hate ISIS, they will join in the war against the West.

(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  That sounds marvelous, but completely void of actual substance. When you say intelligence, what exactly are you referring to?
I refer to what the international effort are doing right now.
Monitoring communications, monitoring individuals and groups, monitoring borders...
Being careful not to give the perception that this is the West Vs the Muslims.

Bush's war on Terrorism was a disaster. We are still paying for it now.

(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  And if your intent is for local forces to do it, that can certainly be debated.
At the front line, it must be local forces, there is no debate on this.

(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  It does, however, contradict the point you're trying to make that grunts are not needed. What you instead mean to say is that you just don't want them to be our grunts.
Although some shoot outs may be necessary, the basis for the "war" needs to be intelligence and reducing supply chains.

(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  Obama is, indeed, an intelligent man. He knows absolutely nothing about military strategy, however.
He is smart enough to read the reports, listen to his advisers and take a calculated and shrewd response. He isn't getting a rush of blood to the head, jumping on the back of his ute cluching a bunch of guns and saying "Let's make 'em pay!"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
13-02-2015, 03:17 PM
RE: War against Isis?
(13-02-2015 02:28 PM)Stevil Wrote:  At the route of all operations needs to be a focused strategy.
In the Muslim Arab nations the West need to tread very carefully, they are seen with disdain as an unwanted, invading presence. If China or Russia had a military presence in USA, with weapons and gung ho attitude, going in to right the wrongs that they perceive are happening on US soil, do you think many US citizens are going to be cheering for them?
No. And at no time will you ever hear me say that I believe the world is or should be fair. If it were we'd all still be a bunch of single celled organisms with no reason to change. Alas, resources are scarce, and every other day we come up with another one we feel we absolutely need in order to have a worthwhile life. If Russia or China wants something I've got, I will not criticize them if they attempt to come and take it from me. Nor will I welcome them with open arms.

(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  Why is this USA's fight? Why are the West invading in the affairs of the Arabs?
USA stood by while Mugabe killed the white farmers in Zimbabwe but gets all righteous when it comes to the affairs of the oil nations.
Because civilization is and has been dependent on resource flow since long before the U.S. even existed. Personally I'd be happy to go defend farmers in Zimbabwe or the minorities of South Sudan (never again my ass). But as you pointed out, the American people, and I'm talking just as much about the bubble dwelling general population as I am the politicians and the corporations, are probably more concerned about their social security and the price of gas than to worry about a fight that is not likely to result in a return on the investment.

(13-02-2015 02:28 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Why do you think these ISIS are burning people alive, chopping heads off on video. Don't you think they are beconning, (goading even) the USA into combat?
Why would they want the USA to get gung ho?
Then consider me gullible. Given the chance, I'm gonna shred the bastards.

(13-02-2015 02:28 PM)Stevil Wrote:  There is an international response.

It is one based on combating terrorism, one based on intelligence (spying on the threats), based on hunting down the key players, freezing funds, training the local forces how to combat the insurgents. It's working, the ISIS are getting desperate. But it will amount to nothing if USA go with their guns blazing. If they do this and chop of the head of ISIS then over the next decade many more heads will replace it.
There is a restrained international response, but it will not help control the aftermath, and that is extremely important. I don't deny that this will end up being a fight of perhaps decades. The first mission the U.S. ever embarked on overseas was against the Muslims of the Barbary Coast in response to the kidnapping of merchant sailors. In that regards, we've been fighting this fight off and on for two hundred years already. This and other fights like it are not something where one day we're going to be able to say we have definitively won and go home and live happily ever after. The world doesn't work like that.


(13-02-2015 02:28 PM)Stevil Wrote:  We are all part of it, we have no choice. But we need to think out where our involvement needs to be. White faces with Yankee accents and military guns is an unwelcome sight in the Middle East.
Some welcome us, some hate us. Such is life. One of their biggest problems with us is that they know any help we offer them runs out in the next election if our general population gets tired of it and the next presidential wanna be uses that in his campaign.

In any case, I have no hate for them, and given the option I'll take the compassionate route when it doesn't compromise my own objectives, but ultimately I'm gonna do what I have to do to keep this fight elsewhere. That objective does not involve them liking me.


(13-02-2015 11:58 AM)yakherder Wrote:  If ground forces are needed then these ground forces need to be Arabs.
Either could work, but right now they're not doing so hot on their own. The Iraqi forces could have stopped this fight in a matter of hours when it first began, but instead they chose to turn tail and run. The Kurds are doing remarkably well, and that is largely because they are supported by foreigners both financially and directly in combat.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 03:47 PM
RE: War against Isis?
The Yazidis seem to be holding their own. I know they've bailed out the Kurds a few times.

Sorry times for people who just want to live their lives and give their children a future.

Fuck ISIL. Angry

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 04:24 PM
RE: War against Isis?
(13-02-2015 01:08 PM)yakherder Wrote:  
(13-02-2015 05:57 AM)Dom Wrote:  And last not least, he did take out the brain behind 9/11. Nice and quietly. So he's got some good people working for him. A president is only as good as the people who work for him.

The brain behind 9/11 was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and he was already in Guantanamo by the time Obama was in office. I'll assume you're referring to Osama Bin Laden, whose main role in 9/11 was about the same as Obama's role in taking him out. He pretty much just gave the okay to go ahead with it.

As for quiet, the immediate result was an international incident and compromise of relations with Pakistan (which I can live with) and the introduction of Seal Team 6 into the public eye. Glad he was taken out, of course, but it was done in a manner that was everything but nice and quiet.

I said he was taken out quietly, as in opposed to throwing a bomb on a town he was known to be in. I wasn't referring to any consequences.

And again, and always: "A president is only as good as the people who work for him."

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dom's post
13-02-2015, 04:51 PM
RE: War against Isis?
There is one obvious problem in declaring war against the Sunnis. You end up on the same side as the Shi'ites.

And what a bunch of fucking scumbags they are.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 04:59 PM
RE: War against Isis?
(13-02-2015 04:51 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  There is one obvious problem in declaring war against the Sunnis. You end up on the same side as the Shi'ites.

And what a bunch of fucking scumbags they are.

Or kill 'em all, let Allah sort 'em out. Big Grin

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
13-02-2015, 05:01 PM
RE: War against Isis?
How very catholic of you!!!

Angel

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 05:06 PM
RE: War against Isis?
(13-02-2015 05:01 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  How very catholic of you!!!

Angel

Just call me a traditionalist. Yes

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2015, 05:14 PM
RE: War against Isis?
(13-02-2015 04:59 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(13-02-2015 04:51 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  There is one obvious problem in declaring war against the Sunnis. You end up on the same side as the Shi'ites.

And what a bunch of fucking scumbags they are.

Or kill 'em all, let Allah sort 'em out. Big Grin

Lol

Honestly, if we could, it would be letting them all have their own religious wars in the Middle East. Having said that, a lot of the wars started were caused by Western governments along with the Soviet Union trying to influence everything, so I don't see how we can wipe our hands clean of it all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: