U.S. Air Strikes in Syria

[Yuri Bezmenov]

I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.

But how do you fight an idea?  air strikes can do damage,  ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process.  You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else!  So many people have the same idea

It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit 

You take out the Imams who are spreading this evil crap. The moderate Imams then have to denounce these people as heretics.

[bodie]

Do Imams have deputies, reserve Imams, 2nd in command,

 -  number 2's?

It's whackamole again. 

[Gopher Gary]

You included a YouTube video.

I know. I added the s to https, so it would post as a link.   

[Gopher Gary]

I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.

There's a lot more than the US involved, but everyone else is very skilled at the appearances of sucking their cocks. 

[RageBeoulve]

Its pretty typical to think that. I used to, until I looked at the facts. Lemme help, bro.

Al-Qaeda

http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam

http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#1986:_Stinger_Missile

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm

http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/the-5-trillion-war-on-terror

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fed-americans-wealth-dropped-40-percent/2012/06/11/gJQAlIsCVV_story.html

 

Iraq

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/17/iraq-tony-blair_n_5503110.html

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jan/21/iraq.iraq

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665670/ISIS-seize-key-border-crossings-Syria-Jordan-John-Kerry-lands-Baghdad-showdown-talks-Iraqi-PM.html

http://www.tonyblairoffice.org/news/entry/iraq-syria-and-the-middle-east-an-essay-by-tony-blair

http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/how-the-us-made-isis-a-threat

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/world/middleeast/us-actions-in-iraq-fueled-rise-of-a-rebel.html

http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5827046/who-are-sunnis-who-are-shias

 

Libya

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/isis-libya-nato_b_5764988.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610598/Group-US-switched-sides-War-Terror-facilitating-500-MILLION-weapons-deliveries-Libyan-al-Qaeda-militias-leading-Benghazi-attack.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html

http://video.foxnews.com/v/3760226769001/gen-mcinerney-provides-insight-into-ukraine-crisis

 

Syria

http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2014/09/08/14-million-refugees-make-the-levant-unmanageable

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303410404577464763551149048

http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/officials-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-base-in-jordan

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/06/rice-united-states-is-leading-with-lethal-and-non-lethal-aid-to-syria

http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-500-million-to-aid-syrian-rebels-1403813486

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/08/US-Backed-Moderate-Free-Syrian-Army-Factions-Join-Islamic-State-Terror-Group

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html

http://stopwar.org.uk/news/eight-facts-everyone-should-know-about-the-rise-of-isis-and-the-new-war-in-iraq

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html

http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/asking_the_wrong_questions

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/syria-death-toll_n_5626482.html

 

Misc

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740998/ISIS-release-video-showing-beheading-American-journalist-Steven-Sotloff.html

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/text-obamas-speech-destroying-isis_804732.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html

http://www.vox.com/c...ow/what-is-isis

Aaah, the shotgun of bullshit approach. Bury your opponent in so much irrelevant information that they can't form a counter argument. Gee, I've never seen this done before.                  

Irrelevant how? I see you guys are annoyed by a large amount of info on this subject. Especially crapheap, who envisions muslims as the forces of darkness from lord of the rings.

For Parts, I will narrow it down to only his question.

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2007/09/14/poll-civilian-death-toll-iraq-may-top-1-million

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/sep/16/iraq.iraqtimeline

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/08/100827_iraq_deaths_nh_sl.shtml

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14501232

http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2010/06/13/iraq-death-tolls-yet-again/
 

I can't believe that someone published the first one at all based on how it was done

According to the ORB poll, a survey of 1,461 adults suggested that the total number slain during more than four years of war was more than 1.2 million.

ORB said it drew its conclusion from responses to the question about those living under one roof: "How many members of your household, if any, have died as a result of the conflict in Iraq since 2003?"

Based on Iraq's estimated number of households -- 4,050,597 -- it said the 1.2 million figure was reasonable.

Did you even read the last one it actually refuted the bigger numbers and complained  about how they were exaggerated showing flaws used in the studies used in the other links

2. I think that far too many people have died, which is a terrible indictment not of the decision to invade but of the failure to prepare for what followed. I do not agree with opponents of invasion, but that 100,000-150,000 have died should be enough for them to make their case without having to exaggerate the toll by a factor of as much as 10.

I included it to be fair, but I have also read how the surveys were done, dude. Bodies buried in mass graves, people too scared to take to the streets and go door to door. I'll stick by the prior figure. It seems more reasonable when considering the situation there and how many people were killed, along with how impossible it was to find all the bodies or even ask the families.

[awiddershinlife]

Not as many links, but so much more sense.

[Parts]

Sloppy surveys sloppy stats sloppy research it cheapens the message and puts the seeds of doubt in the minds of people on the fence on issues and more times than not turns them against you.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

Do Imams have deputies, reserve Imams, 2nd in command,

 -  number 2's?

It's whackamole again.

Not if moderate Imams succeed in discrediting the remaining Jihadists.

[odeon]

I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.

But how do you fight an idea?  air strikes can do damage,  ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process.  You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else!  So many people have the same idea

It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit 

This particular idea is punishing civilians for the airstrikes even as I write this. I certainly agree with you that the idea will take a different form and reappear somewhere else if you destroy the capabilities of the current embodyment, but in the short term, something needs to be done.

[odeon]

I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.

But how do you fight an idea?  air strikes can do damage,  ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process.  You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else!  So many people have the same idea

It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit 

You take out the Imams who are spreading this evil crap. The moderate Imams then have to denounce these people as heretics.

Not a viable method. Leaders are replaceable. While these people are nutjobs, the fact that they tend to reappear means that there are bigger issues to address.

[odeon]

I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.

There's a lot more than the US involved, but everyone else is very skilled at the appearances of sucking their cocks. 

The others wouldn't have done much without the US.

[odeon]

Sloppy surveys sloppy stats sloppy research it cheapens the message and puts the seeds of doubt in the minds of people on the fence on issues and more times than not turns them against you.

Agreed.

[Gopher Gary]

I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.

There's a lot more than the US involved, but everyone else is very skilled at the appearances of sucking their cocks. 

The others wouldn't have done much without the US.

That's because they like the taste of Arab cock.  Seriously though, they probably would, because without the US they wouldn't have much other choice.

[bodie]

I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.

But how do you fight an idea?  air strikes can do damage,  ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process.  You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else!  So many people have the same idea

It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit 

This particular idea is punishing civilians for the airstrikes even as I write this. I certainly agree with you that the idea will take a different form and reappear somewhere else if you destroy the capabilities of the current embodyment, but in the short term, something needs to be done.

There was an Army Major on newsnight yesterday giving his take on things.  He said air strikes alone won't work without boots on the ground.  No one wants to send their own troops in.  He said that the allies were going to be training the Iraq army,  the Free Syria Army and locals from Jordan.

I don't want to sound pessimistic but I can see several major flaws in training and arming shepherds who don't even have proper shoes on their feet!   

Prepare for the eternal war me thinks.

[odeon]

I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.

But how do you fight an idea?  air strikes can do damage,  ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process.  You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else!  So many people have the same idea

It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit 

This particular idea is punishing civilians for the airstrikes even as I write this. I certainly agree with you that the idea will take a different form and reappear somewhere else if you destroy the capabilities of the current embodyment, but in the short term, something needs to be done.

There was an Army Major on newsnight yesterday giving his take on things.  He said air strikes alone won't work without boots on the ground.  No one wants to send their own troops in.  He said that the allies were going to be training the Iraq army,  the Free Syria Army and locals from Jordan.

I don't want to sound pessimistic but I can see several major flaws in training and arming shepherds who don't even have proper shoes on their feet!   

Prepare for the eternal war me thinks.

Agreed. It might be better for them to send in troops themselves. Or nuke the Middle East.