1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

What ISIS Really Wants

Discussion in 'Issues Around the World' started by SixofNine, Feb 19, 2015.

  1. SixofNine

    SixofNine Jedi Sage Staff Member

    This awesome article was an eye opener for me. It certainly highlights the absurdity of calling ISIS "not Islamic" and "al-Qaeda's jayvee team."

    Excerpts:

     
  2. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    I really find this dynamic interesting. Where's the payoff for us to pretend ISIS isn't actually what it is? Do we need attacks on US soil in their name to prove to our leadership that this is a direct threat to us and the West? Or would even that be dismissed as "thugs who pervert Islam"?
     
  3. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    The payoff is the ability for the clueless to continue their belief that it's possible for everyone to live in peace and harmony, participating in group hugs and singing kumbaya.

    I've come to the realization that it's impossible for the left to comprehend that there are groups that should be wiped from the face of the earth and they'll come up with any rationalization possible so they don't have to face reality.
     
    Allene likes this.
  4. SixofNine

    SixofNine Jedi Sage Staff Member

    The "good news" is that ISIS isn't interested in attacks on infidels in far off lands, though wannabees in Paris and Copenhagen have certainly rendered that point moot. Al Qaeda is still that sort of threat. ISIS is daring us to come to them to fill the role of "Rome" in their apocalyptic prophecy.
     
  5. SixofNine

    SixofNine Jedi Sage Staff Member

    Our administration's verbal gymnastics sometime enters gold medal territory. Cyd posted this on Facebook: apparently the White House was quick to identify the three shooting victims in Chapel Hill as Muslims (even though the shooting might have been the culmination of a parking dispute), but failed to identify the Coptic Christian faith of the 21 Egyptians beheaded by ISIS.

    Fox’s Ed Henry grills White House: ‘Why didn’t you say Christians were killed?’ - BizPac Review

     
    Sierra Mike likes this.
  6. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Well, if we really came after them, they would probably find they read their prophecy incorrectly. Not that there's much chance of us doing anything, though. And if we did, we would find ourselves in the rather unenviable position of supporting Assad.

    I find this very troubling: Obama: "Notion that the West is at war with Islam is an Ugly Lie" and pretty much the same article over at Yahoo News entitled US seeks to spur global action against jihadists. I'm a bit dense, but I haven't heard of widespread calls for war "against Islam," "against Muslims," or any other such thing in any operational context--even Bush made that abundantly clear. But the president keeps hanging on to this, bending over backwards to prove the US is a bunch of nice guys who really, at the end of the day, don't want to start busting heads.

    I'm not sure these continuous proclamations of weakness are something I admire in a president. But then and again, I like my steak rare, my beer cold, my trucks with the biggest engines I can find, and smell the of 100LL fuel (though I prefer JetA1.).
     
    Copzilla, Allene and SixofNine like this.
  7. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    Unfortunately, I don't see anyone in the wings that would be much better after the elections next year. And by then, it may be too late.
     
  8. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    if Well, I wouldn't want to be the guy who wants to try and encourage a war-weary nation of stepping once again unto the breach, but anyone who wants to be POTUS has to understand this is a problem that needs to be dealt with. Whether the next president chooses to over-nuance every aspect of the dimension like Obama or decides to effectively polarize it like Bush, it's unlikely to eat itself. ISIS exists in a region of the world where ideology, religion, and historical culture run in such close parallels that they're the essential fabric of the societies there. You cannot mess with one without messing with the others, and in the case of ISIS, you're going to be messing with all three right off the bat.

    That's a pretty big bite to take.

    But I'll play the game. I'm of the mind that Arabs and Muslims only respect force, and if you level enough force at them--and I mean Soviet-style force here, not surgical contingency operations that no one knows about--then they'll eventually get the message. In broad bullet points:

    • Kill a hundred thousand of the fuckers. ISIS is not so vast and all encompassing that a hundred thousand funerals can't make things right.
    • Killing a hundred thousand assholes, even if they're with ISIS, is going to make a lot of people crazy unhappy. They'll forever hate the US.
    • Not killing a hundred thousand assholes is going to make a lot of people crazy unhappy. They'll forever hate the US.
    • Stay engaged in the region, but only after making it absolutely plain that a lot of people will pay a very hefty price if you fuck with us. If that had happened after Benghazi, we'd still have a point of presence in Sanaa. Of course, the Weakling in Chief made the moot when, instead of rising to the call of duty, he invented a new battle tactic: blame an obscure YouTube video.
    • A lot of innocents will be killed. Suck it up. Deal with it. Better their innocents than ours. That's their viewpoint, and it serves them well. While it would horrify our oh-so-genteel European allies and our I-Don't-Wanna-Deal-With-This-Shit Asian friends, they aren't playing anyway. It's our game. Let's win it.
    • Deal with Assad. Let him stay, or throw him out--and stay committed to the chosen course. Just remember, the Middle East has a longtime love affair with murderous strongmen. Maybe there's a reason they're so successful in that region of the world.
     
  9. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    I think it's too late for that. Too many idiots here already that would just do all types of terrorism within each Western country. That was one of the arguments of letting anyone in but that's too late. Barn is on fire, don't mind the door.
     
  10. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    You're right. We should just give up and hope no one thinks we're making war against Islam.
     
  11. SixofNine

    SixofNine Jedi Sage Staff Member

    So the article in The Atlantic has drawn the requisite opprobrium. One such response comes from ThinkProgress, a media site affiliated with the Center for American Progress, a think tank started by, drumroll, John Podesta.

    What I get from that article is "but not all Muslims have such a literal interpretation of Muslim scripture, therefore, the Atlantic article is wrong."

    Argue over "inevitable," but isn't that exactly what fucking happened? That ISIS is in fact a product of a literal interpretation of Islam?

    Two female Muslim journalists in the U.S. responded in turn to ThinkProgress. Excerpts:

     
  12. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    This is a perception problem, and even moreso, an inability to prioritize.

    To date, I've heard very little from organizations or institutions in the US government about waging a "war on Islam." As a matter of fact, to date the only organ which can actually enact war against any enemy is the Department of Defense, and I'm unaware of planned combat operations against a specific religion from a doctrinal standpoint.

    It's not particularly important in the short term to determine ISIS's religious affiliations. While there is no doubt in my mind that an especially restrictive interpretation of Islam is the cornerstone of their top-down hierarchy, I am mystified that others who are supposedly more mentally adroit than I am when it comes to such issues can't reach the same conclusion. It's as if admitting that "a fundamental consideration for ISIS is that it is built upon an extremely narrow interpretation of Islamic principles" is somehow the same as saying, "Islam is bad, must kill all Muslims."

    I'm not sure how politicians, of all people, who can split hairs at the microscopic level when it suits them and serves their specific purposes, cannot vault over this one-inch high hurdle.

    Short term goal remains the same, no matter what the enemy formation's religious orientation: they are a threat, they are killing innocents who do not proscribe to their doctrine, they are destablilizing an entire region, they have the potential capability to disrupt national economics and security external to the region. While ISIS is still mostly confined to a specific geography at the moment, the consequences of their actions (and inaction on the part of the West, which is facilitating the success of ISIS more than anything else) are actually quite widespread.

    But I didn't get a political science degree from an Ivy League school, nor did I sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night.
     
    Allene and SixofNine like this.
  13. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    I don't know of anyone with the political cajones to do what needs to be done. We'll continue to get band aid non-solutions that placate the cries for action, but do absolutely nothing to fix the issue.

    I totally agree that a comprehensive campaign needs to be waged that wipes them off the face of the planet. But part of their strength is knowing that there's not a Western government in existence that has the will do what needs to be done.
     
  14. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Never said nor alluded to that. You are being a right wing Joseftu with your replies.
     
  15. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Nice needless attack. And just like Joseftu, you get all pissy and snap into attack mode when you come across people who aren't as far to the left as you are. Grow a pair, get over it.

    And if that's NOT what you meant, then get a grip on written English and reread what you wrote. Your response of I think it's too late for that. Too many idiots here already that would just do all types of terrorism within each Western country. That was one of the arguments of letting anyone in but that's too late. Barn is on fire, don't mind the door, to this native speaker and reader of the local language indicates you were, in fact, alluding to just that--giving up. Perhaps you think there was an easily detectable special meaning somewhere in there that somehow vacates my assessment, but I left my Ethics Post Decoder Ring at the office.

    Unhappy with my response? Let me make it all better for you, in fewer words: Go unfuck yourself.
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2015
  16. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Wow, you get much sand in your vagina?

    My english is fine, thank you very much.

    Let me go point by point for you since you can't decipher a summation:

    • Kill a hundred thousand of the fuckers. ISIS is not so vast and all encompassing that a hundred thousand funerals can't make things right.
    How? We are bombing them already, if you mean "boots on the ground" we are -- the world is -- will be very political place for it. Meaning that unless the entire world, including Middle East, are for this policy, then it will work (Kuwait, 1991), if not, then you will get a lot of hand wringing and create a massive amount of blowback within each supporting country, including the US of A. You even mention this point below:

    • Killing a hundred thousand assholes, even if they're with ISIS, is going to make a lot of people crazy unhappy. They'll forever hate the US.
    • Not killing a hundred thousand assholes is going to make a lot of people crazy unhappy. They'll forever hate the US.
    Yes, of course, the decisive point here is what is the best thing to do. You won't make everyone happy.
    • Stay engaged in the region, but only after making it absolutely plain that a lot of people will pay a very hefty price if you fuck with us. If that had happened after Benghazi, we'd still have a point of presence in Sanaa. Of course, the Weakling in Chief made the moot when, instead of rising to the call of duty, he invented a new battle tactic: blame an obscure YouTube video.
    Then there's people like me who think that "they" should sort their own shit out. Hell, I am not even sure we should be involved with ISIS right now. Why are we? Are they a threat to us? No? Then let Frenchies, Brits, and other Arab countries deal with this cancer that they've created. Don't like extreme form of Islam? How about addressing that in your own countries? How about snipping that crap at the mosques and stop using the, "O they are just being wound up against the West and Christians and Jews". Na huh, it doesn't end there and it's a high time Arabs all over the world understand that.
    • Deal with Assad. Let him stay, or throw him out--and stay committed to the chosen course. Just remember, the Middle East has a longtime love affair with murderous strongmen. Maybe there's a reason they're so successful in that region of the world.
    Again, I say leave him alone. We helped with Qaddafi and Libya is a shit show. We've helped with Mubarak, Egypt is a mess. Let Arabs sort this shit they've created themselves so that no one can use the US of A as a bad guy when shit turns to shit.

    And finally, my point on your : We should just give up and hope no one thinks we're making war against Islam.

    Give up? If you think not getting involved with the shit show as "giving up" then I gave you way too much credit in your know how about world politics.
     
  17. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    I disagree that a hands off approach is best. This is a group with an agenda, and once they consolidate their hold in the region, they'll just spread outward in attempt to bring about their ultimate goal. This isn't a group who just wants to set up their own little regime in the Middle East. This is a group that's looking at a far wider picture that wishes to bring things back to medieval ways as evidenced by their referral to "moderns".

    They, themselves, may not travel as Al Qaeda does. But they'll recruit outside their ranks and peck at the social order of things until things reach a boiling point.

    This isn't something that can be ignored in the hopes that it'll eventually go away. We don't need boots on the ground. It's entirely possible to wage an air campaign that would lay waste to vast areas. If the more moderate ranks in the region refuse to do the right thing, they're part of the problem rather than the solution. It's time to fish or cut bait and sitting on the fence ain't gonna cut it.
     
  18. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Seriously? With that lot? Wouldn't they have to swallow a few of the massive governments and countries before they reach the US of A? Who will allow that in Middle East? Everyone is used to sitting back and let US handle things. This is the whole policing the world that many of us, are against. And it's easy to do this propaganda with a riff raff like this vs. going nose to nose against some one like Putin, who's REALLY looking at a far wider picture and wishes to bring back the Soviet Empire.

    Sooo while you guys are and always have been "US military solves everything" camp, I am going to agree to disagree. There are bigger threats that are being ignored, but Obama and you and Stephen are not talking about Russia, this is much easier to pick on. A bunch of rag tags driving 1990 toyota pickup trucks and going after other Arabs is not US' problem as much as Putin carving out successfully parts of sovereign country. But Putin to Americans is hard, hence why Obama IS ignoring that and going after low hanging fruits like these fruits.

    EDIT: And then we can't even plan for ISIS? Yeah, US of A is in greeeeaaaat shape to tackle anything these days: Exclusive: Pentagon Doubts Its Own ISIS War Plan - The Daily Beast
     
  19. Allene

    Allene Registered User

    The current situation reminds me of the UK before WWII. 'They had a wimp leading the government before Churchill stepped in and showed the Nazis who was boss. The British avoided German occupation by a whisker. ISIS and Putin wouldn't behave this way if we had someone in the White House with some good old-fashioned guts. People like ISIS and Putin only understand force. ISIS may not be coming to our shores in person, but they have other ways to get at us. The only way to deal with these bullies is to stand up to them.
     
  20. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    And we are. To do more is to lose more lives over someone else's problem. Look how Egypt stepped up after 21 Christians were beheaded.
     

Share This Page