Iraq Reverts

[guido911]

Here's a take. Not sure if its reasonable, but its a take.

[guido911]

Feel good story of the day. Kudos to the title.


http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/21/that-isis-guy-who-promised-to-raise-islamic-flag-over-the-white-house-hes-dead/

[guido911]

How Russia deals with terrorists.

http://articles.philly.com/1986-01-15/news/26052630_1_hostage-crisis-soviet-captives-islamic-liberation-organization

[heironymouspasparagus]

How Russia deals with terrorists.

http://articles.philly.com/1986-01-15/news/26052630_1_hostage-crisis-soviet-captives-islamic-liberation-organization

You advocating?


That is the single most effective mode of operation.

[guido911]

You advocating?


That is the single most effective mode of operation.

Just passing along information...

[Conan71]

Pretty telling when even Al Qaeda won't associate with these guys because they are too radical and dangerous for them.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Just passing along information...

I sometimes think we went just a little too far with that "kinder, gentler, machine gun hand" thing.  Sometimes it needs to be unkind, ungentle, brutal, and vicious.  This is one of those times!

[Gaspar]

I sometimes think we went just a little too far with that "kinder, gentler, machine gun hand" thing.  Sometimes it needs to be unkind, ungentle, brutal, and vicious.  This is one of those times!

The rule is simple and timeless. 

When we are attacked, the US must respond with frightening and terrible force. 

Anyone who considers attacking the US, our people, or our interests should be so fearful of doing so that the idea becomes unthinkable.

This new-age concept of "proportional response" is ridiculous because it only produces a parlay, where each side slowly increases it's actions, and creates a sustainable conflict that is long lasting and politically comfortable.

Sec. of Def Hagel seems to understand this but has been put in a very uncomfortable position. The president stated that ISIS is not Al Qaeda, and that they are just the "JV team," in an effort to downplay the need for any responsiveness on his part.  This was a very very stupid thing to say just to expedite his journey back to the golf course.  The very next day, Hagel came out and said that ISIS is like no threat we have ever encountered before, and he is correct.  By saying this Hagel realizes that he has no choice but to contradict the president in order to do his job and protect this country.

This is why Hagel takes this position:
First, Al Qaeda was only about 25K - 30K strong at its most powerful, and though well funded, they were very disorganized, and regional. They did not get along with governments, or military groups, and employed a decentralized power structure. This did not prevent them from being highly effective, and carrying out successful terrorist plots world-wide.

ISIS is documented at 80K in strength, and made up of significant organized military might from the former Iraq Republican Guard, as well as Iranian, Lebanese, and Syrian forces. They have deep government funding as well as an organized methodology of seizing money and equipment in the regions they occupy. They are highly structured with stated goals and a command hierarchy based on standard military formulation with a functioning caliphate government. They are also not confined to a single region or ethnic group.  Their membership is world-wide and embraces a diverse cultural makeup.

They have no need to cower in caves and send, cryptic notes and VHS tapes by curriers that take weeks to arrive.  They are live on Twitter, Facebook and use technology as just another weapon.  They are fearlessly posting images of US targets with very literal intent, like this tweet from August 9th.

@Sunna_rev
#AmessagefromISIStoUS
We are in your state
We are in your cities
We are in your streets

You are our goals anywhere

If you had the stomach to watch the video of Mr. Foley being decapitated, you noticed that the hooded man was not speaking in arabic. He was speaking english with a british accent, and directly addressing President Obama. He has in fact been identified as a British citizen. ISIS also offered a degree of symbolism by clothing Foley in an orange outfit reminiscent of those worn in Guantanamo. The significance of which is speculated to indicate that the person carrying out the act may have been a former detainee, or that they want to focus attention, or send a message to others being held in Guantanamo.

We have this whole foreign policy thing so screwed up now that unfortunately something much bigger is going to happen to make us wake up and realize who we are.  We bought a lemon on this one, but unfortunately we are going to have to drive it until the engine catches fire.

[TheArtist]

Our foreign policy has been messed up for decades. We should not have been funding and protecting these governments who were repressing their people.  We should have kept being a beacon of freedom and enlightenment (education).  I remember being in Egypt in the 90s before the first Gulf war and seeing how the people were repressed by that government and how powerful the US was to them.  I remember getting off a bus to see the pyramids and a vendor was being a little overly persistent "won't go into details" but I got angry and started yelling at him then a bunch of guys carrying machine guns came up and whisked him away. Everywhere you could see that there were a few huge companies that seemed to dominate just about everything, likely government supported.  All in all not a pretty picture but I could only imagine what things were like in other countries even less free and with even more dictatorial leaders like Iraq and Saudi Arabia, but there we were making the government rich, doing deals with them while the even good people couldn't help but look on with resentment, and the bad becoming more and more radical  and more numerous decade after decade. Regardless of whether we may have seen it as having been up to the people to make their governments change it wasn't our job,,, we were there doing deals with and helping the people that were and still are, repressing them.  It couldn't stay like that forever.  Things would have to change some day, some how. Meanwhile technology progresses giving both good and bad people more and more power to do good or ill.

[heironymouspasparagus]

The rule is simple and timeless. 

When we are attacked, the US must respond with frightening and terrible force. 

Anyone who considers attacking the US, our people, or our interests should be so fearful of doing so that the idea becomes unthinkable.

This new-age concept of "proportional response" is ridiculous because it only produces a parlay, where each side slowly increases it's actions, and creates a sustainable conflict that is long lasting and politically comfortable.

Except that doesn't work, either.  Until you get to the point of extermination.  I put some links to Israel versus Palestinians....it is anywhere from about3:1 to 6:1 on deaths.  The Jews didn't stop attacking in Palestine area from about 1900 to 1947, and the Palestinians haven't stopped attacking in the area since 1947.  In spite of frightening and terrible....

So given that history, one might be tempted to pursue a policy of 10:1 or 1000:1 - step it up a notch or two.  Does anyone believe public opinion would allow that without a 'bigger' attack on us?  Or even with a bigger attack...?  Suppose we kill maybe 15 million - that might be kinda frightening and terrible - any chance of that helping anything?   We turned 80 - 90 million Native Americans into about 300,000 by 1900.  Do we have the will to repeat that?  On a half billion scale?

We seem to have cultivated a resistance to massive overkill as was used in WWII.  Tokyo fire-bomings, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, Berlin.... hundreds of thousands of civilians killed.  So, if we want to "win" this one, just eliminate all living beings in those red areas I see on the news as Isis controlled.  We could do it....set a perimeter around the area, move toward the center and kill everything that moves.   Could make it worse....probably would.

Still wouldn't "solve" the problem.  Still waiting for valid ideas.  Or even one glimmer of an idea that might actually make a positive difference.  None here so far...none on a national scale....none on a continental or global scale.  Maybe we will just have to keep on with a "holding action" until the UFO Aliens show themselves and bail us out.....or eat us!

[guido911]

This says it all I guess.

https://twitter.com/BecketAdams/status/502674824347803648/photo/1

[Gaspar]

Our foreign policy has been messed up for decades. We should not have been funding and protecting these governments who were repressing their people.  We should have kept being a beacon of freedom and enlightenment (education).  I remember being in Egypt in the 90s before the first Gulf war and seeing how the people were repressed by that government and how powerful the US was to them.  I remember getting off a bus to see the pyramids and a vendor was being a little overly persistent "won't go into details" but I got angry and started yelling at him then a bunch of guys carrying machine guns came up and whisked him away. Everywhere you could see that there were a few huge companies that seemed to dominate just about everything, likely government supported.  All in all not a pretty picture but I could only imagine what things were like in other countries even less free and with even more dictatorial leaders like Iraq and Saudi Arabia, but there we were making the government rich, doing deals with them while the even good people couldn't help but look on with resentment, and the bad becoming more and more radical  and more numerous decade after decade. Regardless of whether we may have seen it as having been up to the people to make their governments change it wasn't our job,,, we were there doing deals with and helping the people that were and still are, repressing them.  It couldn't stay like that forever.  Things would have to change some day, some how. Meanwhile technology progresses giving both good and bad people more and more power to do good or ill.

100% agreement with that.
The issue is that we are now in a position (that I would never deny was our own making) where we must take action to protect our own interests and our own people.  We can't just treat this a politics and sound bytes for fundraisers. We have to stop telegraphing our response, and our weakness.  A handful of highly publicized air strikes will not serve as a deterrent for an international force of 80,000.  All that serves to do is poke them with a stick.  They need to learn that to attack us is to face annihilation.

[Gaspar]

This says it all I guess.

https://twitter.com/BecketAdams/status/502674824347803648/photo/1

Mind if we play through?

[guido911]

Mind if we play through?

That's brutal. How does this one measure up?

[guido911]