|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
06-15-2014, 12:54 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: San Diego via Vermilion Ohio and Points Between
Posts: 11,538
|
|
I think Obama will do something but not boots on the ground.
In 2004 no one knew the future and could have predicted that it would be the downfall of Syria as a state that would pose the biggest internal threat to Iraq ten years later.
Although wealthy benefactors of ISIS most likely exist in Saudi Arabia the consensus is the monarchy there does not really want ISIS on their borders either.
__________________
Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.
|
06-15-2014, 12:59 PM
|
|
Admin
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain in California
Posts: 37,224
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dondilion
This is a weak cover for a lack luster president. The people also elected him to f--k up Al Qaeda or similar outfits any where we see them.
I do not see the point of droning them in Yemen, Afghanistan and Pakistan and folding our hands in Iraq.
|
That's where we differ my friend, I consider it sign of strength and maturity not to impulsively resort to the big hammer of military force at every turn, unlike conservatives of the 'shoot first, aim later' type.
Protecting the country via fucking our adversaries isn't some chess game where we need to be 20 moves ahead, diplomacy should be the first and foremost tool not bombs.
__________________
I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
- Mr. Underhill
|
06-15-2014, 01:34 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Sierras
Posts: 14,206
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by icenine
I think Obama will do something but not boots on the ground.
In 2004 no one knew the future and could have predicted that it would be the downfall of Syria as a state that would pose the biggest internal threat to Iraq ten years later.
Although wealthy benefactors of ISIS most likely exist in Saudi Arabia the consensus is the monarchy there does not really want ISIS on their borders either.
|
I remember reading after the Arab Spring in Tunisia and Egypt, the country most worrisome was Syria. And then it happened and there is no end in sight. I do agree that funding is coming from the Saudi's and that Saudi monarchy is either looking the other way nervously or hoping the west would get involved and avert the spread of ISIS.
In the end, both sides will be shooting at us so why bother helping either side out?
__________________
White Christian Nationalism:
Freedom for us, order for everyone else, and violence for those who transgress.
|
06-15-2014, 03:07 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Upper Canuckistan
Posts: 2,180
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dondilion
This is a weak cover for a lack luster president. The people also elected him to f--k up Al Qaeda or similar outfits any where we see them.
I do not see the point of droning them in Yemen, Afghanistan and Pakistan and folding our hands in Iraq.
|
No, Obama understands reality. The US is broke and can't afford any more wars.
Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
__________________
There never Was a Good War or a Bad Peace. - Benjamin Franklin.
|
06-15-2014, 03:10 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Upper Canuckistan
Posts: 2,180
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by icenine
|
They likely will. The US is the hated enemy who destroyed their country. Saddam is looking like a good guy now. The country ran pretty well comparatively under him.
Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
__________________
There never Was a Good War or a Bad Peace. - Benjamin Franklin.
|
06-15-2014, 04:44 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: San Diego via Vermilion Ohio and Points Between
Posts: 11,538
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeamOn
I remember reading after the Arab Spring in Tunisia and Egypt, the country most worrisome was Syria. And then it happened and there is no end in sight. I do agree that funding is coming from the Saudi's and that Saudi monarchy is either looking the other way nervously or hoping the west would get involved and avert the spread of ISIS.
In the end, both sides will be shooting at us so why bother helping either side out?
|
I would help Malaki out as the lesser of two evils and as an effort to at least preserve the state of Iraq as we know it.........so that at least after our invasion something along the lines of a nation state exists. Moreover I do not think Malaki has exported terrorism.....
you have to remember that the Shiites in Southern Iraq control a big chunk of the world's supply of oil and we need that on our markets.
It is obvious that ISIS does not want to be a mainstream player on the world stage or a force for stability in the area.
__________________
Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.
|
06-15-2014, 04:51 PM
|
|
reflexionar
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Oregon
Posts: 2,273
|
|
Well our election pool here at home has been the lesser of two evils for quite some time. It obviously doesn't always work out for the best anywhere.
__________________
“Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.” Douglas Adams
|
06-15-2014, 07:47 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Sierras
Posts: 14,206
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by icenine
I would help Malaki out as the lesser of two evils and as an effort to at least preserve the state of Iraq as we know it.........so that at least after our invasion something along the lines of a nation state exists. Moreover I do not think Malaki has exported terrorism.....
you have to remember that the Shiites in Southern Iraq control a big chunk of the world's supply of oil and we need that on our markets.
It is obvious that ISIS does not want to be a mainstream player on the world stage or a force for stability in the area.
|
Then let's take over the oil fields. From what I understand, they are operated by western oil companies anyway. This way no need to take sides, pay the Iraqi's for what we take based on a non-negotiable contract. The whole world would watch and understand. As a bonus, this will piss off the Iranian's which is to our benefit.
__________________
White Christian Nationalism:
Freedom for us, order for everyone else, and violence for those who transgress.
|
06-15-2014, 07:52 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: San Diego via Vermilion Ohio and Points Between
Posts: 11,538
|
|
Taking over the oil fields would just benefit the oil companies who want to gouge world wide consumers of gasoline. We would not see cheaper oil.
Oddly an convergence of Iranian and American interests in saving the Iraqi government could bring about warmer relations.
__________________
Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.
|
06-15-2014, 07:58 PM
|
|
reflexionar
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Oregon
Posts: 2,273
|
|
Quite a unique and interesting situation. Hard to predict an actual outcome from a particular move and even harder to predict the outcome of the outcome.
__________________
“Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.” Douglas Adams
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:34 PM.
|