Printable View
I mean, this intervention can prove decisive in the sense that it can establish areas where ISIS can conquer land and where they can not (although ISIS being allowed to take shia-dominated areas as well as Kurdish areas seemed to be out of the question since the beginning of this, anyway).Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
But the limited scope of the intervention means that it is unlikely to have a major impact on the ability of ISIS to hold most of the areas they have already conquered.
Obama announces campaign to bomb, in Iraq, the guys that we armed in Syria....Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
Did you actually send them any arms in the end? Just be grateful that you pulled back from intervention against Assad in Syria, as that means that you at least have a significant card to play in this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
Only because they use the equipment that you gave to guys in Iraq, I mean if we let anyone use anything other than the weapons designated for them, the world will end in chaos sooner or later!Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
This was often mentioned indirectly somewhere in the middle of the news here. Sentences like "if xyz, then Obama will reconsider sending more weapons to Syrian rebels". I hardly heard about it directly but it was very often mentioned in the context of reporting on the crisis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
How come there is never an effort to bring back the Beirut of the 1960s as a model for change.
You've got your iron-heeled dictator types willing to be the center of the universe, plenty of would be caliphs desirous of ruling by shariyah, a few zionazi seeking to make everything from Damascus to Sainai into a kibbutz writ large, and, I have no doubt, a fair number of folks scamming any and all while playing middlemen to the mayhemists and stuffing their numbered Swiss accounts absolutely full.
So why does nobody fight to become a place for commerce, or tolerance, or even as one American pol put it, "a chicken in every pot?" Why do all the current crop of power seekers want to rule a wasteland?
Have they even thought about what they want in human terms?
During the Cold War, some of our more cold-blooded analysts were aware that the USA, by pre-empting without any warning, could have "won" the war against the Soviets (too many liquid-fueled rockets, too slow a command and control reaction time because of their centralized decision practices, greater stealth ability among our boomer subs, etc.). We'd have lost millions and taken major hits to our infrastructure, but the USSR would have been decapitated, its strategic forces gone and its tactical ability smashed. Eastern Europe would have broken away and much of the USSR would have been facing civil war and breakaways from the 'stans etc.
Somebody decided that 10s of millions of dead along with who knows how many in the USSR wasn't a cost worth paying -- whatever the more bloodless analysts thought about doability.
Why aren't more in the Middle East willing to make an analogous assessment about the human costs of all this? I begin to wonder if Jordan somehow acquired all of the people who believe in sanity.
Oh well, had to vent that.
We were training/advising/arming Syrian rebels. Publicly, we weren't assisting the real extremists- only the moderate extremists, but there's little doubt that weapons we provided and personnel we trained in Syria are fighting for ISIS.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
It's not very realistic to think you're going to arm these rebels and not those rebels, when they're all essentially fighting on the same side.
As though that was unexpected, or even matters. :rolleyes:Quote:
but there's little doubt that weapons we provided and personnel we trained in Syria are fighting for ISIS.
Even the divisions between rebel factions contribute to the intermixture.Quote:
It's not very realistic to think you're going to arm these rebels and not those rebels, when they're all essentially fighting on the same side.
Because it resulted in 30 years of brutal sectarian warfare?Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
Stalin managed to arm just one faction of an alliance just fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
It's not as simple as that. The FSA is part of a coalition that includes islamists and which fights Assad, but it does not include ISIS. From what I know ISIS has done very little combat with Assad's forces and is hostile to other islamist groups. In fact, ISIS is hostile to everybody, and most of its combat in Syria has been about conquering land from other rebel groups.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
Too many in the Middle East are locked in a circle of hate and would rather rule in hell then share in heaven. That's why they can't have nice things.
That attitude is why we're better off keeping the hell away from there and leaving them to their own devices than get involved. Unless there are important strategic or resource interests involved, I'd want us to keep away from anywhere south of Turkey and north of Kenya, and west of India.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
Pick the answer(s) you like:Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
A: Cause religion.
B: Cause Arabs are not built to think like that.
C: Cause the culture there is ****** up.
I've seen claims for all of the points, personally I go for religion and the cultures built around them being just nutty.
As long as it does not involve boots on the ground, I am more than willing to have the US compromise on its interventionist policies by just bombing IS from afar. The only thing to really follow this up with is by changing our policy to promote a multiple state solution. Let the Kurds rule themselves in the north, the shia in the east with baghdad and give the crazies their caliphate in the west, contained on all sides by US supported allies (kurds, turkey, Iraqi government, jordan).
My ideal situation is for the US to use this opportunity to relax tensions with Iran by promoting cooperation with each other against the Sunni extremists that are clearly looking for nothing more than hell on earth.
I am just glad the events of 'Shadow of Ender' series didn't pan out. Effectively, they established a caliphate then the 'Muslim nations' all joined it enmass, creating a political unity of pan-arabian nationalism centred around islam, unheard of since the Ottoman Empire.Quote:
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name
That really would have been a major shock to International Relations and Global Politics... and thats without the part where they invaded India.
Oh dear God how I want to see these animals wiped out. Down to the very last one of them. So many of my people dead. So many displaced. It's like 1914 all over again. Go Obama, bomb these monsters until there are none left. If we ever decide to do another ground offensive, I'll f@ing lie on my application if needed, but I'm going.
NO lack of clarity there.Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
The airstrikes might help but nothing will be gained without boots on the ground. The real question is: Can Iraq provide effective troops on the ground to push back?
Complex mix of national unity and will, complicated by the troops level of professionalism and the competence of command.
Owning the airspace does not (by default) occupy the territory.
That's the way.Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
Demonize your opponents till they no longer have any human value, and then exterminate them.
Silly Jews with their holocausts :creep:
Considering that rvg is Syrian I kinda understand why he doesn't like them very much.
Viewing tip https://news.vice.com/topic/isis
cute
And the oil goes up to 200$ a barrel, western economies enter deeper recession and Russians grow fat on the profits. Not an option.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Hence why I cited strategic and resource interests. We need to do business with Saudi Arabia and other oil countries. However much it stinks, we need them. We don't need to do business with the likes of Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. Suez canal, Red Sea route through to the Gulf area, oil states. That's all we need from that region.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Hey, I like that option....Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
It will mean your government will have even more money than they know what to do with. Which may mean more state-sponsored holiday camps for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Wonderful, sign me up!Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
But nah, my government will just put the money in a fund.... No fun...
Iraq is a major oil country. The top 5 countries with proven oil reserves includes Iraq, Iran and Venezuela.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Problems in one country in the region can spill over, e.g. Syrian rebellion -> ISIS
Assyrian. But yeah, this is personal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
What is your capital?Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
Washington, D.C.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
I once again know nothing, with Assyrian I think of the Mesopotamian periods. Didn't know people still call themselves Assyrian nowadays.Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg