Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    1:57 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Is the killing of Foley an act of war or criminal act? Back to Topics
mexicomaria

Champion Author
Minnesota

Posts:26,858
Points:1,799,460
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2014 3:38:33 PM

What a horror...what does one have to do to Americans to declare war on them?
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,862
Points:2,372,200
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Sep 15, 2014 8:16:33 AM

Would US sue parents of James Foley? Why White House is defending itself.





"The parents of James Foley, who was beheaded by the Islamic State, say the Obama administration told them they could be sued if they tried to pay their son's ransom. A White House official said Sunday that it was not a threat."




Would be interesting to know what went on here.... Parents are distraught and rightfully so... They are being vocal, on behalf of the memory of their son (not agreeing with them, or criticizing, just stating facts) It is a Very sad affair...

Personally, I do not think it is safe to be traveling over seas and relying on being a U.S. Citizen is not something that should be "banked on" in this day and age... That goes for Journalists, Tourists, etc.


[Edited by: reb4 at 9/15/2014 8:19:27 AM EST]
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:15,171
Points:528,100
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Sep 13, 2014 6:54:31 PM

Hostage 'death video' investigated

"The Foreign Office has said it is "working urgently to verify" video purporting to show beheading of British hostage David Haines.
The aid worker, 44, from Perth, was kidnapped last year while delivering aid in Syria.
Islamic State (IS) militants have already beheaded two US journalists and threatened to kill Mr Haines if US air strikes in Iraq were not halted.
The Foreign Office said Mr Haines's family had been informed.
Mr Haines, a father-of-two, was taken hostage in the village of Atmeh, in the Idlib province of Syria, in March 2013........It comes hours after his family had made a direct appeal to IS to contact them on Friday "

Time to piss off the British now.


[Edited by: theTower at 9/13/2014 6:55:14 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,637
Points:13,885
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Sep 8, 2014 10:56:28 AM

SE3.5: "Do we have a strategy yet?"

Don't know, President Obama is going to read his TelePrompter to us on Wednesday. Of course, the Narcissist-in-chief had to pick September 11th. After all, it just wouldn't do to have the Nation's attention fixed on anything besides his huge ego on such an important anniversary...

I understand, though, that he's going to threaten them with his pen and his phone...


[Edited by: Troller_Diesel at 9/8/2014 10:59:44 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Grizdad
Champion Author Montana

Posts:7,960
Points:1,159,720
Joined:Oct 2010
Message Posted: Sep 8, 2014 6:29:08 AM

We'll see what happens when the British journalist is slaughtered.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:23,067
Points:3,715,790
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 7, 2014 3:23:26 PM

I wonder how the French hostage got out with his head intact?
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,376
Points:2,985,570
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 8:30:15 AM

Yeah, SE, the strategy is "don't do anything stupid"

Sometimes not doing anything at all is what's really stupid.
You know, "stupid is as stupid does" can be morphed into "Stupid is as stupid doesn't do" .......
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:23,067
Points:3,715,790
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 8:26:30 AM

According to USA Today, another 350 troops are being sent to Iraq. The incremental re-build continues.

Do we have a strategy yet?
Profile Pic
Grizdad
Champion Author Montana

Posts:7,960
Points:1,159,720
Joined:Oct 2010
Message Posted: Sep 3, 2014 7:36:24 AM

Savages.
Profile Pic
Bell30012
Champion Author Atlanta

Posts:4,527
Points:692,610
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 8:42:25 PM

These people chose to go to countries where we have travel advisories warning people not to go there. While I feel very sorry for their families, the did go there of their own choice. People who go to hostile areas to bring us the news are paid extra for taking those chances. It does not always work out well.

We, the United States do NOT need to get involved in a war in Iraq. The government of Iraq wanted us to leave. We did. Now it is their problem. They had an opportunity for the US to leave a force behind, they refused.
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:10,470
Points:1,988,130
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 7:25:22 PM

sgm4law said: "I hope Joe remembered to give Sarah credit for that one."

Old drunken Joe doesn't need to give credit to anyone; he's just brimming with his own concentrated stupidity.
Profile Pic
wbacon
Champion Author Philadelphia

Posts:15,865
Points:3,531,225
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 5:59:23 PM

both
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:17,505
Points:2,071,265
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 4:34:31 PM

BOTH!!!
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,925
Points:817,585
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 3:39:58 PM

"What a horror...what does one have to do to Americans to declare war on them?"

Apparently, something more than kill a journalist, or two, or...
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,862
Points:2,372,200
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 3:04:10 PM

"The "JV team" claims to have beheaded another American journalist today."



Very sad... Thanks for update SE...

[Edited by: reb4 at 9/2/2014 3:04:28 PM EST]
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,862
Points:2,372,200
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 3:01:02 PM

"He could still fire his shotgun with his hands"




Oh, that is good one... you win...., and since it's a shotgun, no need for to much accuracy... not sure Biden's is ever can be thought as having both feet planted on solid ground....



[Edited by: reb4 at 9/2/2014 3:01:13 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:23,067
Points:3,715,790
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 2, 2014 2:50:47 PM

The "JV team" claims to have beheaded another American journalist today.

[Edited by: SE3.5 at 9/2/2014 2:51:10 PM EST]
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:5,392
Points:1,485,770
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Aug 29, 2014 8:59:19 AM

""If you think about it, it would be better if Biden had both feet in his mouth at the same time..... ""

You are right.
He could still fire his shotgun with his hands
Profile Pic
wbacon
Champion Author Philadelphia

Posts:15,865
Points:3,531,225
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 6:22:54 PM

Let the Grand Jury decide
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:52,512
Points:1,217,535
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 5:51:49 PM

"The simple conclusion is this: If ROTFLNorm weren't so eager to throw out ridicule and actually stick to the subject, he wouldn't distract intelligent discussion of the subject. And look foolish doing so."


Translation: "Just. Can't. Admit. You. Were. Wrong."

*ROTFL*
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,862
Points:2,372,200
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 9:54:21 AM

"Joe Biden needs to remove 1 of his feet on an hourly basis so he can insert the other foot into his mouth."





If you think about it, it would be better if Biden had both feet in his mouth at the same time.....



[Edited by: reb4 at 8/27/2014 9:54:29 AM EST]
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:5,392
Points:1,485,770
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Aug 27, 2014 9:46:48 AM

Joe Biden needs to remove 1 of his feet on an hourly basis so he can insert the other foot into his mouth.
That man must have done too much LSD in college.
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:52,512
Points:1,217,535
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 11:28:27 PM

"As anyone with an IQ over that of the average houseplant can clearly see, ROTFLNorm's response that 80% of Americans didn't want to go to war simply does not speak to the assertion that I made."


Yes it did.

You asserted:

"Waiting for a problem to get far worse before taking action is simply foolish."

My point was simply applying YOUR reasoning to the 80% anti-war sentiment meaning that the 80% must have been foolish since they didn't want to take action. Or, as someone else around here said, if the exponential expression of a point is stupid, then the original point was stupid to begin with (paraphrased).

As Johnny points out, since the county had suffered great losses in WWI, they did not have the appetite to go overseas and deal with yet another problem in Europe. And if you had lost loved ones over there, you would not be so quick to lose more loved ones for problems over there.

Yeah, its easy to dismiss the valid reasoning of others when you're not the one putting it on the line...

Your problem Mr. Pilgrim, is that you're too quick to dismiss facts just because I said them and will only admit them to be true when someone you agree with says "Yes you are wrong and Norm is right".

Some things and some people never change...no matter how many times they're banned and change their avatar and/or handle...

SMH

Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:52,512
Points:1,217,535
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 11:18:25 PM

"I have read a lot about WWII history and from what I remember Norm's 80% number is close enough if not right."


Thank you.

I should not be ridiculed and lied upon as "making stuff up" just because some are not as informed about things as they profess to be. I don't need to make up stuff when the information is readily available to any who want to find out for themselves, since they immediately dismiss whatever I say, just because I said it...and all the while talking about looking for informed and reasoned debate.
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:8,085
Points:1,185,890
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 10:28:28 PM

I am not disagreeing with you about the need to act. The old saying is, those who fail to learn from their history are doomed to relive it. Just like in 1941 when 80% +or- of Americans wanted no part of another war in Europe we now have a majority of Americans who don't want to go to war in the Middle East again. In 1941 the way the Jews were being treated was known, but not our problem and if it was/is what can we do?

Just like in 1941 we will need to get hit in the head with another 2x4 before the war is supported. You are right we should stop ISIS before they become stronger, but we won't. That would not be popular at home and the host countries don't want us to act. Right now ISIS is killing mostly Christian and in the Islamic world that may not be great but they don't see a need to stop it either. One thing is for sure Muslims will not risk their lives, weapons, or political capital to help the Christians. If we act alone it would just be seen as another example of U.S interference and the PR campaign would work against us in the regen. "America invaded a Islamic nation to help the infidel." In the long run it could actually help the ISIS recruiting efforts. The best we could do is evacuate the ones who are willing to leave. After that we need to let them fight it out. If ISIS wins then they will come after us and we can wipe the area clean. If they lose then we didn't need to go in and the area may learn from it's mistake. If not then the next uber radical group will show up and we do the same thing.

I have no doubt in the end they will come after us in some way. The important thing we need to do is be ready and willing to act quickly and viciously when they do. We can't do it like we did Afghanistan or Iraq. Nation building is a joke in that part of the world. They don't want a democracy and one won't work there. They see kindness as a weakness to be exploited. Respect starts with fear and they need to learn to fear us. Roosevelt said speak softly and carry a big stick. We have spoken softly now we need to use the club, but at the right time.
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,637
Points:13,885
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 9:56:16 PM

johnnyg1200: "I have read a lot about WWII history and from what I remember Norm's 80% number is close enough if not right."

OK. So he's right. It doesn't matter, since it's simply a red herring response to what I actually said:

"I wonder how many millions of people have died because some people "didn't want to go to war?"

How much more did it cost in treasure and lives due to the delay of the United States' entry into WWII?

Waiting for a problem to get far worse before taking action is simply foolish."

As anyone with an IQ over that of the average houseplant can clearly see, ROTFLNorm's response that 80% of Americans didn't want to go to war simply does not speak to the assertion that I made.

His (sarcastic) reply was that 80% of the American people were being foolish.

Which, is not what I said. I don't want to go to work tonight. However, I will, because my family needs the income. Doing what is necessary at times does not equal what one wishes they could do.

So, instead of addressing my point, ROTFLNorm simply engages in a ridiculous series of posts about the simple fact that I pointed out that once again, he provided no proof nor evidence. Then he simply posted a couple of articles that "agreed" with is assertion. Fine.

There may have indeed been 80% of the US people against the US entering WWII.

So, then, what is the conclusion? We shouldn't have fought WWII?

History seems to show that we did, in fact, enter the war.

The simple conclusion is this: If ROTFLNorm weren't so eager to throw out ridicule and actually stick to the subject, he wouldn't distract intelligent discussion of the subject. And look foolish doing so.



[Edited by: Troller_Diesel at 8/25/2014 9:58:06 PM EST]
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:22,810
Points:2,927,770
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 9:37:50 PM

I hope Joe remembered to give Sarah credit for that one.
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:10,470
Points:1,988,130
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 9:29:03 PM

PopcornPirate said: "Pick a country in Africa"

You silly PopcornPirate, you!

Don't you know that Africa IS the country?

P.S. Any argument about that fact and I'll fire two shotgun rounds into the air. Once I scramble around for more shells, I might even fire a round through the door! Don't say you weren't warned!
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:8,085
Points:1,185,890
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 8:03:37 PM

I have read a lot about WWII history and from what I remember Norm's 80% number is close enough if not right. After the first "War To End All Wars" America did not want to go through the losses of another war in Europe. The attitude was let Europe handle it this time. It wasn't that people were foolish, they just didn't understand the threat. It took a 2x4 upside the head before the nation collectively understood the problems of Europe could affect America. It was not understood that conquest America was also part of the Nazi/Japanese plan for the world. It wasn't supposed to happen until Hitler took all of Europe but it was coming. Fortunately Japan jumped the gun. If the Politicians had tried to force the U.S. into the war before Pearl Harbor the ones who did it would have most likely been voted out of office.

After the last ten+ years America is not interested in getting back into a war in the desert no matter how correct it may be. We are tired of wars that have no effect on this continent. In the mean time the ethnic minorities will continue to be slaughtered. ISIS will continue to grow in numbers and strength. They will become better funded and more technically capable. Both Iraq and Syria are incapable of stopping ISIS independently and I doubt they could do it even if they worked together. It would take a unification of a number of nations in the region to defeat ISIS. That is highly unlikely because these countries will play for position when the war with ISIS is over so they have the advantage over the others. In short they don't trust each other enough to work together in a military campaign. Right now neither Iraq or Syria will let the other nation peruse ISIS across their shared boarder. They don't like us but they trust us more than their neighbors. At least we go home, eventually and don't try to rewrite boarders.

Here is what I see happening. ISIS will continue to grow. They will continue to gather numbers and eventually they will come after us. Russia and China are sitting on the sidelines and are not being threatened by ISIS. In short they don't have a dog in this fight. To be honest I wouldn't be surprised of one or both rendered aid to ISIS just so they can destabilize the region and maybe weaken the U.S.

At some point we will be drawn into this fight. The only questions are how horrific will the magnet be that pulls us in, how powerful will ISIS be when we enter the fight, and will we be ready or will we be like we were in 1917 and 1941? The first days of both we not what I would call good for us.
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:52,512
Points:1,217,535
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 11:56:16 AM

"Neither of the links you posted were "circa 1940."


Obviously you did not read them, for if you did, then you would know what and when they were referencing...

But like I said, you'll keep changing the subject away from your false statement:

""Well, I suppose I could comment on that, but since we really don't know that 80% of people didn't want to get involved, since you just made that up, why bother?""

*ROTFL*

Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,637
Points:13,885
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 11:25:07 AM

ROTFLNorm: "...articles circa 1940 would know more about polling in 1940..."

Neither of the links you posted were "circa 1940."

Once again, I don't think that word means what you think it means...

Since, when your statements are proven wrong, you will not admit they are wrong, but will try and change the subject to something else to redirect the focus from your being wrong once again.
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,637
Points:13,885
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 11:23:16 AM

Looks like Foley's death is just another in the never-ending series of Obama Misadministration failures...

Pentagon sources said Foley and the others might well have been rescued but Obama, concerned about the ramifications of US troops being killed or captured in Syria, took too long to authorise the mission.
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:52,512
Points:1,217,535
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 11:22:10 AM

"You haven't proven anything. All you did was link to a couple of articles that "agree" with you. Why not link to the polls themselves, or contemporary articles reporting those polls?"


LOL, I proved two things:

1. Your statement "since we really don't know that 80% of people didn't want to get involved, since you just made that up, why bother?" is false, since (a) I didn't make it up; and (b) articles circa 1940 would know more about polling in 1940; and

2. When your statements are proven wrong, you will not admit they are wrong, but will try and change the subject to something else to redirect the focus from your being wrong once again.

That's enough proofs for me today.

Ciao.
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,637
Points:13,885
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 10:19:01 AM

ROTFLNorm: You haven't proven anything. All you did was link to a couple of articles that "agree" with you. Why not link to the polls themselves, or contemporary articles reporting those polls?

Don't know what you're *ROTFL* about, other than your own inability to hold up your end of a conversation...

And that still does not address the point that I made, that the US' late entry into WWII caused more mayhem and destruction than if the US had entered earlier.

Pointing to polls is simply an appeal to popularity.

If you asked the same question in 1940 about segregation, you'd probably get about the same result, so then, would you say desegregation was wrong based on those polls?

Seriously. Try to keep up.



[Edited by: Troller_Diesel at 8/25/2014 10:22:22 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:29,963
Points:3,672,925
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 10:15:35 AM

"They probably will also threaten Kuwait, the Emirates and Saudi Arabia, if unchecked."

Great idea.

When the armies of those three countries attack ISIS we should back them up.
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:5,392
Points:1,485,770
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 10:11:07 AM

ISIS = Ethnic Cleansing
We have seen this many times before...haven't we?
Nazi Germany
Bosnia
Iraq ( By Sadam )
Egypt
Pick a country in Africa
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:52,512
Points:1,217,535
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Aug 25, 2014 12:11:33 AM

"Well, I suppose I could comment on that, but since we really don't know that 80% of people didn't want to get involved, since you just made that up, why bother?"


Yes, lets bother...

So now that we know I didn't just make that up, we also know you're not going to say you were wrong about what I said...but will keep droning on about straw men...

*ROTFL*
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:52,512
Points:1,217,535
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Aug 24, 2014 10:28:20 PM

"Well, I suppose I could comment on that, but since we really don't know that 80% of people didn't want to get involved, since you just made that up, why bother?"


No, I don't need to make stuff up...

Right through 1941, polls showed 80 percent opposition to American involvement. Only after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor did U.S. entry into World War II become politically possible.
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,637
Points:13,885
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Aug 24, 2014 10:17:22 PM

Well, I suppose I could comment on that, but since we really don't know that 80% of people didn't want to get involved, since you just made that up, why bother?

Besides, it's just another one of your empty-headed straw man arguments anyway.

Of course, no one really wants to get involved in a war, but, like many other things, it sometimes becomes a necessity.

No one wants to get surgery, but if someone has cancer, it may be necessary. Wouldn't it be foolish to wait until the cancer became much worse before having surgery? I would think that would be common sense.

In other words, put simply, sometimes we have to make choices that we don't want to make.

It's best to make wise choices, something liberals seem to have a very difficult time comprehending. Since libs tend to run on "feelings" rather than intellect.
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:52,512
Points:1,217,535
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Aug 24, 2014 9:07:36 PM

"Waiting for a problem to get far worse before taking action is simply foolish. "


Yeah, kinda like not entering WWII until Pearl Harbor, huh? When, prior to that 80% of Americans did not want to get involved...So I guess that whole generation was foolish...

Thanks for clearing that up.

[Edited by: RNorm at 8/24/2014 9:09:40 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,637
Points:13,885
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Aug 24, 2014 8:01:15 PM

I wonder how many millions of people have died because some people "didn't want to go to war?"

How much more did it cost in treasure and lives due to the delay of the United States' entry into WWII?

Waiting for a problem to get far worse before taking action is simply foolish.

Profile Pic
Grizdad
Champion Author Montana

Posts:7,960
Points:1,159,720
Joined:Oct 2010
Message Posted: Aug 24, 2014 6:29:40 PM

Well… Let's See Who Takes Out The Trash
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:30,680
Points:3,404,245
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Aug 23, 2014 12:03:54 PM

Grizdad - it's usually "God save the Queen", but your point is well taken. Unfortunately, I think Europe doesn't have the "huevos" to go in without America. Germany might. They're poised to become a European superpower, again.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:30,680
Points:3,404,245
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Aug 23, 2014 12:01:40 PM

johnnyg said: "Groups like ISIS think America is week and if you hit us hard enough we will tuck our collective tail between our legs and go home to hide in a corner."

--And from the actions of this fool administration, wouldn't that be an entirely logical conclusion? So what has Obama done about it? Zip, nada, zilch. We've continued airstrikes, and that's fine, but what about assassinating the leaders of this terror organization? We managed drone strikes against an American citizen - Al Alwaki. And that's all well and good. So why not go after these others in a bigger way.

Oh, and if Obama thinks airstrikes will drive out this group, he's either badly mistaken, ill advised, or mentally infirm. Airstrikes can be used to WEAKEN an invading army, but not to entirely displace it. Ultimately, whether Obama likes it or not, we will have to go back in with an invading army to displace, root out and kill these terrorists that mean harm to us and our allies. Remember that Turkey is a NATO country now. It's not just about Israel, nor Iraq. They probably will also threaten Kuwait, the Emirates and Saudi Arabia, if unchecked.
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:8,085
Points:1,185,890
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Aug 23, 2014 11:21:39 AM

I don't really want to go to war either, but what will letting ISIS continue to grow cost in the long run? The UN just announced a round of sanctions to deal with ISIS. The problem is sanctions have not worked in the past. The arms embargos in parts of Africa didn't work. In 2000 and 2001 the UN had sanctions against the Taliban. We saw how well that worked on 9-11. Sanctions were put in place to prevent Iran's nuclear program. They didn't work. The UN imposed sanctions against North Korea to prevent it from getting nuclear bombs and long range missiles. They now have both.

Now this is just me but we have ISIS with an abundance of oil at their control and North Korea who needs oil. Then you have North Korea with missile technology and missiles in their hands but no place to use them with out getting stomped into a mud hole. North Korea also has the brass ring that every terror organization wants, chemical weapons. They have the silver ring of missile technology. They also have the Gold Ring, Nukes. How long before these two start talking about a trade. Instead of oil for food this will be oil for weapons.

If ISIS gets its hands on long range missiles Israel will be hit, I have not doubt about that. If ISIS can get there hands on chemical weapons Israel will be hit. If ISIS can get their hands on nukes I think they will go after us because that would be the grand daddy of all terror attacks and they don't think we are willing to do what is needed to win a war. Groups like ISIS think America is week and if you hit us hard enough we will tuck our collective tail between our legs and go home to hide in a corner. Also the PR campaign they could run for requiting purposes after a successful attack against the U.S. would be enormous. It would also be a PR weapon to keep other weaker nations out of the fight.

It isn't really a question of if we are going to take ISIS out but what will it take for us to decide we have to do it and who will stand with us, who will stand on the sidelines and who will align with ISIS as we do.

We need to start sending very clear signals about the long term consequences of dissensions. We need to start understanding who our friends are and identifying our enemies.
Profile Pic
SAVMOR
Champion Author Idaho

Posts:6,906
Points:1,635,305
Joined:Jun 2005
Message Posted: Aug 23, 2014 9:30:39 AM

Ditto - worryfree.
Profile Pic
worryfree
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:27,003
Points:2,361,135
Joined:Oct 2005
Message Posted: Aug 23, 2014 12:56:28 AM

Let's say criminal. We don't want to go to war again.
Profile Pic
Grizdad
Champion Author Montana

Posts:7,960
Points:1,159,720
Joined:Oct 2010
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 9:10:05 PM

"John" will never see the inside of a courtroom. Our friends across the pond contend the SAS will find him and deal with him. God bless the Queen!
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:1,637
Points:13,885
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 7:21:36 PM

johnnyg1200: "None of the countries in the area have the ability or will to do it."

I dunno. I'm getting a little tired of being Saudi Arabia's mercenary army...
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:8,085
Points:1,185,890
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 6:12:53 PM

I think we will end up dealing with ISIS in the end. None of the countries in the area have the ability or will to do it. Until then ISIS will continue to get stronger and commit more and more appalling atrocities as they do. Unfortunately it will take a direct attack against the west or America its self before we decide to deal with it. They have made their goals clear, the destruction of anything that doesn't fit their idea of Islam. This includes the U.S. as stated many times.

They are well funded and training their forces. They have access to oil money, low grade nuclear material, and there are chemical weapons in Syria. With the money at their disposal they could buy the weapons or hire a chemist to make them for them. Remember the Tokyo subway attack by a religious cult in 1995? They also have Westerners to carry out attacks in the west for them.

As cruel as it sounds I say wait until attacked and then the nation will be behind any action we take, at least for a while. The only question is who will be in charge when it happens and how will he/she deal with it. We tried nation building and all it did was cost us a lot of lives and money. I think it time to try total warfare with no reconstruction after. Treat the area like we did Japan and Germany during WWII. We left equipment for the Iraq military, now ISIS is using the U.S. made equipment we gave the Iraq army.


[Edited by: johnnyg1200 at 8/22/2014 6:13:37 PM EST]
Profile Pic
RNorm
Champion Author San Bernardino

Posts:52,512
Points:1,217,535
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2014 12:46:42 PM

"It seems to me that sending a few more troops or flying a few more bombing runs is not going to stop ISIS. One of our planes WILL get shot down, and/or a couple of our ADVISORS will get captured. Then what?"



Although I RARELY agree with the Pilgrim on anything, he did say this:

"How about we just take out ISIS, Syria, AND Assad."

If you really want to solve the problem, then you have to be willing to do that, which would means lots (and I do mean LOTS) of people will have to die. Otherwise, we'll be perpetually fighting some insurgency in the middle east (as they keep replacing dictators with other dictators).

Is this what we're committing ourselves to do? Be honest.
Post a reply Back to Topics