ISIS on the offensive in Iraq

Seems the IS isn't having all that much fun this time regardless, go team Kurdistan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagemusha

Isis is advancing at Kobane at Syrian Turkish border and has now one third of the city under its thumb. Once again this shows that air superiority is not everything. Now US is trying its best to get Turkey to send land forces, but i doubt Turks arent thrilled about fighting alongside the Kurdish peshmerga, so it might be that Turkey will not agree to do as US wishes.

---

Coalition air strikes against Isis aid Bashar al-Assad, Syrian rebels claim

“We are losing martyrs and many get injured but no one pays any attention. Now the Syrian army is taking areas bombed by the coalition forces after the Islamic factions withdraw. I have to say that the coalition military campaign is in the interest of the Syrian regime and against the Syrian people.”

Cry me a river.

If ISIS proves to be much more resilient than expected Iam wondering what will be the line in the sand before the US will put boots on the ground again.

Whole hawg or none then?

I think this crisis is just once again showing how unable different countries are from stepping outside their partisan positions. US and Iran wasted the perfect opportunity to cooperate at the start of the conflict at Iraq, while Turkey and Kurdish organisations are unable to cooperate at Northern Syria.

At the same time the Arab countries that are in the coalition fighting against ISIS are at the same time funding similar extremist organisations all over middle east.

Maybe it would be for the best to allow ISIS to conquer the whole Sunni area of middle east, while preventing them conquering the minority areas. Then the people supporting them would be able to live the dream that is Isis and their caliphate. We simply cant think on behalf of the Sunni Arabs. Let them experience their dream and take their own actions based on those experiences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagemusha

Maybe it would be for the best to allow ISIS to conquer the whole Sunni area of middle east, while preventing them conquering the minority areas. Then the people supporting them would be able to live the dream that is Isis and their caliphate. We simply cant think on behalf of the Sunni Arabs. Let them experience their dream and take their own actions based on those experiences.

---

In some of these countries it would probably just mean that the population gets even more oppressed while their leaders are the heads of ISIS anyway and wouldn't really suffer a lot. If ISIS even decide to attack these countries given that they are supposedly led and financed from there.

However, in a few years it will be more like metal on the ground, when the US sends armies of terminators and other drones to fight on the ground. At that point there will be little resistance at home regarding the caskets being sent back, it will be more of a tax issue or a balance sheet discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

it will be more of a tax issue or a balance sheet discussion.

---

In other words, basically like it is now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

In other words, basically like it is now?

---

Some people are actually concerned about dead Americans now, this little concern will fall away with drone armies.

Whole Hawg would be:

1. Break local "axiom of evil"
2. Establish Military Governorship
3. Begin development of "Western" institutions
4. Puppet Government advised by Military Governor
5. Continue institutional development
6. Move toward self governance
7. Transition to self security force control
8. Leave
9. Act as "aloof by reliable" big brother

Whole process would take 25-40 years, with phase 4 beginning no sooner than 5 years in and phase 6 no sooner than 10 years in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Whole Hawg would be:

1. Break local "axiom of evil"
2. Establish Military Governorship
3. Begin development of "Western" institutions
4. Puppet Government advised by Military Governor
5. Continue institutional development
6. Move toward self governance
7. Transition to self security force control
8. Leave
9. Act as "aloof by reliable" big brother

Whole process would take 25-40 years, with phase 4 beginning no sooner than 5 years in and phase 6 no sooner than 10 years in.

---

You'd also need o break the current brand of extremist Islamism, which AFAIK is Saudi-sponsored Salafism. With their up close and personal violence being their particular brand of resistance, you'll need to show that this isn't solely their domain, by showing that you're capable of being just as nasty. Only after you've shown this, do you get the luxury of showing that you can refrain from doing so, but it's your choice rather than a societal restriction. If the west isn't up to that, then their allies need to fill the gap, with the west's explicit support. Otherwise set conditions for talks with ISIS which both sides will be held to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Ockham's razor: Kadagar uses an equals sign in the middle of a sentence where it makes little sense -> Kadagar scores very low on the intelligence standard I just set (but he may be good at skiing).



Ockham's razor: Kadagar finds the results of scientific studies absurd -> Kadagar is not very educated according to western standards of education (but he may be good at skiing).

---

Well, read what I wrote again - and see if you can't make sense of it, if you just stop being linguistically overly anal about it.

Side question: When you go to the beach, do you bring meteorological charts around if someone wants to small talk about the weather?

Silly Germans :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

You'd also need o break the current brand of extremist Islamism, which AFAIK is Saudi-sponsored Salafism. With their up close and personal violence being their particular brand of resistance, you'll need to show that this isn't solely their domain, by showing that you're capable of being just as nasty. Only after you've shown this, do you get the luxury of showing that you can refrain from doing so, but it's your choice rather than a societal restriction. If the west isn't up to that, then their allies need to fill the gap, with the west's explicit support. Otherwise set conditions for talks with ISIS which both sides will be held to.

---

Talk with IS? Is there anything to talk about, I have never seen something as horrible and ruthless as thIS. Talk with them, are you nuts. Kill it. Here and there. Treat it like a cancer, cut it out. Good tissue gets lost when you cut a cancer out, granted.

Over a thousand are watched by Scotland Yard just in London. Those you can't send back easily, but you can prevent making it worse by closing your borders, and adapt the tactics of mossad.

War on terror, take it seriously.

The terrorists have won. :soapbox:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Talk with IS? Is there anything to talk about

---

Ever seen the documentary "Gatekeepers"? You should. It's interviews with the six former heads of Shin Bet, Israels internal security force.

At the end of it, this hardcore pinkocommie was asked how Israel should respond to terrorism. His reply was the following:

Quote:

---

Even if they answer rudely, there's no alternative to talking. It's a trait of a professional intelligence operative to talk to everyone.

---

There's no sense in talking to your friends about peace. You can only talk to your most extreme enemies.

If the former head of Shin Bet believes talking to groups like ISIS is the way forward, on what grounds can I object to it? My massive arm-chair experience from playing total war games?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Well, read what I wrote again - and see if you can't make sense of it, if you just stop being linguistically overly anal about it.

Side question: When you go to the beach, do you bring meteorological charts around if someone wants to small talk about the weather?

Silly Germans :rolleyes:

---

So you still think your wrong use of Ockham's razor is a good excuse not to use your brain and go with the simplest interpretation as long as it suits your prejudices?

As for the "question mark debate", I'm not sure whether you got my point there, I got yours quite a while ago. It doesn't matter how one reads your equals sign, it makes no sense there anyway and has nothing to do with the application of Ockham's razor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

So you still think your wrong use of Ockham's razor is a good excuse not to use your brain and go with the simplest interpretation as long as it suits your prejudices?

As for the "question mark debate", I'm not sure whether you got my point there, I got yours quite a while ago. It doesn't matter how one reads your equals sign, it makes no sense there anyway and has nothing to do with the application of Ockham's razor.

---

I think reading it in the context it was written, it made perfect sense.

Blacks underperform in their own and in shared societys, compared internationally.

You can apply a load of intellectual arguments as to why, with ever deeper and deeper explanations...

Ooooor you can just assume black people are sub par-performers when it comes to modern society building (extremely broadly and generally speaking of course).

See, it was in this context Ockham's razor came in, hope I made myself more clear now :pray:

Funny thing is, we are all comfortable with the fact blacks are much better athletes than all other ethnicities.

Yet of course all are absolutely equal when it comes to intellectual achievement.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

Funny thing is, we are all comfortable with the fact blacks are much better athletes than all other ethnicities.

Yet of course all are absolutely equal when it comes to intellectual achievement.

~:smoking:

---

It's only racism if people care...

Regardless, I honestly think we all know East Asians are smarter than us all other ethnicities anyway.

I have come to terms with East Asians beating me at Go while Black men outrun me. White people still got the hottest babes :creep:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

1 is relative, 2 has been done before, 3 breeds resentment, 4 breeds insurgents, 5 leads to corruption, 6 leads to sectarian authoritarianism, 7 leads to defeatism on part of the locals, 8 leads to collapse, 9 is our bread and butter.

And, of course, anything that takes 25-40 years won't survive the schizophrenic mess that is US politics. I'm not poo-poo'ing, I just want to drive home the fact that there's little more we actually can do, aside from play whack-a-mole. I agree that sometimes the moles need whacking, especially ISIS, but dreaming too much farther than that will just result in another long, pointless war.

---

You're numbered responses were playful but a bit too cynical (sadly, only a bit). Your last paragraph is spot on correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

I think reading it in the context it was written, it made perfect sense.

Blacks underperform in their own and in shared societys, compared internationally.

You can apply a load of intellectual arguments as to why, with ever deeper and deeper explanations...

Ooooor you can just assume black people are sub par-performers when it comes to modern society building (extremely broadly and generally speaking of course).

See, it was in this context Ockham's razor came in, hope I made myself more clear now :pray:

---

The way you use Ockham's razor I could also say that cars move forward by magic because any other explanation is obviously way too complicated in our environment and therefore obviously wrong.
You could of course look deeper and deeper into the car but why bother if Ockham's razor already proves my most simplistic explanation true?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

The way you use Ockham's razor I could also say that cars move forward by magic because any other explanation is obviously way too complicated in our environment and therefore obviously wrong.
You could of course look deeper and deeper into the car but why bother if Ockham's razor already proves my most simplistic explanation true?

---

Oh c'mon Husar, you can make a better argument than that I am sure... That was just sad :shame:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Oh c'mon Husar, you can make a better argument than that I am sure... That was just sad :shame:

---

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053619863

Last paragraph, and your "arguments" that all my arguments are just bad and sad only distract from the lack of arguments on your side, other than "Ockham's razor, I win!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053619863

Last paragraph, and your "arguments" that all my arguments are just bad and sad only distract from the lack of arguments on your side, other than "Ockham's razor, I win!"

---

Oh well, plenty of proof that black societies tend to do rather bad...

Plenty of proof that black people tend to do less well on intelligence tests.

Plenty of evidence that East Asians do well on intelligence tests...


If you are intellectually honest, you will have to admit that a species living in separate conditions over tens of thousands of years, WILL turn out differently.


Your REAL problem, like all multiculturalists, is that you don't want it to be so. But hey, just because someone doesn't want something to be true, doesn't mean it isn't true.

I will fully agree that the implication of grading ethnicities in intellectuality is problematic, and can have grave and often unfair ramifications in society...

But at the end of the day, if we want this planet to work we at first need to come to terms with exactly with what we deal with. Brushing issues under the mat because they are politically uncorteous is... No way forward.

I've seen black people post more coherent things than Kadagar, does that disprove the stuff he's been writing so far, or what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hax

I've seen black people post more coherent things than Kadagar, does that disprove the stuff he's been writing so far, or what?

---

No dear sir, that is just rubbish argumentation from your side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Oh well, plenty of proof that black societies tend to do rather bad...

---

Tend to do rather bad in what? Plenty of evidence that white idiots tend to destroy the ozone layer above them and poison their own food in an attempt to preserve the really stupid monocultures that continue to destroy everyone's habitat...

If that doesn't qualify as doing rather bad...

I assume though, that you think getting a new iPhone every year and throwing the old one into a river is the only definition of doing well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Plenty of proof that black people tend to do less well on intelligence tests.

Plenty of evidence that East Asians do well on intelligence tests...

---

I also scored really high in an online intelligence test, does that make me a genius or an east asian?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

If you are intellectually honest, you will have to admit that a species living in separate conditions over tens of thousands of years, WILL turn out differently.

---

You mean like some have a darker skin than others?
How does the skin relate to the brain exactly? How do you measure the deficiencies or proficiencies in the brain? With intelligence tests designed for white people of white culture who went to white schools and learned white things? If you design different tests for different cultures, are the results comparable? If so, how and why?

I know that you do not want to think about this, but it is the basis of your argument, if the tests that led to the numbers for your funky stormfront intelligence world maps are neither comparable nor reliable, then how can you call them facts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Your REAL problem, like all multiculturalists, is that you don't want it to be so. But hey, just because someone doesn't want something to be true, doesn't mean it isn't true.

---

And this could in no way apply to you in reverse I assume, because your evidence is solid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

I will fully agree that the implication of grading ethnicities in intellectuality is problematic, and can have grave and often unfair ramifications in society...

---

According to some of my grades, I am also an idiot (or barely passable as educated), yet you keep telling me that you believe I can do better. Are you just playing with me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

But at the end of the day, if we want this planet to work we at first need to come to terms with exactly with what we deal with. Brushing issues under the mat because they are politically uncorteous is... No way forward.

---

So you finally admit that we white people and the up-and-coming super-stupid yellow people should stop our factories and cars to make the planet work better? We already know that we are dealing with all kinds of toxic gasses that we pollute the air with simply to get more bling bling and comforty stuff and to prove to ourselves and other that we are superior to the others. Why elese would someone want a billion dollars, an expensive car and a yacht? Hardly to fulfill the evolutionary goal of spreading one's genes, given how rich people get fewer children, which basically means they remove their genes from the gene pool voluntarily, especially on an international scale.

Kadahar is right, multiculturalists refuse to differantiate between what they want things to be and what is simply so. He calls it a lack of intellectual integrity, I go even further, I call multicultaralists deeply religious. Screw facts, es muss sein.

Husar, I admit that other ethnicities than Africans have been detrimental to nature, of course. However, what the hell makes you think Warlord M'beke Mg'Hhgi would have done a better job, were he leading the worlds scientific progress?

I fully agree that western society is a disaster in its current form. African society also is, and even worse.

And when it comes to where the world would go to help the problem... Yeah, let's hope we don't put too much trust on Africa, shall we?

So that argument of yours is = nothing.


You talk a lot... a LOT... about IQ tests being made for white persons... I ask in return, where are the intelligence tests for black persons?

It's like you automatically assume they have some hidden intellectual power we just don't know of. What the heck makes you think so? They seem to fail at pretty much anything, so again... If they have some extra intellectual powers, why do these never (or so rarely) seem to pop up positively in society ?

What would, in your world and perspective, a test for "black" intelligence be anyway? What hidden gems are there in the black gene pool, according to you?

We already know black people generally have a higher kinetic intelligence (how the brain interact with the body), so I'll grant you that. But what other of the 7 commonly held intelligences do you seriously think black people manifest on better levels than the rest?

"Blacks" are better runners, "Sloped Eyed People" are better thinkers... And us "pale-faces" have women with rocking bod's.

Nature already balanced it out for us, no need to get any panties in a twist when differences are argued.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Sloped Eyed people are better thinkers...

---

Jesus Christ man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

Jesus Christ man.

---

I should have inserted a wink or something... Instead of trusting my fellow Orgahs to detect sarcasm. I thought describing myself as a "pale face" would be enough...

But what do you know, people still surprise me.

EDIT: Then again, a whink might have insinuated tilted eyes...

Being politically correct really is a minefield, isn't it? I mean, when someone takes offense from "slope eyed people are more intelligent" then you just KNOW the person isn't Asian.

Get an actual eastern Asian in here to take offense, or untwist your panties :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

Funny thing is, we are all comfortable with the fact blacks are much better athletes than all other ethnicities.

Yet of course all are absolutely equal when it comes to intellectual achievement.

~:smoking:

---

Who said they are much better athletes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

You talk a lot... a LOT... about IQ tests being made for white persons... I ask in return, where are the intelligence tests for black persons?

It's like you automatically assume they have some hidden intellectual power we just don't know of. What the heck makes you think so? They seem to fail at pretty much anything, so again... If they have some extra intellectual powers, why do these never (or so rarely) seem to pop up positively in society ?

---

https://www.iqelite.com/en/account/scientific-tests/

Quote:

---

The IQ (Intelligence Quotient) test was developed by PhDs. It has been examined by the SRH University of Applied Science Heidelberg.

It is a dynamic test, yielding more than 1 million unique combinations of test questions.

The test measures three aspects of intelligence:

Verbal-Logical: Comprehension of similar words or opposites, analogies, relationships and arguments.
Mathematical-Numerical: Comprehension of mathematical equations, patterns and numerical relationships.
Visual-Spatial: Comprehension of graphical patterns, analogies and visualizations.

---

How can someone who has a pretty harsh life compared to our and can only go to school sporadically score well in the mathematics test if she or he has missed half the mathematics classes? And how comparable is the design of verbal logical tests in different languages, which are sometimes based on quite different concepts?

And even then it clearly says "three aspects of intelligence", so are there more, which are not measured by this test or is this the ultimate IQ test? I'm not saying Africans have some hidden intellectual power, I'm saying that IQ tests may be bad at measuring the actual mental potential of a person.

And further I also question the idea that brain development is mostly dependent on genetics. If you can prove that African children who were given to white families in the west right after birth can never reach the same standard of whatever one can measure, then maybe there is a point to different genetic potentials for their brain cells, but otherwise I don't quite see why someone who lived a jungle life should be intellectually incapable just because he cannot solve mathematical equations when he never learned what maths is.

And then what about the maker of an intelligence test? If the guy who invented the test has an IQ of 120, how can he determine what the answers are to score a 160? To know which answers make you score a 160, you have to have a 160 yourself, but if you only have an IQ of 120, how can you determine the answers for a 160? How can he come up with the answer that is more clever than he could ever think of?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

We already know black people generally have a higher kinetic intelligence (how the brain interact with the body), so I'll grant you that. But what other of the 7 commonly held intelligences do you seriously think black people manifest on better levels than the rest?

---

I don't care quite frankly, but why do you think the three out of seven that we ask for in tests here are the only ones that count and should be used to build apartheid walls?

I never had a black guy come to me and say "You shouldn't even try to dance, you are inherently too dumb to do that."
Yet you keep using a similar argument to tell black people they shouldn't come here because they're inherently too dumb to live in our societies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

"Blacks" are better runners, "Sloped Eyed People" are better thinkers... And us "pale-faces" have women with rocking bod's.

---

So when was the last time you asked a sloped eyed person about what you should think of immigration?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Nature already balanced it out for us, no need to get any panties in a twist when differences are argued.

---

And the white man invented ships and airplanes so that people can move quickly to other places on the earth and provides it happily to everyone, and nature will balance that out over time as well, why does the difference in your IQ tests matter again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Who said they are much better athletes?

---

Not scientists.

"Evolution argues that organisms adapt to their environment.

THEREFORE

All our existing prejudices towards other humans must be true."



The wonders of right-wing logic. It's funny how none of these supposed "racial difference studies" never come up with anything new, they have an uncanny ability to only validate pre-existing notions.

Also funny to note how those proposing these ideas never seem to be bothered by how all their studies have been massively debunked by the top educational institutions of the world.

Science only matters to the right-winger when it confirms their existing worldview.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

"Evolution argues that organisms adapt to their environment.

THEREFORE

All our existing prejudices towards other humans must be true."



The wonders of right-wing logic. It's funny how none of these supposed "racial difference studies" never come up with anything new, they have an uncanny ability to only validate pre-existing notions.

Also funny to note how those proposing these ideas never seem to be bothered by how all their studies have been massively debunked by the top educational institutions of the world.

Science only matters to the right-winger when it confirms their existing worldview.

---

Too hilarious if it wouldn't be so scary when it comes to having a total lack of understanding irony.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Too hilarious if it wouldn't be so scary when it comes to having a total lack of understanding irony.

---

A true believer is never easily swayed, you are really living up to the right-wing label, Frags.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

A true believer is never easily swayed, you are really living up to the right-wing label, Frags.

---

Yeah, that must be why I have never voted in my life. I don't like rightwingers really. lefties see everything they don't absolutily agree with without any compromise whatsoever as wrong. Lack of brains. Not my fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Yeah, that must be why I have never voted in my life. I don't like rightwingers really. lefties see everything they don't absolutily agree with without any compromise whatsoever as wrong. Lack of brains. Not my fault.

---

This is just your typical nonsense.

I can use myself as an example. I rarely read "leftist" publications, and prefer to read conservative and/or liberal stuff. Wealth of Nations is a favourite, and I have adopted a lot of its content into my opinions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

This is just your typical nonsense.

I can use myself as an example. I rarely read "leftist" publications, and prefer to read conservative and/or liberal stuff. Wealth of Nations is a favourite, and I have adopted a lot of its content into my opinions.

---

Call it nonsense but I am just not interested in politics. I don't mind agreeing or disagreeing with anything. Fire away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

I am just not interested in politics.

---

Completely irrelevant. You don't have to care about politics at all to be a right-winger.

I am no rightwinger, I just am just very much not left. All I want is sensible policies and reasonable debate, and be able to call a spade a spade without getting my eyes clawed out because of assumptions that don't resonate all that well with reality, but I should take for granted regardless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

https://www.iqelite.com/en/account/scientific-tests/



How can someone who has a pretty harsh life compared to our and can only go to school sporadically score well in the mathematics test if she or he has missed half the mathematics classes? And how comparable is the design of verbal logical tests in different languages, which are sometimes based on quite different concepts?

And even then it clearly says "three aspects of intelligence", so are there more, which are not measured by this test or is this the ultimate IQ test? I'm not saying Africans have some hidden intellectual power, I'm saying that IQ tests may be bad at measuring the actual mental potential of a person.

And further I also question the idea that brain development is mostly dependent on genetics. If you can prove that African children who were given to white families in the west right after birth can never reach the same standard of whatever one can measure, then maybe there is a point to different genetic potentials for their brain cells, but otherwise I don't quite see why someone who lived a jungle life should be intellectually incapable just because he cannot solve mathematical equations when he never learned what maths is.

And then what about the maker of an intelligence test? If the guy who invented the test has an IQ of 120, how can he determine what the answers are to score a 160? To know which answers make you score a 160, you have to have a 160 yourself, but if you only have an IQ of 120, how can you determine the answers for a 160? How can he come up with the answer that is more clever than he could ever think of?



I don't care quite frankly, but why do you think the three out of seven that we ask for in tests here are the only ones that count and should be used to build apartheid walls?

I never had a black guy come to me and say "You shouldn't even try to dance, you are inherently too dumb to do that."
Yet you keep using a similar argument to tell black people they shouldn't come here because they're inherently too dumb to live in our societies.



So when was the last time you asked a sloped eyed person about what you should think of immigration?



And the white man invented ships and airplanes so that people can move quickly to other places on the earth and provides it happily to everyone, and nature will balance that out over time as well, why does the difference in your IQ tests matter again?

---

First of all, black people living in western societies doesn't really fit well under the umbrella of "pretty harsh life compared to our and can only go to school sporadically".

It seems like you don't have an inkling on modern intelligence research. Last I checked we had 7 intelligences, albeit this is a field of study that can more or less change over night.

IQ tests ABSOLUTELY do not say anything more of a person than how well they score on IQ tests. However, IQ in and of itself has been linked to more advanced thinking in the logical sphere.

Basically, just because you have an high IQ you don't have to be intelligent. However, if you want to bet who is more intelligent between a guy with low IQ and a guy with high IQ - you should always put your money on the guy with high IQ.

You won't win every time, just like a turtle sometimes do beat the rabbit. In the real world however, we put our money on the rabbit.


To move on, I never said that intelligence was solely based on genetics. The very idea is preposterous!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Intelligence is based on 2 things, to inform you.

1. Genetics.
2. Environment.

As culture ties in tightly with "environment", it's rather obvious that ethnicities sharing both genetic and cultural traits will eventually show differences compared to other ethnicities. In the time span of tens of thousands of years, at the minimum, this is an absolute fact.


Lucky day for you, there HAS been studies made of adoptive children.

Guess what, these studies adhere to all the other studies showing East Asians being more smart and black people being more not. IIRC Minnesota did the most famous transracial adoption study.

Yes black children put in white homes do better than black children put in black homes. However, they don't do as well as white children, and are a laugh and a half away from the Asians.


Further, as to what IQ tests really are... You seem less coherent and precise than usual here, so I question if you have read up on what exactly intelligence and intelligence tests are?


I never once said anything about building apartheid walls, have I?

I just mean that my country, among others, have to accept that some ethnicities will take more effort off of our shared energies to be able to be fully functional citizens in a modern society.

I'm a teacher, and quite frankly black people generally need more resources to be able to learn well. This should be factored in when deciding where to best use the available resources in IE schools - as well as be factored in when it comes to immigration.


I don't need to ask "slope eyed" people what they think of immigration. It's easy to tell from what the East Asian nations do. See much immigrants in Japan? Huh?

No?

I guess they don't like it then, as immigrants are quite easy to get these days, would you so like.

So yeah, if we ask the intelligent East Asians their example shows that we in the west are being stupid accepting the immigrant waves we do, and changing society to accommodate for them in the way we do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Old racist stereotypes

---

30.000 years of living in different environments certainly is not bound to create a meaningful difference in cognitive ability. If you wish to argue this, you will need to identify the cause of this difference. So far, you have pointed to the need for clothing and food storage during the winter. This is weak, to say the least, and easily countered by pointing to the scorching sun in a desert and droughts(according to your logic, Somalians should be the smartest people on earth).

There is very little evidence that humans have evolved our cognitive abilities since our change in diet(more meat) around 50.000 years ago. No surprises there, given that evolution is an extremely slow process.

As for your drivel on adopted children, it's needless to say it's not supported by science.

Quote:

---

given that evolution is an extremely slow process.

---

Which is why it's best to avoid succumbing to the temptation of saltational thinking.

Quote:

---

There is very little evidence that humans have evolved our cognitive abilities since our change in diet(more meat) around 50.000 years ago. No surprises there,

---

The changes in diet, and gut-size, and muscle-protein receptor genetics, were well-underway by the time the hominid brain became human-like 200-100K years ago.

http://references.260mb.com/Paleonto...Aiello1995.pdf

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...21104821055497

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wolpo...ain%20Size.pdf

Jeez, am I really popping in sporadically just to make really pedantic out-of-context remarks about an issue I've long-since stopped following? :undecided:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

The changes in diet, and gut-size, and muscle-protein receptor genetics, were well-underway by the time the hominid brain became human-like 200-100K years ago.

---

I take it you do not subscribe to the notion of a "great leap forward"? That's fine. The reason why I referred to that theory is that AFAIK this is the dominant of the two theories currently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I take it you do not subscribe to the notion of a "great leap forward"? That's fine. The reason why I referred to that theory is that AFAIK this is the dominant of the two theories currently.

---

A great leap forward? 50k years ago?
Wasn't that when god created Adam and Eve?

And no Kadagar, I have no idea what intelligences are, how many of them are scientifically proven to exist in a given framework of didtinguishable differences or how well that corresponds to reality. Given that HoreTore has posted several links to debunk most of what you say, I assume it would be a waste of time to read your debunked sources now, had you bothered to link to all of them.
And of course some people require more effort, a good first effort would be to stop ignoring or treating them like outcasts in very subtle ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

30.000 years of living in different environments certainly is not bound to create a meaningful difference in cognitive ability. If you wish to argue this, you will need to identify the cause of this difference. So far, you have pointed to the need for clothing and food storage during the winter. This is weak, to say the least, and easily countered by pointing to the scorching sun in a desert and droughts(according to your logic, Somalians should be the smartest people on earth).

There is very little evidence that humans have evolved our cognitive abilities since our change in diet(more meat) around 50.000 years ago. No surprises there, given that evolution is an extremely slow process.

As for your drivel on adopted children, it's needless to say it's not supported by science.

---

In any case, the human brain, unlike the octopus one which is supposed to have evolved to devise ways of finding food and avoid becoming food, is geared towards social interaction, like most other advanced brains in the animal kingdom. So better use of the brain is achieved by exposing the individual to greater social stimulation. Which is culture, not genetics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

A great leap forward? 50k years ago?
Wasn't that when god created Adam and Eve?

---

According to my sources, God created Adam and Steve around that time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

And no Kadagar, I have no idea what intelligences are, how many of them are scientifically proven to exist in a given framework of didtinguishable differences or how well that corresponds to reality.

---

Well, then it might be time you got schooled, no? May I suggest you start up with Gardner's studies on intelligence. That is basically the framework the scientific society use as of today

Quote:

---

Given that HoreTore has posted several links to debunk most of what you say, I assume it would be a waste of time to read your debunked sources now, had you bothered to link to all of them.

---

Given that HT is a flaming communist with often weak concepts of reality, I wouldn't lean on his contributions all too much.

I already hinted you at the Minnesota transracial adoption study... You couldn't just highlight and google it? There are plenty more examples, let me know if you want to be get informed :)

Quote:

---

And of course some people require more effort, a good first effort would be to stop ignoring or treating them like outcasts in very subtle ways.

---

Oh wow...

You basically say that them blacks sure might take more effort to include in modern western society, but if we just look the other way we won't see a problem?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Well, then it might be time you got schooled, no? May I suggest you start up with Gardner's studies on intelligence. That is basically the framework the scientific society use as of today

---

Most certainly not, I don't trust Gardner or anyone who studies intelligence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Given that HT is a flaming communist with often weak concepts of reality, I wouldn't lean on his contributions all too much.

I already hinted you at the Minnesota transracial adoption study... You couldn't just highlight and google it? There are plenty more examples, let me know if you want to be get informed :)

---

Mionnesota is in the south of the USA, you yourself keep saying how horrible these people are, why should I trust them?
Somewhere around 20 years ago (give or take two hundred years) they still held blacks as slaves there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Oh wow...

You basically say that them blacks sure might take more effort to include in modern western society, but if we just look the other way we won't see a problem?

---

No, not what I said. I'm sure you can read better than that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Mionnesota is in the south of the USA, you yourself keep saying how horrible these people are, why should I trust them?
Somewhere around 20 years ago (give or take two hundred years) they still held blacks as slaves there.

---

And they say Americans don't know geography... ~:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Most certainly not, I don't trust Gardner or anyone who studies intelligence.

---

Well then it's hard to help you.

If humanitys best effort just isn't good enough for you, I really don't know what to bring to the table.

Quote:

---

Mionnesota is in the south of the USA

---

Dude. No.

Quote:

---

you yourself keep saying how horrible these people are, why should I trust them?

---

I think USAnian foreign politics is often pure evil. That has little to nothing to do with the proud people of Minnesota. Heck, I openly grant they made good studies on racial inequality.

Quote:

---

Somewhere around 20 years ago (give or take two hundred years) they still held blacks as slaves there.

---

Yeah... Let's just say this wasn't the peak of your argumentation ability. Shall we?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drone

And they say Americans don't know geography... ~:rolleyes:

---

Indeed, that was not excusable, and yes, my knowledge of US geography is not that great concerning some states.
I should have just checked a map, but hey, I'm a monkey, what can I say....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Well then it's hard to help you.

If humanitys best effort just isn't good enough for you, I really don't know what to bring to the table.

I think USAnian foreign politics is often pure evil. That has little to nothing to do with the proud people of Winnesota. Heck, I openly grant they made good studies on racial inequality.

Yeah... Let's just say this wasn't the peak of your argumentation ability. Shall we?

---

After that geography blunder I will just give up, I'm too stupid to argue about this, sorry.
So what do you propose we do about the issue then, now that I concede that the average IQ of Africans has to be almost as low as mine?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Indeed, that was not excusable, and yes, my knowledge of US geography is not that great concerning some states.
I should have just checked a map, but hey, I'm a monkey, what can I say....



After that geography blunder I will just give up, I'm too stupid to argue about this, sorry.
So what do you propose we do about the issue then, now that I concede that the average IQ of Africans has to be almost as low as mine?

---

Awww.... C'mon Husar, I still love you :)

As to what to do about it...

You have to bear in mind that I am Swedish... We are right now more or less exchanging our gene-stock with African ones. I have a problem with people who think you can just toss hundreds of thousands of people from less orderly ethnicities in, without a grasp of the concept that it might lead to problems.

The only thing I ask for is that the Africans we already have should be assimilated into our modern society before we take on more.

So yeah, quite a leap away from jumping up and down doing Sieg Heils.

So there was something about issa... isis... is... issl... whatever, someone seemed worried about that... thing. Seemed important. Enough to make a 10 page thread over almost. What was it?... I seem to have forgotten, having a thread hiijacked by racist bullshit just does that to me sometimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

So there was something about issa... isis... is... issl... whatever, someone seemed worried about that... thing. Seemed important. Enough to make a 10 page thread over almost. What was it?... I seem to have forgotten, having a thread hiijacked by racist bullshit just does that to me sometimes.

---

Welcome to the Org. Backroom :)

See, this is the CHARM here!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar AV

As culture ties in tightly with "environment", it's rather obvious that ethnicities sharing both genetic and cultural traits will eventually show differences compared to other ethnicities. In the time span of tens of thousands of years, at the minimum, this is an absolute fact.

---

Throughout human history people have been migrating to new lands, conducting long distance trade, and going to war with each other, inter-breeding and spreading their genes as they go. As a result there are not sharp genetic distinctions between different races.

Culture and ethnicity are not static. Culture evolves over time and ethnic identity is subject to change, so it is unlikely that culture could have influenced one group to evolve differently from another.

I googled the Minnesota transracial adoption study and according to Wikipedia, the authors of the study didn't consider the results to support a genetic or an environmental explanation for racial IQ differences, because there were too many confounding factors. The study can be interpreted as supporting a genetic explanation but that's not the only possible interpretation, the results weren't so clear cut.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuuvi

Throughout human history people have been migrating to new lands, conducting long distance trade, and going to war with each other, inter-breeding and spreading their genes as they go. As a result there are not sharp genetic distinctions between different races.

---

Are. You. On. Drugs.

You basically claim there are no asian or black people. This is preposterous. Of course people breed across "the lines", but when you start to count people in the number of millions you can easily see ethnical differences.

Quote:

---

Culture and ethnicity are not static. Culture evolves over time and ethnic identity is subject to change, so it is unlikely that culture could have influenced one group to evolve differently from another.

---

Pretty much all of modern science would disagree with that. You basically say that culture does not impact on the evolutionary scale.

This. Is. Stupid.

Go find your school teacher and beat him up for doing a bad job.

Quote:

---

googled the Minnesota transracial adoption study and according to Wikipedia, the authors of the study didn't consider the results to support a genetic or an environmental explanation for racial IQ differences, because there were too many confounding factors.

---

Well then read the actual report. East Asians did well, black people did not.

"Confounding factors" is a PC way of saying "let's not touch this".

As soon as you start to read data, instead of having some filter on how you should read data, the realization will probably be shocking to you.

Quote:

---

The study can be interpreted as supporting a genetic explanation but that's not the only possible interpretation, the results weren't so clear cut.

---

You can interpret that black people do worse on modern intelligence tests in any and every way you want. Bottom line will still be that they do worse on intelligence tests.

You can make any excuses for it that you want, but it really doesn't matter, as they will still show the results they do.

Quote:

---

You basically claim there are no asian or black people. This is preposterous.

---

Holy :daisy: guys, he's FINALLY got the :daisy: point, only to deny it outright without a second thought.

I declare you a member of the Fragony race, Kad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Holy :daisy: guys, he's FINALLY got the :daisy: point, only to deny it outright without a second thought.

I declare you a member of the Fragony race, Kad.

---

That's quite OK.. I will of course in return whiff you off as someone who hasn't understood that ethnical differences exist.

It's hard to take such a position seriously.

'Racial differences exist. How do we know? Because we have crude racial typologies in place. Why is that so? Because racial differences exist.'

So long as you refuse to accept basic facts of reality and continue to indulge in 0-step circular reasoning it will never be possible to have a productive discussion with you on this issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades;2053620705; asterisks added by SF

So there was something about issa... isis... is... issl... whatever, someone seemed worried about that... thing. Seemed important. Enough to make a 10 page thread over almost. What was it?... I seem to have forgotten, having a thread hiijacked by racist bull**** just does that to me sometimes.

---

Grammar concern here 'blades. I believe that "racist bull****" is functionally redundant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

That's quite OK.. I will of course in return whiff you off as someone who hasn't understood that ethnical differences exist.

---

Again...all of the differences that matter most to you are more likely cultural in character than ethnic. Ethnicity has only been conclusively linked to a few physical differences -- percentage of twitch muscle fibers, melanin content, etc -- which are not particularly earth-shaking.

When you have a greater degree of variation (genetically, phenotypically, etc.) WITHIN a given "race" than you do between "races," it becomes harder to consider the category significant in a statistical or scientific fashion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

I already hinted you at the Minnesota transracial adoption study... You couldn't just highlight and google it? There are plenty more examples, let me know if you want to be get informed :)

---

No need to do that, when that study was among the ones I linked to in my above post.

Naturally, it does not support your point.

Also this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Are. You. On. Drugs.

You basically claim there are no asian or black people. This is preposterous. Of course people breed across "the lines", but when you start to count people in the number of millions you can easily see ethnical differences.

---

Some people are born in Asia and there are people with dark skin and black coiled hair. But due to the gene flow between these different populations there is not much of a genetic distinction separating them from each other. Black skin and epicanthic folds are just that, black skin and epicanthic folds. They don't say very much about the rest of the Black or Asian genome.

Quote:

---

Pretty much all of modern science would disagree with that. You basically say that culture does not impact on the evolutionary scale.

---

This is exactly what I was saying. Do you have a modern scientific source that explains how culture impacts human evolution? I have a hard time seeing how something that is in a state of flux could influence the course of evolution in a short amount of time. (tens of thousands of years is not a long time time at all on an evolutionary scale). Show me a credible source (and I mean credible, not some pseudo-scientific bullshit from a non-peer reviewed open-access journal) and I will admit I was wrong and cede the point.

Quote:

---

Well then read the actual report. East Asians did well, black people did not.

"Confounding factors" is a PC way of saying "let's not touch this".

As soon as you start to read data, instead of having some filter on how you should read data, the realization will probably be shocking to you.

You can interpret that black people do worse on modern intelligence tests in any and every way you want. Bottom line will still be that they do worse on intelligence tests.

You can make any excuses for it that you want, but it really doesn't matter, as they will still show the results they do.

---

But WHY. Why do Black people do worse on intelligence tests? Is it primarily because of environment or is their a genetic factor as well? I thought that's what the Minnesota study was trying to find out. I did not deny that the Black children in the study scored worse than the White and Asian children. But if several researchers, including the authors of the study, did not find the results of the study to support the existence of a genetic cause for lower Black IQ's, than the Minnesota study does not support your claim for innate racial differences in intelligence as much as you think. I'm sorry but I trust scientists' ability to interpret data more than I do yours.

If "black" is a credible racial classification by Kad's interpretation, then he will have to explain why "red-headed" or "lactose-intolerant" or "Rh-positive" should not be admitted as well.

See, this is the stuff that happens when you start with "fuck n*****s" and try to move from there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

I declare you a member of the Fragony race, Kad.

---

If you are trying to be insulting, that is really not going to work, I am only insulted if someone who I respect insults me, and you are not one of them. You are way too normal.

Forget it guys, if my Starcraft analogy did not convince him, I don't know what will.

Hmmmm, I guess I could ask Kad if he thinks Scandinavians are naturally better CounterStrike players....

Heya guys, sorry I've been busy...

I'd like to answer you all, however, have had little time lately. Anyway, my answer will be in the longer region as there are some sources I'd like to bring up and also explain.

Also, this is an ISIS thread... And as ISIS is an ongoing thing, I'm not sure we should derail this further? The main discussion is valid enough.

I think I'll just start a new thread when I have time (this weekend). Hope no one minds ~:)

@HoreTore, just tangentially:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smith, Fred H., and James C. Ahern. The Origins of Modern Humans: Biology Reconsidered. pp. 371-372. John Wiley & Sons, 2013.

A Focus on Processes: Was There a Human Revolution?
There is a long-standing debate over the causes and significance of the so-called “human
revolution” in Europe—the “explosion” of expressions of symbolic behavior and complex
social relationships manifested in the Upper Paleolithic archeological record (Soffer, 1992,
1994; R. White, 1982, 1989). While some workers see the “human revolution” as cultural
change within a species (Clark, 2002; Wolpoff et al., 2004), others believe it represents the
biologically based cognitive superiority of modern humans. The problem is, that as traditionally
described, anatomical modernity predates behavioral modernity. Some advocates
of a biological basis for behavioral modernity (e.g., Klein, 2008) attribute it to a neural
change linked to human language some 50,000 years ago that doesn’t manifest itself anatomically;
others see it as a latent potential of modern humans.16 However, these innovations
of the Upper Paleolithic can alternatively be understood as a consequence of demographic
influence, expanding human populations, without requiring an explanation based on
biological changes in cognitive capacity. Moreover, there is considerable debate over whether
a human revolution actually exists at all.
Various trait lists defining “modernity” have been critically assessed by Henshilwood and
Marean (2003 and in the Current Anthropology commentary following). Recently, the very
idea of any single trait list signifying modernity has been undermined by the 2000 publication
of “The Revolution that Wasn’t: A New Interpretation of the Origin of Modern Human
Behaviour” by S. McBrearty and S. A. Brooks. While hold-outs reflecting Howell’s position
remain (for instance, Mellars from [at least] 1973 to Mellars and French, 2011, and many
others), this shifted much of the discussion to the African continent and emphasized the
gradual and seemingly independent African appearances of many of the modern behaviors
later found together in the European Upper Paleolithic. These African appearances differed
from the European Upper Paleolithic in that they occurred over a much longer period of
time and were ephemeral, sporadically appearing and disappearing at different times and
places within the Middle Stone Age. Whatever modernity entailed in the archaeological
record, it could no longer be considered as a single event.
If the behaviors of the European Upper Paleolithic are not so distinctly different from
behaviors of earlier Africans, the other side of the coin is that modern elements have also
been identified in the archaeological record of European Neandertals (Caron et al., 2011;
d’Errico et al., 2003; Morin and Laroulandie, 2012; Peresani et al., 2011; Roebroeks et al.,
2012; Teyssandier, 2008; Zilhão, 2007, 2011; Zilhão et al., 2006) and other archaic Eurasian
populations (Hovers and Belfer-Cohen, 2006). In the framework promoted by these and
other workers, it is far from clear whether Neandertal archaeology has always been correctly
interpreted.17 Primarily European observations of modern behavioral elements associated with Neandertals continue to appear in the literature; some show continuity with later
Upper Paleolithic industries, others indicate early, unconnected appearances of evidences
for modern behavior, often at the same time similar modern behavioral elements appeared
in Africa (as in Roebroeks and colleagues’ [2012] discovery of an early [200–250 kya] use of
red ochre pigmentation). All of this evidence also helps undercut the contention of a
“human revolution” accounting for the different behaviors of the Neandertal and Upper
Paleolithic peoples in Europe (Zilhão, 2011), a tradition of skepticism embodied in the
writings
of d’Errico and Zilhão separately (d’Errico, 2003; d’Errico et al., 2001, 2003; Zilhão
2006b, 2007, 2011) and together (Zilhão et al., 2006). Combined with the African data, this
indicates that meanings of behavioral modernity are complex and that processes accounting
for its appearance are unlikely to be biological.
It is increasingly clear that this is not the modernity of Howells (1969). The attributes
associated with modern behavior likely do not have a single origin; as cited above, they
appeared ephemerally both in African Middle Stone Age assemblages and in some
Neandertal contexts and likely will be found more broadly around the world. Wobst (1976)
argues that modernity may appear to have dispersed from a single origin, even if it actually
emerged gradually in many regions. Wobst’s view is that the perception of a single origin and
subsequent spread of modernity is a creation of the archaeological record. He demonstrates
that the appearance of punctuation is inevitable in a model predicated on gradualism: if we
assume modernity appeared gradually, we may expect to find what he calls a “cone of
modernity” created by viewing the past from the cone’s base in the present. Because of preservation
bias, more ancient time slices produce smaller and smaller samples of things that
are modern, until there is an earliest. Such a cone would give the illusion that modernity had
a single origin in Africa, where there were more people and therefore more evidence of
modern traits. But the increasing presence of modern artifacts when approaching the present
does not necessarily mean that modernity spread from a single point of origin (its earliest
appearance in the record); on the contrary, this would violate the predicating assumption
of the model that modernity arose gradually.
Wobst (1977) also discusses social reasons why stylistic changes in (or the attachment of
style to) classes of artifacts may appear abruptly once those artifacts become vehicles for
social signaling. Many of the features of behavioral modernity may be linked to information
exchange within and between groups, conveying broad information to recipients about
identity,
ownership, authorship, proscription and prescription, religion, and potentially
other variables. Intended recipients should be socially distant (so that conversation was not
common) but not so remote that they wouldn’t be able to decode the messages. Wobst argues
that style, the attachment of such cultural messages to classes of artifacts, will “appear”
revolutionary
largely because of dangers of miscommunication. Once meaning is attached,
style should quickly pervade that class of material culture, and one should expect relative
uniformity within a social group; as Wobst argues using examples from mid-twentieth-century
Yugoslavia, the dangers of being associated with the wrong social group, or inadvertently
sending the wrong message, force rapid conformity of dress (in this case headdresses)
within groups. Ultimately, as discussed below, demographic factors, especially population
expansion, would increase the number of individuals in and relations between these distant
but not-too-remote social groups, potentially leading to the intentional use of artifacts for
information exchange and the appearance of a cultural revolution.

---

EDIT: The upshot is:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p. 381

We believe that expanding population sizes and increasing numbers, driven by great
improvements in adult survivorship, underlie the archaeological manifestations of behavioral
modernity.

---

Looks like IS found it's Waterloo in Kobani. Go team Kurdistan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Looks like IS found it's Waterloo in Kobani. Go team Kurdistan.

---

Waterloo or Stalingrad ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Decent_Greek

Waterloo or Stalingrad ?

---

No idea really, I don't understand what's going on. That it is s an absolute nightmare I got.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Looks like IS found it's Waterloo in Kobani. Go team Kurdistan.

---

Let's not be too optimist. Kurdish propaganda (just a couple of days ago, it was discovered that the pictures of female fighters in Ayn al-Arab are two years old) is a worthy opponent for the ISIS tweets in that Middle-Eastern Goebbels competition.

Meanwhile, the Syrian and Iraqi Armies lost Saquer Island and Qara Tapa respectively.

Light infantry vs light infantry

So brittle...

I wonder if ISIS planned all along for the assault on Kobane to be a diversion. Being on the Turkish border and bringing Turkey's Kurds onto the scene was always going to concentrate international attention on that area. Has this just been giving them freedom to make more strategically important gains elsewhere?

Maybe a bit like when they stormed into Iraq where everybody was looking at Syria.

I doubt that they planned to use the assault at Kobane as a diversion, from the begining, but the losses of Qara Tapa and Saqer Island indicate that they might have changed their strategy, when the western media started to focus solely on the Syrian Kurds.

The air bombings target almost exclusively the ISIS forces of Kobane, which might allow them to operate elsewhere much more freely.

Of course, Kobane now has got a huge symbolic value, apart from his strategic/tactical importance, which probably explains how the West chooses her bombing priorities.

"Waterloo" Err...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crandar

when the western media started to focus solely on the Syrian Kurds.

---

I think we need to drop this "western media/western opinion"-thing.

While we do get a kick out of believing the world revolves around us, it's time to realize that it doesn't. While ISIS does send the occasional message our way, the primary targets of their communications are the Iraqi's, Syrians and its surroundings. Just like when Saddam was very ambigious about his supposed WMD's, he wasn't trying to tell us that he had them. He was warning the Iranians.


Not saying your post is wrong btw, just pointing out one issue....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

"Waterloo" Err...

---

Wut, that's the name of the place