Seven U.S. states shut doors to Syrian refugees after Paris attack.....

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Thanks for the correction Goat. I am actually relieved it isn't true.

*Shrug* I say it doesn't matter much, since ISIS leadership is still very much a function of US decisions, but I think the real problem isn't McCain's role in Syria, but Bremer's decision to fire all the Iraqi officers and send them to the unemployment line, which, at the time, was basically an ISIS recruitment center. ISIS might be based in Syria, but most of its leadership is Iraqi.

 

[BigRedBanners]

Russia is merely doing what we do when our interests are threatened.

Did they intervene when we invaded w/o provocation a country that touches their border? So why should we intervene here?

I've heard all the "what we should've done" and none of them would've made a bit of difference. We're pissing in the wind effing around in that part of the world. Another military invasion would've been a disaster. Arming moderates (which ones are they?) is only adding guns to the stockpile of American and Russian weaponry they have. Attacking Russia is obviously ridiculous.

Leaving 10,000 troops in Bagdad would've maybe slowed things by months, not years. This notion that keeping them there would've stymied the spill over from the Syrian civil war and the rise of post war terrorist groups is easy to scream but, conveniently, impossible to disprove and IMHO folly. So THAT was going to be the thing that finally brought peace to the region? lol

ISIL began on 9/11. Next year it'll be some new hip terrorist group with a different name but the same thing. It's a part of life now. I used to blame religion, but now I just blame people.

But Obama knows fools rush in (you know this now, too, thanks to Curious George and the Cakewalks)....ISIL is 30,000 strong in the occupied territories....there are ways to, ahem, somewhat contain that.

But the ideology is out there and these attacks are coming to the US - and there's nothing we can do to stop it except ramp up security and live with it just like every other country has for centuries.

What are you proposing? Just leave the Middle East alone altogether? Leaving safe havens and breeding groups and training grounds and a 'Caliphate' will increase the amount of risk to the free world without question. We absolutely have to fight terror sponsors wherever they exist. To sit back and just take it will not make it better.

 

[UTFO]

When my family came to US, they were sponsored by citizens and not by the government. It's my opinion that the government doesn't need to be telling people how their money is going to be spent and if people want to be compassionate, then they can put their money where their mouths are.

By the way, you know what happened after they got sponsored? They worked off the debt. That's the American way. Well it used to be anyway, before those who felt entitled grew to a number in which they were able to impose their will upon everyone else.

The American Way is working off debt? Wow how inspiring.

 

[burnthemallralphie]

"What are you proposing? Just leave the Middle East alone altogether? Leaving safe havens and breeding groups and training grounds and a 'Caliphate' will increase the amount of risk to the free world without question. We absolutely have to fight terror sponsors wherever they exist. To sit back and just take it will not make it better."

Great, I look forward to your next post informing the AOTF you've enlisted in the Army to fight ISIS.

 

[BigRedBanners]

The American Way is working off debt? Wow how inspiring.

Didn't have to, chose to.

The current American way to is to demand entitlements.

I am very inspired by the way my family chose to conduct itself and I'm sorry if you're not.

 

[UTFO]

What are you proposing? Just leave the Middle East alone altogether? Leaving safe havens and breeding groups and training grounds and a 'Caliphate' will increase the amount of risk to the free world without question. We absolutely have to fight terror sponsors wherever they exist. To sit back and just take it will not make it better.

I go back and forth on that. Honestly, does the thought of leaving it alone altogether (not realistic, obviously) sound all that bad compared to what we've been doing the past 30 years?

Maybe they wouldn't hate us as much? Maybe they'd hate what's in closest proximity and just F with each other?

But, yes, a coalition with Russia and other big nations will be required to retake the ISIL territories. Boots on the ground and all that. Obama won't do it. Hillary will.

But an occupation is impossible and wouldn't work any way. And you have to leave eventually. So it will be a failure.

And then the whole thing will essentially repeat itself, again.

And the days of training grounds with monkey bars are soon dying out. This can all be done online now.

The one great thing about ISIL is that they tell us where the final war is going to be. They're waiting for it. In 18 months time, they're gonna get their wish I suspect.

 

[UTFO]

Didn't have to, chose to.

The current American way to is to demand entitlements.

I am very inspired by the way my family chose to conduct itself and I'm sorry if you're not.

My parents' version of the American way was joining the Army in the early/mid 60s to pay their way through school.

Is that American enough for you?

 

[BigRedBanners]

I go back and forth on that. Honestly, does the thought of leaving it alone altogether (not realistic, obviously) sound all that bad compared to what we've been doing the past 30 years?

Maybe they wouldn't hate us as much? Maybe they'd hate what's in closest proximity and just F with each other?

But, yes, a coalition with Russia and other big nations will be required to retake the ISIL territories. Boots on the ground and all that. Obama won't do it. Hillary will.

But an occupation is impossible and wouldn't work any way. And you have to leave eventually. So it will be a failure.

And then the whole thing will essentially repeat itself, again.

And the days of training grounds with monkey bars are soon dying out. This can all be done online now.

The one great thing about ISIL is that they tell us where the final war is going to be. They're waiting for it. In 18 months time, they're gonna get their wish I suspect.

True. I do think think, though, that the idea of an IS with enough land and money to start buying nuclear materials and airplanes and war fighting equipment is probably not the answer.

I think that the occupation cycle you reference can be broken, and even if it repeats is probably better than the scenario I mentioned above.

I feel bad for the next generations. It's a whole new beast, used to be you knew who you were fighting.

 

[BigRedBanners]

My parents' version of the American way was joining the Army in the early/mid 60s to pay their way through school.

Is that American enough for you?

Yeah it is. Where did I come at your story? I just checked and it was you coming at mine. Why so defensive?

 

[iubud]

Most of the region is screwed and no amount of bombs will change that. I don't have a solution and I haven't heard a good one yet.

I still won't demonize peope trying to get the hell out (not saying you do).

And yes, a few dickheads will use it to their advantage. That doesn't mean we screw over the rest.

If I lived there with my family, I would get out as fast as possible. You now have the Russians, al-Assad's government, the rebels, and ISIS all fighting. The people lose regardless of who the winner is.

A solution would require the UN or impartial coalition to do what has never worked in the Middle East or not likely to happen:

1. Remove ISIS - This will require the US and allies to align with Russia, Iran, and the sovereign Syrian government.
2. al-Assad stepping down - Not likely while Iran and Russia has committed to his protection.
3. Elections for the people to chose their government and leader - The eventual Sunni victor would have to be encouraged to not take out revenge on the ruling Alawites or other minorities as happened in other removal of minority led dictatorships. There would likely be bloodshed until opposition is eliminated.

I am of the opinion that Middle East countries are happiest under a benevolent dictator. Al-Assad may not be the leader many want to remain in power, but we may have to live with him. Kicking him out may be worse than keeping him.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

For the record ... I tried to kill this thread.

Each and every one of you owe full frontal

And - you are ALL wrong.

 

[iubud]

Not that it matters, but that's not true.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/12/w...shake-falsehoods-about-ties-to-isis.html?_r=0

Was this meant as a response for another post?

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Was this meant as a response for another post?

No.

 

[twenty02]

If I lived there with my family, I would get out as fast as possible. You now have the Russians, al-Assad's government, the rebels, and ISIS all fighting. The people lose regardless of who the winner is.

A solution would require the UN or impartial coalition to do what has never worked in the Middle East or not likely to happen:

1. Remove ISIS - This will require the US and allies to align with Russia, Iran, and the sovereign Syrian government.
2. al-Assad stepping down - Not likely while Iran and Russia has committed to his protection.
3. Elections for the people to chose their government and leader - The eventual Sunni victor would have to be encouraged to not take out revenge on the ruling Alawites or other minorities as happened in other removal of minority led dictatorships. There would likely be bloodshed until opposition is eliminated.

I am of the opinion that Middle East countries are happiest under a benevolent dictator. Al-Assad may not be the leader many want to remain in power, but we may have to live with him. Kicking him out may be worse than keeping him.

Assad will step down....Russia will force him to as some formal cease fire with everyone other than ISIS. They may carve out some Alawite safe haven in the process, but the years of Alawites ruling the entire 'Syria' region are over. If that occurs, then all force can be focusd upon destroying Isis, from whatever remnants of non extremists take over in Damascus and Aleppo

Iran is the big problem here, as they aren't keen on Sunnis taking over Syria, regardless of being the vast majority. But Iran is a big problem in the entire region as they attempt to become the superpower of the mid east.....to the violent objection of Arabs everywhere. This will go on the rest of our lives most likely

 

[outside shooter]

UPDATED:

 

[UTFO]

True. I do think think, though, that the idea of an IS with enough land and money to start buying nuclear materials and airplanes and war fighting equipment is probably not the answer.

I think that the occupation cycle you reference can be broken, and even if it repeats is probably better than the scenario I mentioned above.

I feel bad for the next generations. It's a whole new beast, used to be you knew who you were fighting.

We can't let them take territory and overrun cities. Nothing can be "ISIL (or whatever the next group will call itself) owned.

It's a real pisser. On the one hand, you can't stand idly by. On the other, we create way more terrorists than we destroy.

The ISIL mindset is so extreme that they are even killing Chinese hostages now...seemingly hellbent on pissing off everybody and bringing the fight to them. Because they know, if such a thing were to happen, ISIL goes worldwide in a huge way....well, at least in the places that matter to them.

Anti-Muslim sentiments are at a scary level here which will have long term consequences. The seeds for a sorta terrorist uprising in the US are sowed. Seems naive to think we won't eventually see terrorist attacks here at the same rate as mass shootings.

And the people doing it will be Americans.

 

[UTFO]

Yeah it is. Where did I come at your story? I just checked and it was you coming at mine. Why so defensive?

No I was making a sarcastic comment about how being in debt is the American way.

Thanks to law school I'm living that dream.

BTW, why is it always the other person who's being defensive?

 

[booyah31183]

When my family came to US, they were sponsored by citizens and not by the government. It's my opinion that the government doesn't need to be telling people how their money is going to be spent and if people want to be compassionate, then they can put their money where their mouths are.

By the way, you know what happened after they got sponsored? They worked off the debt. That's the American way. Well it used to be anyway, before those who felt entitled grew to a number in which they were able to impose their will upon everyone else.

And yet we have citizens, nonprofits and NGOs that are willing to sponsor refugees, but our governors are unilaterally deciding to shut down those opportunities (or make them too difficult) even after lengthy vetting. You and your family should feel incredibly lucky that they came to this country before people of your ilk were in charge.

 

[burnthemallralphie]

 

[burnthemallralphie]

 

[outside shooter]

Anne Frank's father tried to get his whole family to the US, but we didn't want them.