Post: #101

(02-04-2015 10:42 AM)Saga Wrote:  I would argue that stability in the region is a vital national interest, the corollary of which being that a renegade insurgency is contrary to the national interest.

And what exactly is our national interest?

I don't see the argument for intervention.
It's not oil.
It's not humanitarian.

We intervened in Afghanistan to stop the Russians, and we got Osama Bin Laden.

Intervened in Iraq to protect the Kurds from Saddam - that was the purpose of the mass weapons of destruction right? - and now we have the Caliphate to deal with.

Is this all to stop the Russians from building a pipeline?

The Russians are still a threat?

Venezuela's a threat?
Cuba?

Maybe if you're Raytheon or McDonnell Douglas.

*shrugs*

WIA

Post: #102

Great post WIA. Whenever I hear anyone talking about "our interests" I check if my wallet is still in my pocket.

Post: #103

Savages. Isis should be dealt swiftly, mercilessly and without a hint of hesitation.

Post: #104

(02-04-2015 01:04 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  America and Europe fight with one hand tied behind their back despite having the power to utterly annihilate this bunch of barbaric third world assholes because we would think it morally wrong to do so due to the amount of innocent people that'd be killed in the process.

That a distinctly western point of view. It is an exceptional view not shared by any other civilization I can think of and I can't help but laugh at people who believe we're evil or that we're the bad guys or as bad as they are. Yeah, we do bad things from time to time. We're not perfect. But it's our goodness that keeps us from being the most evil, bloodthirsty, frightening motherfuckers to ever exist on this planet. We got a glimpse of what can happen when we let the reins slip in the early 20th century and it wasn't pretty.

Amen. well put. And this is what frustrates me to no end with the left. The sheer dishonesty. The moral equivocation. The self-loathing. These voices are louder and more emboldened then ever and emblematic of the feminine values that have taken over Western thought.

Post: #105

I'm almost delighted that it seems this board has woken up to the brutality of these inhuman barbarians. When I advocated total war against these types of 'organizations' or whatever you want to call him on this forum a couple of years ago, I was met with an almost universal condemnation. I was told I was a 'chickenhawk' more times than I could count. Now it seems we have made a complete 180. It reminds me when Churchill said America only does what works, but not before trying everything else first.

The Wastelander - you are fucking on-point with your analysis. There is literally nothing I would or could add. I'm not sure if you have been around for that long, or if you had a different name before, but you are definitely getting a +1 from me. I'll check out your site too.

Post: #106

(02-04-2015 01:32 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  And what exactly is our national interest?

I don't see the argument for intervention.
It's not oil.
It's not humanitarian.

Instability in Iraq threatens the security of Jordan and Turkey, increases extremist power in Syria and Lebanon, and could potentially cause problems in Iran. The chaos has also negatively impacted the Kurdistan Regional Government, which is probably the best hope for secularism in the region south of Turkey.

All those have geopolitical and economic consequences.

Moreover, continued violence there is tied to radicalism within Europe, the results of which can be seen in the Paris massacre last month.

I'm not unsympathetic to isolationist arguments, but there are plenty of factors that involve US interests there.

Post: #107

(02-04-2015 01:44 PM)Farmageddon Wrote:  I'm almost delighted that it seems this board has woken up to the brutality of these inhuman barbarians. When I advocated total war against these types of 'organizations' or whatever you want to call him on this forum a couple of years ago, I was met with an almost universal condemnation. I was told I was a 'chickenhawk' more times than I could count. Now it seems we have made a complete 180. It reminds me when Churchill said America only does what works, but not before trying everything else first.

So how do you tell who is the Caliphate from who is not?

Or do you just lay waste to the entire country?

Should we just level Raqqa and then sweep and kill whoever is left in the rubble?

Then start going through the refugee camps and kill able bodied boys and men on suspicion?

What's the final solution here?

WIA

Post: #108

Well, we know who some of our friends are. We could start by fucking giving the Kurds the weapons they deserve and have fought and died for instead of completely ignoring them, as we have done numerous times in the past. It's funny because ISIS now uses the equipment WE gave Iraq against the Kurds (who are our true allies) against them while they still use PRE-SADDAM era weapons. Shame on us.

And yes, we could start by completely annihilating Raqaa, which is 100% under ISIS control. Preferably with a division made up entirely of women and Jews.

We have to make the consequences of their actions so terrible that people won't even dream of joining ISIS. And if they do dream of it, they will immediately wake up and go to the nearest American embassy to apologize.

Post: #109

(02-04-2015 01:55 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  What's the final solution here?

Treat our enemies like WW2 era Japan.

Operation Meetinghouse-esque tactics would be horrible to contemplate today (over 100,000 dead in a single night). Look at Japan today though. I'd say we pacified our former enemies, no?

I'm more interested in tactics that work rather than endless moral hand wringing and pathetic attempts at equivocation. Either fight to win or don't fight at all.

Post: #110

(02-04-2015 02:22 PM)Professor Fox Wrote:  

(02-04-2015 01:55 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  What's the final solution here?

Treat our enemies like WW2 era Japan.

Operation Meetinghouse-esque tactics would be horrible to contemplate today (over 100,000 dead in a single night). Look at Japan today though. I'd say we pacified our former enemies, no?

I'm more interested in tactics that work rather than endless moral hand wringing and pathetic attempts at equivocation. Either fight to win or don't fight at all.

When there's no prize for winning, opt for the latter.

Post: #111

(02-04-2015 03:04 PM)Grange Wrote:  

(02-04-2015 02:22 PM)Professor Fox Wrote:  Either fight to win or don't fight at all.

When there's no prize for winning, opt for the latter.

If it's better for the West to disengage, I'm all for that. Heavily restrict immigration, repatriate 3rd world ingrates, let them spill blood in their lands.

What I don't understand is choosing the worst possible course of action. Neither leaving us the hell out of there, or eradicating our would-be enemies - but this constant police action/democracy building circle jerk/community outreach/10 day morally sensitive bombing campaigns. What the hell?

Post: #112

Quote:And what exactly is our national interest?

I don't see the argument for intervention.
It's not oil.
It's not humanitarian.

It's naive to think the public knows even a small portion of the narrative. We're not sitting in the secret meetings with military commanders or the intelligence community, and we're not on the ground with first-hand information. Try thinking of the situation (the fight against Islamic terrorism as we know it today, as well as the broader historic struggle of the West vs. Islam) from the perspective of someone behind the scenes with legitimate power, rather than someone in the general public.

What narrative would you give people when the government has been crying wolf for 50 years? We've become so numb to the constant war mongering (granted, much can be justified) that when legitimate threats stand in front of us, we just hit the snooze button and go back to bed. Our politicians have few answers to give us because the truth is staring us directly in the eyes, clear as day, shooting us, beheading us, burning us, and bombing us. And this isn't a natural thing for most Americans, who have grown up being spoonfed half-truths and sugarcoated idealism.

ISIS didn't come to power so late in the game by sheer coincidence or luck. They are painfully strategic and dedicated to playing the long game, which from the early 1990's to 2013 has been to have us swinging at shadows and playing whack-a-mole until they were ready to strike. Now we're in a state of paralysis, constantly debating and flaunting our self-righteous liberal values amongst ourselves, while ISIS is spreading like cancer.

It's exactly what they want, and it's a shame to see so many people buying into it. Especially traditional guys who promote masculinity and enjoy all the benefits, poon and otherwise, of the societies we're trying so hard to improve.

Post: #113

(02-04-2015 03:41 PM)Blick Mang Wrote:  

Quote:And what exactly is our national interest?

I don't see the argument for intervention.
It's not oil.
It's not humanitarian.

It's naive to think the public knows even a small portion of the narrative. We're not sitting in the secret meetings with military commanders or the intelligence community, and we're not on the ground with first-hand information. Try thinking of the situation (the fight against Islamic terrorism as we know it today, as well as the broader historic struggle of the West vs. Islam) from the perspective of someone behind the scenes with legitimate power, rather than someone in the general public.

What narrative would you give people when the government has been crying wolf for 50 years? We've become so numb to the constant war mongering (granted, much can be justified) that when legitimate threats stand in front of us, we just hit the snooze button and go back to bed. Our politicians have few answers to give us because the truth is staring us directly in the eyes, clear as day, shooting us, beheading us, burning us, and bombing us. And this isn't a natural thing for most Americans, who have grown up being spoonfed half-truths and sugarcoated idealism.

ISIS didn't come to power so late in the game by sheer coincidence or luck. They are painfully strategic and dedicated to playing the long game, which from the early 1990's to 2013 has been to have us swinging at shadows and playing whack-a-mole until they were ready to strike. Now we're in a state of paralysis, constantly debating and flaunting our self-righteous liberal values amongst ourselves, while ISIS is spreading like cancer.

It's exactly what they want, and it's a shame to see so many people buying into it. Especially traditional guys who promote masculinity and enjoy all the benefits, poon and otherwise, of the societies we're trying so hard to improve.

And ISIS fighters are all ten feet tall and bulletproof.





The clash of conflicts narrative only helps the powers that be mobilize us to march to their tune. Not surprising that it is also exactly what ISIS uses to mobilize people who otherwise wouldn't give a shit.

Post: #114

In order to understand where we are now, we need to understand how we got here. These fundamentalist groups (there are several of them operating in Sryria and Iraq, but the biggest are ISIS and Jabhat an-Nusra) were encouraged, funded, trained, and coddled by the intelligence services of the following countries:

United States
Israel
Turkey
Saudi Arabia
Gulf states (Qatar, Abu Dhabi)

The reasons for doing this have been as follows. Each of these countries had its own deeply cynical reasons.

1. United States. The US takes its Middle East policy cues from Israel and Saudi Arabia. Israel and the Saudis told Washington that it needed to fund radical Islamists groups because destabilizing Syria and Iraq helps Israel solidify its control of the occupied territories it is stealing in violation of international law.

Israel also wants to see weak, worthless states on its borders, so it won't face any threats. That is why is wants to overthrow Asad in Syria and told Washington to overthrow Saddam in Iraq. Israel wants to have a flunky regime in Damascus that follows its orders. They want to try to choke off Hezballah's support network, which currently relies on Asad and Iran. Israel would also love to have a flunky, compliant regime in Damascus that they can control, just like they have in Jordan. They want to open Syria up as a market for their goods, and turn it into a client state.

2. Israel. See my explanation above. These radical Islamists are being used by Israel (which conducts airstrikes to help them, and also indirectly funnels arms and money to them) as battering rams to overthrow Asad.

3. Saudi Arabia. They are deeply afraid of Iran and a resurgent Shi'ism in the region, and for this reason they channel money and weapons to these Sunni, Wahabist-type extremists. They stab their own people in the back (the Arabs) to run and kiss the asses of the US and Israel.

4. Turkey. Erdogan has Ottoman delusions in the region. When the demonstrations against Asad began a few years ago, he was promised by his masters in Washington and Israel that Asad would be an easy target to topple. This turned out to be far from the truth. But by then, he had opened his borders to allow radicals back and forth, and he had accepted tons of Gulf Arab money to fund these radical groups like ISIS. Everyone knew they were maniacs, but everyone thought they could use them. Erdogan would love to see a replacement for Asad that would be willing to open its economy to Turkish manufactured goods. So, for him, it's about money and power. A vain, arrogant, and stupid man.

5. Gulf States. They follow orders from Washington and Tel Aviv.

So, the bottom line is that all this fake shock, horror, and outrage by the US at the atrocities of ISIS is bullshit. They are the ones who started this. They are still backing and training rebels in Syria.

So, they are all lying. All of these countries are lying hypocrites.

ISIS exists and kills because some powerful states in the region are providing them with cover, money, and opportunity.

Everything I've said here is fully confirmed by the sources. Do your own research and see for yourself.

.

Post: #115

^^^ The idea that the entire GCC is beholden to Washington DC is a hilarious punctuation mark on that entire conspiracy theory.

Post: #116

I take note with almost everything you said, but for the sake of argument, I'll grant everything in your post.

Now, with that aside, if we fucked it up, we need to fix it.

Meanwhile, at QC's house:

   

I was wondering how long it would be until somebody piped in and blamed the Jews.

Post: #117

(02-04-2015 04:40 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  In order to understand where we are now, we need to understand how we got here. These fundamentalist groups (there are several of them operating in Sryria and Iraq, but the biggest are ISIS and Jabhat an-Nusra) were encouraged, funded, trained, and coddled by the intelligence services of the following countries:

United States
Israel
Turkey
Saudi Arabia
Gulf states (Qatar, Abu Dhabi)

The reasons for doing this have been as follows. Each of these countries had its own deeply cynical reasons.

1. United States. The US takes its Middle East policy cues from Israel and Saudi Arabia. Israel and the Saudis told Washington that it needed to fund radical Islamists groups because destabilizing Syria and Iraq helps Israel solidify its control of the occupied territories it is stealing in violation of international law.

Israel also wants to see weak, worthless states on its borders, so it won't face any threats. That is why is wants to overthrow Asad in Syria and told Washington to overthrow Saddam in Iraq. Israel wants to have a flunky regime in Damascus that follows its orders. They want to try to choke off Hezballah's support network, which currently relies on Asad and Iran. Israel would also love to have a flunky, compliant regime in Damascus that they can control, just like they have in Jordan. They want to open Syria up as a market for their goods, and turn it into a client state.

2. Israel. See my explanation above. These radical Islamists are being used by Israel (which conducts airstrikes to help them, and also indirectly funnels arms and money to them) as battering rams to overthrow Asad.

3. Saudi Arabia. They are deeply afraid of Iran and a resurgent Shi'ism in the region, and for this reason they channel money and weapons to these Sunni, Wahabist-type extremists. They stab their own people in the back (the Arabs) to run and kiss the asses of the US and Israel.

4. Turkey. Erdogan has Ottoman delusions in the region. When the demonstrations against Asad began a few years ago, he was promised by his masters in Washington and Israel that Asad would be an easy target to topple. This turned out to be far from the truth. But by then, he had opened his borders to allow radicals back and forth, and he had accepted tons of Gulf Arab money to fund these radical groups like ISIS. Everyone knew they were maniacs, but everyone thought they could use them. Erdogan would love to see a replacement for Asad that would be willing to open its economy to Turkish manufactured goods. So, for him, it's about money and power. A vain, arrogant, and stupid man.

5. Gulf States. They follow orders from Washington and Tel Aviv.

So, the bottom line is that all this fake shock, horror, and outrage by the US at the atrocities of ISIS is bullshit. They are the ones who started this. They are still backing and training rebels in Syria.

So, they are all lying. All of these countries are lying hypocrites.

ISIS exists and kills because some powerful states in the region are providing them with cover, money, and opportunity.

Everything I've said here is fully confirmed by the sources. Do your own research and see for yourself.

.

So the respective governments of all these countries have confirmed everything you wrote in your post? A lot of what you wrote makes sense and a lot of it is true from things I've read. However, I doubt the Gulf States have ever confirmed that they take marching orders from Israel and America. I'd also like to see proof that Israel "uses" ISIS, arms, and funds them. Ditto regarding "Israel and the Saudis told Washington that it needed to fund radical Islamists groups because destabilizing Syria and Iraq helps Israel solidify its control of the occupied territories it is stealing in violation of international law."

I'm sure Israel is glad Hezbollah and ISIS are duking it out, but if you're going to make extraordinary claims they require proof.

Post: #118

(02-04-2015 05:02 PM)MidJack Wrote:  ^^^ The idea that the entire GCC is beholden to Washington DC is a hilarious punctuation mark on that entire conspiracy theory.

The entire GCC is, in fact, beholden to the US. The US has underwritten their security at their request. Do you dispute this?

The US and Britain have bases in the area and patrol the Persian Gulf constantly.

They're terrified of the Iranians. They are Sunni absolute monarchs sitting atop large Shi'ite minorities, whom they have been oppressing for many decades.

So, yes, absolutely, they follow orders from Washington and from Saudi Arabia.

All of the Gulf states are sitting on power kegs of restive Shi'ite populations.

.

Post: #119

(02-04-2015 05:04 PM)Farmageddon Wrote:  I take note with almost everything you said, but for the sake of argument, I'll grant everything in your post.

Now, with that aside, if we fucked it up, we need to fix it.

I was wondering how long it would be until somebody piped in and blamed the Jews.

It isn't a matter of "we fucked up."

The creation and perpetuation of ISIS is not an accident. It was done as part of a specific program to overthrow the government of Syria, and, in a larger sense, reshape the region to benefit the US and its allies.

It has nothing to do with "conspiracy theories." That's just a pejorative term you are using to avoid the facts.

This is about power politics.

And about "blaming the Jews": this has nothing to do with condemning a people's ethnicity or religion. It is about condemning a government's (Israel's) policies toward its neighbors.

It's clear that you believe any criticism of Israeli foreign policy is "anti-Semitic." If so, that's your problem, not mine.

Post: #120

You provide nothing to base your assertions on
. You are saying things that you could not possibly know unless you have access to a highly confidential and top-secret information which I know that you do not. And what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Post: #121

Also, I don't think it's right to be mocking Quintus with pics of Aliens dude or alleging he's a conspiracy theorist. He's a good guy with a great mind. No need to get personal. Either what he wrote is backed up by the facts or it's not. Attack the argument, not the man.

Post: #122

About ISIS being the creation of the US and its allies:


http://forums.canadiancontent.net/intern...eated.html
(This link has a very good interview with Noam Chomsky, where he talks about these issues. It's worth watching for those really interested in the historical background).

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-te...ay-n208006
(Showing ISIS funneled money via Gulf proxies)

http://www.inquisitr.com/1796991/isis-co...rough-u-s/

http://rt.com/op-edge/168064-isis-terror...a-cia-war/

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/01/29/...d-from-us/

http://topinfopost.com/2014/10/06/noam-c...eated-isis

There are also many additional articles appearing on rt.com, as well as the Asia Times (atimes.com).

I have also seen some similar articles in the Arabic press (An Nahar, I think) but I can't remember them.

Anyone who knows how power works and how the game of power is played will recognize what I'm saying here. The US and its allies (Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey) want compliant Arab governments in the region that they can control. Governments that don't follow orders (like Saddam's) are removed.

The ultimate project of the US and Israel is to remove the nationalist government of Syria that exists now, and turn the country into a Somalia-like bantustan that they can control. In this way, they will be able to isolate and knock off Hezbollah, which poses the only actual military deterrent to Israeli aggression in the region.

Then (or concurrent with this) they want to pursue regime change in Iran. Iran is a big danger to the US and Israel because it truly is on its own program. They don't follow orders and don't give a shit what the US and Israel say.

This is the way the game is played, and those who are informed about the history of the region are aware of it.

.

Post: #123

I really just don't see how it is in the US strategic interest to get involved in this.
What am I missing? I'm well read and educated, and as near as I can tell:

1. Iraq is a bullshit fake country made on a map by the British.
2. The Sunnis and Shiites will never live side by side, and whichever group wins the current round of fighting in Iraq/Syria will slaughter the losers.
3. Whichever tribe/country/ethnic group/superstition controls the oil producing areas will sell oil on the world market.

So, given the above, what exactly does the USA gain by expensive, prolonged military intervention in the Middle East?

Why not just pull back, focus on growing the economy, securing the border, and beefing up our Navy with a half dozen more aircraft carriers and maybe even develop a good 6th generation plane to go on them since the F35 is a total turd? The national interest of the USA as I see it is to maintain a strong economy that provides a good quality of life for its citizens while at the same time funding a strong military capable of simultaneously handling a hypothetical war with Russia in Ukraine and China in the Pacific. I just don't see how the USA can maintain superiority through the end of the 21st century if we get distracted fighting very expensive prolonged wars of choice against fanatical guerrilla groups.

Post: #124

^^^^

It's in Israel's strategic interest to see all of its neighbors embroiled in permanent wars. This is an oft-stated objective of Israeli foreign policy.

In this way, they can keep their neighbors permanently weak and divided. They deliberately foment sectarian conflict in all of their neighbors (and beyond) as a way to stay ahead of the game.

ISIS and other similar radicals have been used for this purpose. They are a virus injected into the region to cause harm. Most of these ISIS people are foreigners from Libya, Europe, Algeria, Pakistan, and other places. They are being bankrolled by the US and its allies. The US doesn't like to get directly involved, so it can preserve deniability.

But it uses its client states to do the real heavy lifting, the real dirty work: payrolls, training camps, weapons, etc.

But where they made a mistake was in underestimating just how radical these people are.

If you look at history, the Muslim Brotherhood was used for the same purpose by Jordan, Israel, and the US in the early 1980s. They tried to use this group to overthrow Hafez Asad. He eventually responded with overwhelming force and had them crushed in Hama in 1982.

.

Post: #125

(02-04-2015 05:38 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  About ISIS being the creation of the US and its allies:


http://forums.canadiancontent.net/intern...eated.html (This link has an interview with Noam Chomsky, where he talks about these issues).

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-te...ay-n208006
(Showing ISIS funneled money via Gulf proxies)

http://www.inquisitr.com/1796991/isis-co...rough-u-s/

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/01/29/...d-from-us/

http://topinfopost.com/2014/10/06/noam-c...eated-isis

There are also many additional articles appearing on rt.com, as well as the Asia Times (atimes.com).

I have also seen some similar articles in the Arabic press (An Nahar, I think) but I can't remember them.

Anyone who knows how power works and how the game of power is played will recognize what I'm saying here. The US and its allies (Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey) want compliant Arab governments in the region that they can control. Governments that don't follow orders (like Saddam's) are removed.

The ultimate project of the US and Israel is to remove the nationalist government of Syria that exists now, and turn the country into a Somalia-like bantustan that they can control. In this way, they will be able to isolate and knock off Hezbollah, which poses the only actual military deterrent to Israeli aggression in the region.

Then (or concurrent with this) they want to pursue regime change in Iran. Iran is a big danger to the US and Israel because it truly is on its own program. They don't follow orders and don't give a shit what the US and Israel say.

This is the way the game is played, and those who are informed about the history of the region are aware of it.

.

The stuff about Qatar and jackasses in KSA and other Gulf States funding ISIS is widely known. However, I don't believe that we created ISIS. Furthermore, the things Chomsky says comes from his particular point of view. The man thoroughly discredited himself in my eyes by visiting North Vietnam during the war and denying the Cambodian Holocaust. Be that as it may, I'll watch the video and give my impressions on it after I get back from the gym.

This is a more sensible analysis, I think: http://truth-out.org/news/item/26509-did...reate-isis

We might have had a role in indirectly creating ISIS, but there is no proof that we directly did.

And I'm going to do a search for information about Israel supporting ISIS.