President Obama addresses the nation, declares war. . .

[xbuzzerx]

If you want to justify 9/11 in any way shape or form then you are in the minority. I was against the invasion of Iraq, it was a blunder
and the Bush boys did all that they could to mislead our nation with propaganda to justify it, that war was not comparable to 9/11, they knew that we were coming, where we were from, our men wore uniforms, we did not hi jack airliners and use them on civilian targets.

9/11 was perpetrated by cowards, their leaders hi jacked a religion to recruit punks who were angry, they did not wear a uniform but rather acted as low lives and attacked civilians, if you think that anything that our nation has done could justify what these snakes did
then we have nothing to discuss.

It has nothing to do with "justification." It's a statement of fact. The U.S. was not randomly picked as a target. It was picked by people who feel, whether you agree with the validity or not, that they have specific political and historical grievances against actions the U.S. has taken in the Middle East. Osama Bin Laden, for example, is a Saudi royal who grew disgusted with the fact that the U.S. uses his country as launch board for military interventions in other Muslim countries.

If you want to believe that the U.S. is just irrationally picked by people who have never in any way been on the sour end of U.S. foreign policy then you are just pulling the wool over your eyes. "We gave them foreigners tsunami money and look how they thanked us."

 

[Kulindahr]

As Paul posted, our oil bondage is the bidding of the moneyed megacorporations that will it so.

If we had even half of Germany's resolve to develop alternative energy and soon, the Mideast would be at our door begging us to buy rather than piping the tune.

And we have a dubious quasi-superstitious view of Israel that smacks of divinely ordained support of Israel.

There is another strategic interest at play beyond questions of conservation: the US is an important customer of middle eastern countries. That gives it regional influence that it would not have if everybody in the US had a solar panel on their rooves and China was buying all the oil from Saudi Arabia.

If only 13% of US oil is imported from the middle east as buzzer points out, then this is less about buying energy and more about buying influence and presence.

We'd have more influence if we actually had the capability of suddenly not buying that oil any longer. A more sensible energy policy would be to help domestic energy companies cap US wells and replace that energy with clean sources, until we had enough capped to replace the Mideast oil on short notice.

 

[Kulindahr]

I have no idea.

As a general rule, people who are happy with their lives are not so inclined to try to make others miserable. And what generally makes people happy is a sense of fairness in life. Happiness does not come from wealth, but from hope. There are plenty of abjectly poor people on earth who are nevertheless happy with their lives.

It's not very easy to offer hope to people who feel abused and disenfranchised. That's probably why it hasn't happened in the Middle East for the last few thousand years. But I think the nations of the world would do better to try to offer the people of the Middle East hope than to kill them in the name of peace.

This brings to mind an idea I had quite some time ago, one that really isn't an option for the US because of the huge debt: have a policy that if a country that is misbehaving or has misbehaving groups causing turmoil will cooperate in ending whatever situation has made us feel the need to bomb or otherwise intervene, we will continue spending the same amount of money as the military activities are costing, but on aid to the people -- not the government so much, but the people.

Sticks are a lot more useful when you also have a carrot.

 

[Kulindahr]

I think you are lazily lumping the whole rest of the world into one monolithic group. I have no idea what would possess you to think that places like Syria or Afghanistan are simply biting the hand that feeds them. The only country we "feed" every kind of aid to in the region is Israel, and they're the ones who told us to back off and don't tell them what to do.

The idea that these places "owe us" because of aid we gave to Southeast Asia during tsunamis or similar is just mind-boggling.

Actually, no -- we give Egypt massive aid as well, and they don't like it when advice comes with it, either.

Interestingly, at the moment one nation protesting our interrupting the aid to Egypt is Israel.

 

[Kulindahr]

All Administration spokespeople are touting a - all caps - WAR against ISIS. From the looks of it not many countries outside of the EU are jumping on the bandwagon; in any event there is a noticeable absence of enthusiasm.

I don't understand Turkey's reluctance. ISIS controls most of the Turkey/Syria border, and that can't be reassuring to Turkey. It's a serious worry for them, so why aren't they asking NATO to put some forces on that border? It could even be done in a way that would more than satisfy the more moderate anti-Assad forces: make a deal with them that if they bring democracy and human rights to the area, then NATO will smash ISIS and Assad loyalist forces all along the border so the moderates can move in. Heck, that might even stir Assad to make a deal.

 

[Kulindahr]

If you want to justify 9/11 in any way shape or form then you are in the minority. I was against the invasion of Iraq, it was a blunder
and the Bush boys did all that they could to mislead our nation with propaganda to justify it, that war was not comparable to 9/11, they knew that we were coming, where we were from, our men wore uniforms, we did not hi jack airliners and use them on civilian targets.

9/11 was perpetrated by cowards, their leaders hi jacked a religion to recruit punks who were angry, they did not wear a uniform but rather acted as low lives and attacked civilians, if you think that anything that our nation has done could justify what these snakes did
then we have nothing to discuss.

From their perspective, they were just employing against the US the same tactics the US had been employing against them. If they were cowards, then much -- if not most -- of US policy in the region has been that of cowards. "Our men" didn't wear uniforms, they snuck about offering weapons and bribes to oppose what the people in those countries wanted.

It's easy to be self-righteous, but from a purely balanced point of view it's actually a credit to the patience of people in the middle east that they didn't do a 9/11 thirty years earlier.

 

[palbert]

I don't understand Turkey's reluctance. ISIS controls most of the Turkey/Syria border, and that can't be reassuring to Turkey. It's a serious worry for them, so why aren't they asking NATO to put some forces on that border? It could even be done in a way that would more than satisfy the more moderate anti-Assad forces: make a deal with them that if they bring democracy and human rights to the area, then NATO will smash ISIS and Assad loyalist forces all along the border so the moderates can move in. Heck, that might even stir Assad to make a deal.

It won't even let our fighters use its airstrips.

The reticence has roots in two dilemmas: the Islamic State group holds dozens of Turkish hostages, including diplomats, and Turkey is wary of boosting its rebellious Kurdish minority in the battle against Islamic State group enemies in Iraq.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/feedarticle/11539332

 

[peeonme]

From their perspective, they were just employing against the US the same tactics the US had been employing against them. If they were cowards, then much -- if not most -- of US policy in the region has been that of cowards. "Our men" didn't wear uniforms, they snuck about offering weapons and bribes to oppose what the people in those countries wanted.

It's easy to be self-righteous, but from a purely balanced point of view it's actually a credit to the patience of people in the middle east that they didn't do a 9/11 thirty years earlier.

I remember as a boy I always heard stories of Pearl Harbor, people referred to the "sneak attack" I even at the age of 9 or 10 thought to myself of how dumb it would be to announce an attack. I didn't say this out loud for fear of reprisal from the adults making the comments. I still maintain to this day that Japan did this to drag us in to the war and eventually paid the price when two bombs were dropped that ended the war.

There are consequences for actions, no doubt the USA has poked it's nose in to the affairs of those in the mid east, we were instrumental in Israel becoming a nation in 1949, this provoked (to put it mildly) most Islamic if not all Islamic nations, we have paid for our involvement in this region in many ways, the cost in lives and money are obvious.

Perhaps the terrorists groups from their perspective can justify killing civilians, if that is the case they might do well to take in to account who they are attacking, and how we have dealt with others who have attacked us in the past.

I understand anger, resentment and yes, hate. I deal with these feelings quite a bit, some folks from the past may well deserve some retribution from me, then I tell myself, "choose your battles carefully".

We as a nation would do well if we did this, so would those who feel that they owe us some revenge.

 

[nafhoosier]

The only reason they would decapitate us would be because we are interfering in their affairs, isn't it?

They can suck it.

Many ISIL fighters are not from the countries they are fighting in. They themselves are invaders and are savagely murdering the people they deem infidels that live in the lands they want to make an Islamic state.

So for them to call us "meddlers" is absurd, given that they themselves are doing just that.

I hope every ISIS fighter dies a horrible brutal death at the hands of the Kurds and the US.

 

[peeonme]

They can suck it.

Many ISIL fighters are not from the countries they are fighting in. They themselves are invaders and are savagely murdering the people they deem infidels that live in the lands they want to make an Islamic state.

So for them to call us "meddlers" is absurd, given that they themselves are doing just that.

I hope every ISIS fighter dies a horrible brutal death at the hands of the Kurds and the US.

I duplicate your sentiment.

 

[xbuzzerx]

They themselves are invaders and are savagely murdering the people they deem infidels that live in the lands they want to make an ______ state.

Make that last word a blank and this statement can describe a very large number of countries, including countries in the Middle East. In fact, you could apply the same statement to the Syrian government BEFORE ISIL/ISIS. And of course, the statement applies to another country in the ME you are a big fan of.

But good thing we had you to spot this happening! Now that we're aware of the situation we can all leap to judgment more recklessly, more based on pure emotion and convenience and with less pause for a balanced perspective.

 

[opinterph]

… the region will remain a wasteland with no industry, no great institutions of education, no artistic greatness, and no human rights.

While most of the rest of the world has moved toward pluralistic societies and democracy, much of the Middle East remains captive to autocratic and/or religious rulers. Human rights are secondary, at best. That’s one reason for the ongoing instability of the region.

The only reason they would decapitate us would be because we are interfering in their affairs, isn't it?

The decapitations are theatrical, with videos of the Western captives produced and edited to reach an important audience.

• They function to make the US and UK look impotent, because the Western nations are powerless to stop the killings.

• They function to demonstrate that Western lives are no more important than those of Shiites.

• They function to lure young men who resent the loss of meaningful points of reference in their lives to join a rave party of violent rebellion and thus demonstrate how potential recruits can trade their malaise for omnipotence.

Isis beheading videos: the scariest part is how well their propaganda is working (The Guardian; September 14, 2014)​

 

[opinterph]

I don't understand Turkey's reluctance. ISIS controls most of the Turkey/Syria border, and that can't be reassuring to Turkey. It's a serious worry for them, so why aren't they asking NATO to put some forces on that border?

Turkey has the second largest standing military in NATO.

 

[nafhoosier]

Make that last word a blank and this statement can describe a very large number of countries, including countries in the Middle East. In fact, you could apply the same statement to the Syrian government BEFORE ISIL/ISIS. And of course, the statement applies to another country in the ME you are a big fan of.

But good thing we had you to spot this happening! Now that we're aware of the situation we can all leap to judgment more recklessly, more based on pure emotion and convenience and with less pause for a balanced perspective.

Why don't you give us that balanced perspective then? And what do you even mean by "balanced", in regards to this situation?

I think you'd be a great candidate (at least on this board) to give us ISIS's side of the "story".

Can't wait to hear it!

 

[xbuzzerx]

Why don't you give us that balanced perspective then? And what do you even mean by "balanced", in regards to this situation?

I think you'd be a great candidate (at least on this board) to give us ISIS's side of the "story".

Can't wait to hear it!

I've already made it fairly clear for those who can read. The U.S. has intervened, sold weapons, propped up dictators, prevented rebellions against dictators, switched sides, armed both sides of conflicts, and helped warlords into power, based on whatever was convenient for us at the moment. Virtually all of those things came back to bite us in the ass. Saddam Hussein was "our good guy" at one point when we considered Iran the bigger threat. Osama Bin Laden was "our good guy" when we were more concerned about Soviet influence in Afghanistan. We were even buddies with the Taliban for a good span of time. McCain had his picture taken with his arms around members of ISIS just a couple of years ago and was saying we should be doing more to arm groups like them.

So, by all means. Light your hair on fire and run around talking about how "evil" this latest cabal or faction is and how wildly you support intervention. So we go in, intervene, and perhaps a few more hundreds of thousands of deaths later we have the next generation of people who want to behead Americans on camera for the world to see.

If you don't see this as a pattern that has consistently backfired on us, you aren't paying attention.

 

[palbert]

Well, we are now on the slippery slope. Ground troops - "boots on the ground" - are now on the table.

U.S. General Open to Ground Forces in Fight Against ISIS in Iraq

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s top military adviser said Tuesday that he would recommend deploying United States forces in ground operations against Islamic extremists in Iraq if airstrikes proved insufficient, opening the door to a riskier, more expansive American combat role than the president has publicly outlined.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/17/w...ikes-united-states-coalition.html?ref=us&_r=0

 

[Keeland]

The same assholes who lied to the world the first time are lying to the world a second time.

America is going to war again. People are scared again.

The American news media have a scary monster in the Middle East again, and commentators are practically saluting on air. Again.

Dick Cheney, smirking, is back onstage. Last week, at a speech in Washington, he called for immediate military action, "sustained … across several fronts."

"The president must understand we are at war,” he declared, relishing the new moment. “We must do what it takes, for as long as it takes, to win."

At about the same time, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson was speaking in Manhattan.

“At present,” said Johnson, who is actually in office and whose entire job is protecting America, “we have no credible information that ISIS is planning to attack the homeland of the United States.”

Johnson may as well have been dancing a jig, for all anyone noticed.

Polls suggest an overwhelming majority of Americans now believe that ISIS is a direct threat. . . .

An overwhelming majority of Americans can't name a country beginning with the letter U.

 

[Benvolio]

The same assholes who lied to the world the first time are lying to the world a second time.



An overwhelming majority of Americans can't name a country beginning with the letter U.

I think most can name the United States or United Kingdom.

 

[opinterph]

An overwhelming majority of Americans can't name a country beginning with the letter U.

Most are familiar with Ubeki-beki-beki-stan-stan.

 

[palbert]

One wonders if Obama talks to his military gurus.

Obama reaffirms opposition to US combat in Iraq [The Guardian]

"The American forces do not and will not have a combat mission," Obama told troops at MacDill Air Force Base.

I can figure out how this is going to end. Mission creep, like Vietnam.