Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by DaveM49 9 years, 6 months ago
    This has been the norm in one part of the Middle East or the other throughout history. The only things that have changed is the tools used and the fact that oil was discovered there. Throughout the 20th Century, various nations have tried to "fix" matters. Rudyard Kipling wrote most eloquently about the various adventures which eventually destroyed the British Empire. And of course, there is that wonderful line from "The Princess Bride": "You've committed one of the classic blunders, another of which is: never get involved in a land war in Asia!"

    We should take note of that, and leave the people there to "fix" themselves. Perhaps if we did not pay them so much to finance the systems currently in place, they would learn.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago
      unfortunately the globe is growing ever smaller with the advancements in technology, communication, and transportation. Hiding ones head in the sand still allows the conquest oriented religion of islam the means to foment until it is ready to bring the fight to your doorstep. That is historically proven.

      Isolationism is a thing of the past. To be a secure country WE have to stand to put down budding hitler's around the globe lest we be complicit in their genocide and docile waiting for our turn under the head choppers knife.

      I had and do have the sack to stand. I'd personally prefer to STAND in their countries, destroying their cities and infrastructure, and having their men,women and children suffer the collateral damage of war.

      Please do not forget the enormous lesson learned from stance of Nevil Chamberlain.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 6 months ago
      Three issues - 1) The collectivist greenies will not allow our development of energy sources (any that are practical, that is), 2) There is a lot of history that is meaningful to a large portion of the world population in that area, and 3) Israel - we cannot abandon the only rational representative government in the middle east for if we did, they would be exterminated.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Fountainhead24 9 years, 6 months ago
      You hit the nail on the head. This has been going on for thousands of years and the arrival of Islam in the 7th century only made it worse. It gave them a "heavenly cause" for which to fight and of course all sides think that Allah is with them.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by hattrup 9 years, 6 months ago
      Yep - that is the clear track record - so you can predict what any outside response will be - failure.

      This has to change from within - and in a number of ways. Probably starting with the borders imposed throughout the Middle East in the 1900's by that empire where the sun never set (UK).
      and the border problems are huge throughout the area, so this will take a long, long time -
      The US can do very little to "fix" this - but a lot to irritate the situation.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by barwick11 9 years, 6 months ago
      Yeah, one problem... We have people who ARE friendly to us, who ARE humane and give human rights to individuals. They are the ones being slaughtered. They've stuck their necks out for OUR principles, and they're being murdered for it.

      How dare we abandon them.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by hattrup 9 years, 6 months ago
        That is part of the same 5,000 year old (longer probably) story in the Middle East. Only the specifics change.
        Although it continues to be horribly tragic, outside involvement shows no real improvement - almost always the opposite.
        Best I think we could hope for is providing a way to escape/migrate for those who want to leave the Middle East.
        Dropping indiscriminate bombs, and keeping all the borders closed, making it a real insane fire pit, may be the route the US foreign policy chooses however.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by barwick11 9 years, 6 months ago
          Um... The mid east USED to be a largely Christian (and peaceful) area. Including much of northern africa. Then Islam happened
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by hattrup 9 years, 6 months ago
            Um... this would have been for only 200 years -
            Christianity grew from 100AD to become somewhat dominant around 500AD, then Muslims took over in the 700's.
            There may have been some peace in 500-700AD but I would doubt it - other religions were actively suppressed during the spread of Christianity throughout the Roman / Byzantine Empire during, and well beyond, this period.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 6 months ago
            It's never been "largely Christian" as in the majority of the population. There has always been a sizeable portion of the populace that call themselves Christian, ever since Constantine's conversion around 300 AD. But it has never been the predominant religion in the middle east.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by DaveM49 9 years, 6 months ago
        You do have a point there. To make a rough comparison, we turned a blind eye to much of the persecution of Jews during World War II. Indeed, reports of the concentration camps were suppressed and immigrants/refugees were turned away. That is a dark spot in history we must not allow to repeat itself.

        How to accomplish it, though? Would it be possible to provide a "refuge" for those being murdered and protect it with American forces? Or is there some way to support and protect "friendlies" within the hazardous area?

        We turned our backs on the Kurds during both Gulf Wars after promising them a homeland in exchange for their assistance. To my mind, that was a terrible mistake. The Kurds have a long history of finishing what anyone else might attempt to start.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by NealS 9 years, 6 months ago
          Repeat itself? We turned our backs on the Vietnamese and then even allowed the Commies to kill perhaps millions more to keep the rest in line and teach them a lesson. Now we turned our back on Iraq by completely pulling out and now we just make excuses for our error and try to blame it on them. When we get into a war, we need to learn to do what is necessary to finish it and enforce whatever agreement came to be to end it. We'll never learn if history doesn't reflect the truth. You don't teach a child not to run into the street by letting him do it. How can half of us disagree on this? That's the real problem.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 6 months ago
            Because a good portion of us are irrational idealists. And too many of us are so wrapped up in our own little lives that we care not about events beyond our little bubble that are occurring that we don't believe can affect us, but can and will. But until it actually does, they will remain ignorant and oblivious - and when it does they will scream "why didn't you do something?"
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by eilinel 9 years, 6 months ago
            "Now we turned our back on Iraq by completely pulling out"
            I don't disagree with your sentiment, but I would remind you that, while we WERE there, the Iraqis called us "invaders" and fought just as bitterly against US.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by NealS 9 years, 6 months ago
              "the Iraqis called us "invaders"" was what part of the population? Unfortunately the media only reports what sells. Talk to as many veterans as you can that actually served over there and ask them what they observed. It's usually completely different from what the media reports. It's no different than Vietnam and what it was like when I got home, that was strictly media driven. And the media cost many veterans their lives (suicide) just for doing what their country asked them to do. In fact the media (and others) caused many to get their name on The Wall by reporting the way they reported and strengthening the North's resolve.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by barwick11 9 years, 6 months ago
              That's like saying "the residents of Ferguson rioted and demanded white cops get punished". No, a few agitators in Ferguson, combined with a LOT of agitators from OUTSIDE the area (from hundreds of miles around) came into their town and did that.

              In the same way, a FEW people there called us "invaders", not everyone.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 6 months ago
    After Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qeada, ISIS, they expected.....what? A kinder, gentler Jihad? Human life which is the basis of any rational philosophy means nothing to these radicals. Human life is a commodity to be used, expended, or tortured as needed. That is why they are the lowest form of barbarian. There is no reasoning, compromising, or cease-fire agreements with them that has any meaning. There is only one recourse -- kill them! Sound harsh? Not half as harsh as their treatment of beheading by sawing through the neck with a knife.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ puzzlelady 9 years, 6 months ago
    I abhor atrocities as much as anyone, but let's be a little circumspect. Let us not be goaded into unthinking violence on unconfirmed heresay. We don't know the full context. The little girl could be from anywhere, even a faked event. The "survivor" who hid in a hill and allegedly watched a massacre where he was able to count 67 bodies and made a lucky escape in time to watch the rest of his family rounded up and killed is much too facile a story. This is too flimsy a narrative on which to base a genocide of our own and trigger World War III. Let's be careful not to be sold a bill of goods, no matter how seemingly blood-drenched. I want a lot more objective reporting and full-context truth.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Timelord 9 years, 6 months ago
      It does seem like we have to wait a minimum of 4 days for pretty much any "breaking news" story to get sorted out and we start to get some factual information. But that's regular news with all civilian reporting; when it's the government providing the story we might have to wait decades.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Fountainhead24 9 years, 6 months ago
    I support what Kissinger said... We should bomb the shit out of them for 2 or 3 days and THEN figure out what to do.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by NealS 9 years, 6 months ago
      Kissinger is still around, we should ask him for guidance. Robert McNamera could do the numbers thing on those actions. We should also let the military do what the military is designed for and trained to do, let the Generals run the show. Our foreign policy should be, "Don't make us come over there!!!" Those are just my opinions, I could be wrong.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 6 months ago
        Ask Kissinger for guidance?! I recall, as a child, my father (a professional military man) swearing at just about every decision/deal that Kissinger made.

        Jan
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by NealS 9 years, 6 months ago
          I swore at some of them too, but not all of them. At least he could make a decision and it would be known, he did not make excuses. I guess I really responded to the comment "bomb.... them for a 2 or 3 days and then figure out what to do". As I've said many times before, our foreign policy should be, "Don't make us come over there!!!".
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 6 months ago
        Korea was the last war that the generals even thought that they ran. Since the advent of modern communications, it's been politicians looking over their shoulders at every turn.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Timelord 9 years, 6 months ago
          Politicians *should* be looking over the shoulder of the military! Our founders set civilians over the military for good reasons.

          It's the place of the military to develop strategies and tactics but it's the place of the civilians to determine when it's time for military action. Unfortunately for us the intended relationship between the Executive and Legislative branches has completely broken and the military often controls them both abetted and/or enforced by a schizophrenic dynamic between them and the defense contractors.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by NealS 9 years, 6 months ago
            If you sent me over again I'd do my job, just don't send me over with too many rules on how I am to fight. In the heat of battle there are no rules, period. And don't send me over strictly for politics, only for "military action, then let me act or bring me home. I've already done my tour about 45 years ago, and now the only tour I'll ever do again is if they do it over here. That should be our main objective to keep doing it over there, not here.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago
              I commend you, Neal. The rules of engagement are disgusting. They are designed to protect the enemy and prosecute our soldiers. War is not proper, its not nice, its not clean, and its sure has hell not sanitary. These are things our government has forgotten with its GPS guided laser precision missiles...and something the rest of the world is quite thankful, laughing even, that we've forgotten.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 6 months ago
                Because it has been lead, for the most part, by people with no understanding of the military, and with a current administration that has a total disdain for the military. They seem to believe that military operations are some sort of electronic game whereby they manipulate the players on the field to do the very specific things that they desire and nothing more.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 6 months ago
            You are mistaken. It is the responsibility of the civilian leadership to set the objectives, but the military commanders to execute strategy and tactics to achieve those objectives. The politicians are now dictating tactics, with usually disastrous results.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 9 years, 6 months ago
    Agree O owns thins for getting out way too soon. However, I wonder if we have what it will really take to square this away.
    Is anything in Iraq (or middle east) better before we invaded Iraq?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 9 years, 6 months ago
    Yes, I know Muslims have been killing each other and persecuting Christians and Jews for centuries. But I lay this huge upsurge of ISIS death and destruction at the feet of our Liar-In-Chief.
    His foremost motive? His reelection. He was being advised that ISIS was building up to become a major terror threat but he was telling voters that "Al-Qaeda is on the run."
    Then Benghazi happened. Oh, no! That's not a terrorist attack! That's a protest all because of a Youtube video! Obama's Benghazi smoke and mirrors (rescue who for what?) gambled with America lives. And four American lives paid for that gamble.
    So Obama now lists Benghazi as one of those "phoney scandals" that Eric Holder says those racist Republicans cooked up.
    I consider the build-up and the present devastation wrecked by ISIS to be yet another of those so-called "-phoney scandals." Heaven forbid I be called a racist!

    http://www.newsmax.com/Fred-Fleitz/Iraq-...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Timelord 9 years, 6 months ago
      I haven't read (or searched out) exactly when ISIS was created. I think they exist under that name as a recent development. The last I heard, though, this particular group of thugs achieved their current status and power as a direct result of our choosing sides in the Syrian conflict - the anti-Assad "rebels" contained a huge number of these unfriendly Islamists and we gave them money and weapons. Then they turned around and used both of them against us.

      I welcome correction if my account is based on incorrect or hopelessly outdated information. If my account is correct then Obama is directly responsible, having taken bad advice from his military and CIA advisers.

      One would have hoped that our beloved leaders would have recalled that we directly created and even named Al Qaeda back when they were "freedom fighters" against the Russians. Funny how freedom fighters turn so quickly to terrorists when it's us instead of the Russians on the receiving end.

      Back after the Sept 11 attack when the bad guys were definitively identified (unless and until history gets corrected) as mostly Saudis who were sheltered by and based out of Afghanistan by the defacto government, the Taliban, I was unenthusiastically in favor of war against "somebody over there." The big question was always, "Who?" Wars are fought against governments, not disembodied concepts like "terrorism." You cannot drop a bomb on terrorism any more than you can drop a bomb on "enlightenment."

      I'm honestly not sure what the best response would have been to the Sept 11 attack but I think the response we chose has proven to be a bad one in that it's had no effect, at least not in the grand scheme. Well, actually it probably made things worse.

      But I think almost every libertarian and objectivist would agree that our further actions against Iraq, Lebanon and Syria were drastic mistakes - and the libertarians made loud noises that we had no business over there (and correctly said that there were never any WMD in Iraq).

      Were I the King of America, heaven forfend, I would pack up all of our stuff and our soldiers and our "advisers" and sail for home. I would put a padlock on the checkbook, cutting off every single payment to every foreign government. The very first attack on us during our exit would be met with a response that would surely discourage a second. Then I'd give a public speech to Israel that we formally support whatever measures they deem appropriate to ensure their security. Any and all measures, with no exclusions. But that's all they'd get, best wishes.

      The middle east would quickly devolve back into the tribal hodgepodge from whence it came. Lots of bad guys would be in charge. We probably wouldn't get much oil from them for a while but you'd find that we quickly adjusted. Then those little tribes would realize that they didn't have any money left and that they were out of food. (The map makers could just draw a big, thick line around the entire area and call it "New Somalia.") I'd take up a collection, from voluntary donors, to airdrop 100 tons of Grade A pork products - drop it some place convenient like the middle of those Afghani mountain ranges they seem so fond of.

      At some point they would decide that it's a lot cheaper and better for everyone involved if they sell oil and use the revenue to buy food and cheap Chinese home electronics. I'll even coin a new phrase: "You make more friends with a PS3 than you do a public beheading."

      I'm probably naive to the point of idiocy. If you think that's the case don't spend too much time saying so. But if someone has a plan of action that's moral to an objectivist then I want to read about it. I believe that Objectivism only approves of military action for defense - but my understanding on that might be imperfect.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by rbunce 9 years, 6 months ago
    If you had said the rest of the world is standing by I would be supportive... that somehow it is the US and the US alone that is standing by as has been pointed out in an area of the world that has operated this way for far longer than the US has existed is not correct. The people of the Middle East are ultimately responsible for this and history tells us they will not respond and if we do respond... again... the impact will be short term in the scope of history of the region.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by hattrup 9 years, 6 months ago
      True - this is a long term historical problem. Our best first response should be to help people who want to actually leave the area - which has been
      going on for thousands of years now.
      Unfortunately, that will tend to leave behind the ones that value life the least, and are the slowest to be educated - the typical Middle East SNAFU
      for many millenia.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jerry1228 9 years, 6 months ago
      to say you are right is an understatement you are absolutely right.
      I just spoke with a friend who just returned from Romania working with their military. I pointedly asked what they think of the situation and the answer was to wipe out isis. they have zero respect for 0. that is generally how those in Europe overall think. so what else is new about 0.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo