🇮🇶 Discussion: Iraq II - Part 2

[Thundercrack85]

Do you mean Netanyahu and Likud or Hamas?

 

[Greens]

To me there are two perspectives on this issue. The regional perspective, i.e. the "let them sort it out amongst themselves", and the humanitarian globalist perspective (for lack of better terms). I.e. we can't let Iraqi kids, Syrian kids, whatever kind of kids and innocent people be beheaded and do nothing.

Yup. It's easy to say "fix our own country first before we worry about those countries far away!" and in a sense that would be accurate, but we're all part of one planet. There's no need to segmentize the human race even further.

 

[Kelly]

Do you mean Netanyahu and Likud or Hamas?

Interesting question....

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

To me there are two perspectives on this issue. The regional perspective, i.e. the "let them sort it out amongst themselves", and the humanitarian globalist perspective (for lack of better terms). I.e. we can't let Iraqi kids, Syrian kids, whatever kind of kids and innocent people be beheaded and do nothing.

I fully acknowledge that intervening will probably result in blowback, and the local powers need to actually use those huge militaries they have.

On the other hand, it's doubtful that they will do anything beyond air strikes, and I'm sick of seeing people being beheaded.

So, I'm conflicted.

Think of this way, how would you feel if America had a chance to stop the Holocaust but didn't. How shameful and cruel it would be.

Yes the ISIS killings are smaller in scale (for now) but the justification for humanitarian intervention is similar.

On the other hand, ISIS is not likely to be stopped after 5 years of engagement or even 10 years of engagement. So how much blood and treasure should we commit to playing their sick and twisted war game?

 

[Herolee10]

So in other words, we're basically screwed.

Man, the middle East sounds more like the equivalent of a modern day Gotham, but on a larger scale.

No matter who intervenes or how many villains are taken out, nothing is going to change in the long run until the people there all unanimously agree and cry out for it.

 

[regwec]

Lest we forget, many of ISIS' torturers, rapists, slave owners, and murderers, are Westerners. So we can't explain current events from the starting point that the Middle East is a spawning ground for evil.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Lest we forget, many of ISIS' torturers, rapists, slave owners, and murderers, are Westerners. So we can't explain current events from the starting point that the Middle East is a spawning ground for evil.

Well a lesser evil was holding the evil back in the Middle East and then we helped destabilize the region by over-throwing a couple of dictators in places that are now a sanctuary for ISIS.

The pandora box existed in the Middle East and we opened it.

Maybe the Middle East needed rogue dictatorships to keep Muslim extremism at bay. Did our leaders really think the Arab Spring would result in the establishment of a freedom loving democracy?

 

[herakles]

Well a lesser evil was holding the evil back in the Middle East and then we helped destabilize the region by over-throwing a couple of dictators in places that are now a sanctuary for ISIS.

The pandora box existed in the Middle East and we opened it.

Maybe the Middle East needed rogue dictatorships to keep Muslim extremism at bay. Did our leaders really think the Arab Spring would result in the establishment of a freedom loving democracy?

While George W made things bad by overthrowing Saddam at least the insurgents stayed in Iraq. Obama made things worse by backing coups in Egypt, Libya and Syria.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I wouldn't say Obama supported the coup in Syria.

As for Libya, I still think that was the right call. Gaddafi would have murdered the entire country before he let go of power.

 

[Kelly]

I wouldn't say Obama supported the coup in Syria.

As for Libya, I still think that was the right call. Gaddafi would have murdered the entire country before he let go of power.

The problem is, we have not learned how to support a government, AFTER WE HAVE HELPED KICK ONE OUT. We have been doing this for decades, predominantly in Latin America and we didn't learn then, and it is obvious with Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya we still haven't learned. I think we might actually get lucky in Egypt, and that could quite possibly diffuse to Libya and then onto the other Arab states.

But when you have a State Department that makes comments like this...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nt-spokeswoman-floats-jobs-as-answer-to-isis/

well, we are in trouble....

I'm all for job opportunities, but you have to cut the head off of the snake first.

 

[Victarion]

Is it feasible for us to attack ISIS's finances? Rob them blind and leave them without money for firearms etc?

 

[herakles]

the problem is, we have not learned how to support a government, after we have helped kick one out. We have been doing this for decades, predominantly in latin america and we didn't learn then, and it is obvious with afghanistan, iraq and libya we still haven't learned. I think we might actually get lucky in egypt, and that could quite possibly diffuse to libya and then onto the other arab states.

But when you have a state department that makes comments like this...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nt-spokeswoman-floats-jobs-as-answer-to-isis/

well, we are in trouble....

I'm all for job opportunities, but you have to cut the head off of the snake first.

thank you!

 

[herakles]

I wouldn't say Obama supported the coup in Syria.

As for Libya, I still think that was the right call. Gaddafi would have murdered the entire country before he let go of power.

Gaddafi had been castrated. Reagan put him in quiet time and he forgot to leave his corner. Libya was not causing any real problems. Look at what happened in Egypt. At least their new dictator has b@lls. He bombed ISIS after 21 Coptic Christians laborers got murdered.

 

[terry78]

So in essence the loophole in us going in there and kicking ass is we are technically cleaning up our own mess.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I wouldn't say Obama supported the coup in Syria.

As for Libya, I still think that was the right call. Gaddafi would have murdered the entire country before he let go of power.

What evidence was there that Gaddafi was genocidal?

I know he antagonized the West like most rogue countries do but was he a monster?

I think Gaddafi was on America's hit list because he was a socialist with one of the largest oil reserves, not because of horrific human rights abuses.

I think Libya was far more more stable and non-threatening before the coup and his assassination.

 

[Destructus86]

Is it feasible for us to attack ISIS's finances? Rob them blind and leave them without money for firearms etc?

Actually...I was wondering the same thing. Attack the origin of their supplies rather tan hitting them directly....they are buying their weapons from somewhere and getting their money from somewhere.

 

[BestGirl]

While George W made things bad by overthrowing Saddam at least the insurgents stayed in Iraq. Obama made things worse by backing coups in Egypt, Libya and Syria.

Backing the coups hasn't really done anything one way or the other. Those dictators had lost control over their countries and would've found it almost impossible to get it back. If Obama had done nothing Libya would probably just look like Syria right about now. I don't know about Egypt. Mubarak wasn't as terrible as Ghaddafi.

 

[Kaleb]

Actually...I was wondering the same thing. Attack the origin of their supplies rather tan hitting them directly....they are buying their weapons from somewhere and getting their money from somewhere.

I think this might explain why its not so easier said than done.
[YT]staMI7DoO-E[/YT]

 

[herakles]

Backing the coups hasn't really done anything one way or the other. Those dictators had lost control over their countries and would've found it almost impossible to get it back. If Obama had done nothing Libya would probably just look like Syria right about now. I don't know about Egypt. Mubarak wasn't as terrible as Ghaddafi.

Gaddafi would have put down the revolt if Obama hasn't used the US Navy.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I'm not sure honestly. I think we might have a situation like we now have in Syria. Only bloodier, since the "rebels" had more support in the cities.

 

[Kelly]

Is it feasible for us to attack ISIS's finances? Rob them blind and leave them without money for firearms etc?

I can assure you, that is being done....

 

[Thundercrack85]

Well, most of their success comes from robbing other people.

 

[herakles]

I'm not sure honestly. I think we might have a situation like we now have in Syria. Only bloodier, since the "rebels" had more support in the cities.

Gaddaffi had the army. Plus Obama gave arms to the "rebels" in both Syria and Libya. Now he is DRAGGING his feet in re-arming the Kurds and Jordanians.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Assad had the army too, and the Libyan rebels controlled way more cities.

I think at this point he should arm the Kurds.

 

[PacificBoy]

ISIS will continue to be well funded by sections of Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf monarchies, until the time the House of Saud actually feels threatened by them -- which could be close. ISIS is reportedly turning its sights on claiming Saudi oil and the holy cities, the ultimate prizes. Could be just grandstanding on their part though.

Supplies are seemingly coming through Turkey as well.

[YT]akbfplUcjLU[/YT]