User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 5:36:14 AM EDT
[#1]
ISIS was originally funded by our government to overthrow Assad. I think our government created a monster that has escaped its cage.
Drive them back into Syria and let Assad kill them all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 5:36:32 AM EDT
[#2]
America wants to go isolationist, and Americans are going to underestimate whoever they need to in order to do so.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 5:40:49 AM EDT
[#3]
Our foreign policy is a funny thing. Trade one monster for one million monsters.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 5:45:15 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ISIS was originally funded by our government to overthrow Assad. I think our government created a monster that has escaped its cage. Drive them back into Syria and let Assad kill them all. You keep making this statement. Do you have any data for it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 5:46:57 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You keep making this statement. Do you have any data for it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
ISIS was originally funded by our government to overthrow Assad. I think our government created a monster that has escaped its cage. Drive them back into Syria and let Assad kill them all. You keep making this statement. Do you have any data for it? +1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 5:47:32 AM EDT
[#6]
Let a group of educated, rational people, with good, accurate intelligence on a situation decide what is the best course of action for America.
And you will find that Zero does the exact opposite. All part of his plan. TXL |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 5:52:05 AM EDT
[#7]
It might benefit the United States more, short term, to allow ISIS/ISIL to remain unchecked. Their logical progression has them dismantling Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, UAE, et al.
Culturally that region is in the Stone Age. With a fundamentalist overtaking we should observe Afghanistan v 2.0 a-la the Taliban. Drag the infrastructure and technology down to Stone Age levels and erase the years of work that Iran has put in towards their nuclear program as well as prevent the other states in the region (that declared nuclear intentions) from achieving their goals. Long term, it's going to probably be the same shit we would have to deal with anyways. The goal of Islam, even moderate Islam, is to dominate all other religions and cultures. Islamists are incapable of creating anything beyond what their religion dictates. That's why they had to have outside assistance in their nuclear programs (North Korea, Russia, etc). If you allow the region to polarize so deeply that they can't have outside sources for information or technology... Hell, you might even suck Russia back into a long, protracted war with their Islamist neighbors that might even bring along China to fight our fight for us, weakening both of our long term, legitimate threats, while taking care of our short term garbage, too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 5:52:46 AM EDT
[#8]
America always makes the mistakes of underestimating it's enemies.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 5:53:37 AM EDT
[#9]
No they are not stupid. They are actually well led, trained and funded. That's what makes them such a threat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 5:54:29 AM EDT
[#10]
We? No we aren't. Some are and some know fully well what they are dealing with.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:06:58 AM EDT
[#11]
Billy-Jeff Clinton ignored AQ and we got 9/11 on Bush's watch.
Zero will ignore ISIS and we'll get something possibly far worse, on whatever Republican unfortunate enough to be elected's watch. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:10:03 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Our foreign policy is a funny thing. Trade one monster for one million monsters. And most here still don't understand why Limited Foreign Involvement makes sense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:19:16 AM EDT
[#13]
ISIS is attacking Iranian strategic assets like natural gas. It's throwing chaos into competitor groups, and forcing radicalized Muslims to pick sides against it, a Long War strategy plagiarized straight out of a Rand white paper.
Apart from Iraq, it's an asset to American foreign policy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:21:08 AM EDT
[#14]
Who is the we?
I believe all the agencies that care about such things have the proper level of concern. The only people in denial are in the White House. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:21:09 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ISIS is attacking Iranian strategic assets like natural gas. It's throwing chaos into competitor groups, and forcing radicalized Muslims to pick sides against it, a Long War strategy plagiarized straight out of a Rand white paper. Apart from Iraq, it's an asset to American foreign policy. That's an interesting way of looking at it. But as the others have said: yes. We are making a huge 90's era Afghanistan scale mistake. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:37:13 AM EDT
[#16]
Obama arms rebels in Syria. Link
Conservatives with that pesky logic again. At a congressional hearing on Tuesday on next year's defense budget, GOP Rep. Rich Nugent of Florida said he worried that arming Syria rebels today could mean his sons in the military might face those weapons in the future, if they fall into the wrong hands.
"We want to make sure that we don't put our sons or daughters in any jeopardy particularly as it relates to arming those that we have no idea who they are," Nugent said. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:38:54 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ISIS is attacking Iranian strategic assets like natural gas. It's throwing chaos into competitor groups, and forcing radicalized Muslims to pick sides against it, a Long War strategy plagiarized straight out of a Rand white paper. Apart from Iraq, it's an asset to American foreign policy. They are a transnational entity that, should they get the power of a state infrastructure, represents a massive potential proliferation risk. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:40:10 AM EDT
[#18]
How about some other countries get off their asses and deal with this one? Why does it always come back to America having to take care of it? Europe is going to feel the effects of ISIS before we do.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:40:45 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But as the others have said: yes. We are making a huge 90's era Afghanistan scale mistake. What was the mistake in the 1990s? We weren't going to invade Afghanistan on humanitarian grounds. The Pakistanis weren't going to let us. The mistake was not killing Bin Laden in Sudan. Or, more broadly, pretending a counterterrorism strategy based in law enforcement would diminish the legitimacy of the terrorists. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:41:56 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Obama arms rebels in Syria. Link Conservatives with that pesky logic again. At a congressional hearing on Tuesday on next year's defense budget, GOP Rep. Rich Nugent of Florida said he worried that arming Syria rebels today could mean his sons in the military might face those weapons in the future, if they fall into the wrong hands.
"We want to make sure that we don't put our sons or daughters in any jeopardy particularly as it relates to arming those that we have no idea who they are," Nugent said. So, you're one of those "The US created Bin Laden" geniuses? Noted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:46:42 AM EDT
[#21]
The WH got the memo and could've niped it early on but did nothing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:51:39 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What was the mistake in the 1990s? We weren't going to invade Afghanistan on humanitarian grounds. The Pakistanis weren't going to let us. The mistake was not killing Bin Laden in Sudan. Or, more broadly, pretending a counterterrorism strategy based in law enforcement would diminish the legitimacy of the terrorists. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
But as the others have said: yes. We are making a huge 90's era Afghanistan scale mistake. What was the mistake in the 1990s? We weren't going to invade Afghanistan on humanitarian grounds. The Pakistanis weren't going to let us. The mistake was not killing Bin Laden in Sudan. Or, more broadly, pretending a counterterrorism strategy based in law enforcement would diminish the legitimacy of the terrorists. The mistake was ignoring the problem, and pretending that it wasn't there, despite intelligence stating otherwise. Which ultimately culminated in 9/11, and the attack on the USS Cole, and the embassy bombings prior to that. The CIA had us local assets in place that could've done a commando raid, and capture/killed OBL. They'd been in place for a long time, and were just waiting for the call. I recommend Ghost Wars by Steve Coll. It's talked about in detail, and how the CIA wanted to do it, but the WH wouldn't let them, for fear of casualties, and other bullshit. Your comment about pretending that counterterrorism was a law enforcement problem rather than a military one is also a valid complaint. The government was collecting evidence, rather than intelligence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:53:52 AM EDT
[#23]
They will burn out when Iran and Saudi Arabia feel the threat. Literally burn out.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:56:20 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
America always makes the mistakes of underestimating trusting it's enemies. FIFY 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 6:58:19 AM EDT
[#25]
It's hard for me to say they are "underestimated". I simply don't know enough about their operations. Regardless of their intelligence or technology though, any large coordinated group acting without regard for the individual can be dangerous. In ways, I might liken IS to the Bald Faced Hornets of humanity.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 7:04:26 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They are a transnational entity that, should they get the power of a state infrastructure, represents a massive potential proliferation risk. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
ISIS is attacking Iranian strategic assets like natural gas. It's throwing chaos into competitor groups, and forcing radicalized Muslims to pick sides against it, a Long War strategy plagiarized straight out of a Rand white paper. Apart from Iraq, it's an asset to American foreign policy. They are a transnational entity that, should they get the power of a state infrastructure, represents a massive potential proliferation risk. This is the concern we are facing. Tens of millions of young people living in impoverished countries where there is little hope in life and they are looking for something to belong to that may bring about a change in their life or allow them to vent their anger. Its like the gang problems we face here but on an international scale. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 7:07:54 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It might benefit the United States more, short term, to allow ISIS/ISIL to remain unchecked. Their logical progression has them dismantling Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, UAE, et al. Culturally that region is in the Stone Age. With a fundamentalist overtaking we should observe Afghanistan v 2.0 a-la the Taliban. Drag the infrastructure and technology down to Stone Age levels and erase the years of work that Iran has put in towards their nuclear program as well as prevent the other states in the region (that declared nuclear intentions) from achieving their goals. Long term, it's going to probably be the same shit we would have to deal with anyways. The goal of Islam, even moderate Islam, is to dominate all other religions and cultures. Islamists are incapable of creating anything beyond what their religion dictates. That's why they had to have outside assistance in their nuclear programs (North Korea, Russia, etc). If you allow the region to polarize so deeply that they can't have outside sources for information or technology... Hell, you might even suck Russia back into a long, protracted war with their Islamist neighbors that might even bring along China to fight our fight for us, weakening both of our long term, legitimate threats, while taking care of our short term garbage, too. This. It's chess, not checkers. Also...best post I've ever read from a 13'er. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 7:09:37 AM EDT
[#28]
I think we should keep with the US Foreign Policy tradition and give weapons to Iran and Hezbollah to fight ISIS.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 7:09:42 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: +1 Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: ISIS was originally funded by our government to overthrow Assad. I think our government created a monster that has escaped its cage. Drive them back into Syria and let Assad kill them all. You keep making this statement. Do you have any data for it? +1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 7:10:26 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It might benefit the United States more, short term, to allow ISIS/ISIL to remain unchecked. Their logical progression has them dismantling Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, UAE, et al. Culturally that region is in the Stone Age. With a fundamentalist overtaking we should observe Afghanistan v 2.0 a-la the Taliban. Drag the infrastructure and technology down to Stone Age levels and erase the years of work that Iran has put in towards their nuclear program as well as prevent the other states in the region (that declared nuclear intentions) from achieving their goals. Long term, it's going to probably be the same shit we would have to deal with anyways. The goal of Islam, even moderate Islam, is to dominate all other religions and cultures. Islamists are incapable of creating anything beyond what their religion dictates. That's why they had to have outside assistance in their nuclear programs (North Korea, Russia, etc). If you allow the region to polarize so deeply that they can't have outside sources for information or technology... Hell, you might even suck Russia back into a long, protracted war with their Islamist neighbors that might even bring along China to fight our fight for us, weakening both of our long term, legitimate threats, while taking care of our short term garbage, too. Nope Unlike the USA i'm 100% sure Russia or China will nuke the shit out of the fuckers if given a reason and half the chance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 7:16:31 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
ISIS was originally funded by our government to overthrow Assad. I think our government created a monster that has escaped its cage. Drive them back into Syria and let Assad kill them all. You keep making this statement. Do you have any data for it? +1 Hillary just mentioned she supported this, to differ her from Obama. Stupid tards, they just don't know who and when to support groups |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 7:27:04 AM EDT
[#32]
I can't seem to find any kind of consensus estimate on how many of these ISIL bastards there are.
Is it 3k? 13k? 30k? more? Less? The map of their "controlled" areas is a series of what I would guess are road networks in much of central Iraq and not much else. Their leadership seems to have a central structure that has yet to be seriously challenged by something innocuous like a Hellfire missile coming in through their bedroom windows. How brittle are they? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 7:29:01 AM EDT
[#33]
A Sunni/Shia war would be great news for Isreal. It would hurt Russia. ISIS grew out of the Sunni rebels in Syria, groups who received a lot of funding and gear from the neocon bloc of the administration. Their leader was deliberately released by the same admin.
The Iranians, in their inimitable middle eastern way, started calling Baghdadi a Mossad trained Jew in propaganda, because he does fit the trend. If you're into conspiracy theories, you could even tie Benghazi into the deal - the same admin refusing to rescue CIA employees involved in weapons trafficking in order to seal leakers is classic movie cutout stuff with precedent in other foreign policy adventures, and the standard crimestop responses from establishment pawns add that authentic feel. ISIS naturally arose from natural trends, to naturally serve the American public. But the fact that they've gone about it in exactly the way a starched shirt analyst would plan them to is great conspiracy fodder that gains better and better realism as you get into the details. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 7:32:57 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can't seem to find any kind of consensus estimate on how many of these ISIL bastards there are. Is it 3k? 13k? 30k? more? Less? The map of their "controlled" areas is a series of what I would guess are road networks in much of central Iraq and not much else. Their leadership seems to have a central structure that has yet to be seriously challenged by something innocuous like a Hellfire missile coming in through their bedroom windows. How brittle are they? I heard an estimate of 18,000 yesterday on either Fox or CNN by 1 of their panel experts. If I remember correctly it was around 10,000 or so 2 months ago so apparently they are growing their ranks quite well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 7:59:19 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Billy-Jeff Clinton ignored AQ and we got 9/11 on Bush's watch. Zero will ignore ISIS and we'll get something possibly far worse, on whatever Republican unfortunate enough to be elected's watch. Very good point, something will be biting us in the ass |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
