Boots On The Ground, Or Not?

[JoeB131]

If a guy is a militant because of crusaders and Americans, what do you call a guy who is sick of Sunni vs shiia conflict over the past 2000 years. Get a clue Joe...you're a moron. Maybe you need to call the doctor...he is in....lmao!

I think you are a little confused, guy. Shi'ites and Sunnis haven't existed for 2000 years. nor have they really been in 'conflict' for the most part. At least not until we started mucking around in the region and encouraging factionalism.

They do pretty universally hate the Zionists, though.

 

[Kondor3]

...again, you are very brave with the lives of other people's children. Just shut the **** up if you aren't going down to a recruiter tomorrow...

Shut up? And leave the field to you Fifth Columnists? Not a chance, Achmed.

...No, because they are NOT our enemy. As much as we've sinned against the Iranian people, they really don't do anything but chant...

Fifth-Columnist talk. Traitorous talk. That's your right. As it is the right of your fellow citizens to hold you in contempt, now that you've outed yourself.

...We don't lose any. Not our problem. But you guys go ahead and run on another war. That's going to work out really well for you...

Better than offering our backsides to The Enemy as you-and-yours are trying to seduce The People into doing.

...Guy, right now, your frontrunners are Combover and Uncle Tom. Hillary will beat them both easily.

Please continue to dwell in this charming delusion.

Reality will set in, on the morning of November 9, 2016.

 

[Kondor3]

I think you are a little confused, guy. Shi'ites and Sunnis haven't existed for 2000 years...

True. They've only existed for the past 1350-ish years.

...nor have they really been in 'conflict' for the most part...

Nonsense.

They've been slaughtering each other over The Succession and dogmatic points for the better part of 1300 years...

Shia–Sunni relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...At least not until we started mucking around in the region and encouraging factionalism...

So now The West is responsible for the Sunni-Shia split (which occurred 1300 years ago)???!!!???

What a crock of Shia(t) !!!

...They do pretty universally hate the Zionists, though.

What a coincidence... so do you.

 

[JoeB131]

Fifth-Columnist talk. Traitorous talk. That's your right. As it is the right of your fellow citizens to hold you in contempt, now that you've outed yourself.

The truth doesn't have a column, guy. If you were to bring this to a neutral, third party arbiter, the Iranians have valid complaints. We've waged 30 years of economic warfare on them, we destroyed Iranian Democracy by supporting the Shah, we shot down their unarmed airliner, we supported Saddam's 8 year war against them.

And what did they do to us. Well, they took 53 hostages whom they released. and... that's kind of it.

The Iranians are not our enemy. They might be ISRAEL's enemy, but they aren't OUR enemy.

Nonsense.

They've been slaughtering each other over The Succession and dogmatic points for the better part of 1300 years...

And Christians have been killing each other for 2000 years over whether or not Jesus was really made of wafers or not. No seriously, Transubstantiation. It's a real thing that Christians fight over.

So now The West is responsible for the Sunni-Shia split (which occurred 1300 years ago)???!!!???

What a crock of Shia(t) !!!

No, we were responsible for tearing down the only law and order that made everyone kind of behave themselves. We toppled Saddam. We weakened Assad. We toppled Khadafy and the guy in Yemen. Now we wonder why all these places have fallen into chaos.

 

[Kondor3]

Fifth-Columnist talk. Traitorous talk. That's your right. As it is the right of your fellow citizens to hold you in contempt, now that you've outed yourself.

The truth doesn't have a column, guy. If you were to bring this to a neutral, third party arbiter, the Iranians have valid complaints. We've waged 30 years of economic warfare on them, we destroyed Iranian Democracy by supporting the Shah, we shot down their unarmed airliner, we supported Saddam's 8 year war against them.

We waged 30 years of economic warfare on them because they kidnapped 55 of our people and held them for 444 days.

We supported Saddam against them because they kidnapped 55 of our people and held them for 444 days.

We supported the Shah because he was West-friendly and because we recognized the need for Strongmen to rule that region with an iron fist.

The gamble failed.

The Mexican government was in negotiations with Germany to work against the United States in WWI in return for lost territories.

We did not continue to hold that over the heads of the Mexican People and government in perpetuity.

...The Iranians are not our enemy. They might be ISRAEL's enemy, but they aren't OUR enemy...

A fundamentalist theocracy - especially one which routinely portrays us as The Great Satan - is no one's friend - especially not ours.

...No, we were responsible for tearing down the only law and order that made everyone kind of behave themselves...

We were not there, century after century, as Sunni grappled with Shia, through the generations and the rise and fall of fortunes, and periods of action, and dormancy.

...We toppled Saddam. We weakened Assad. We toppled Khadafy and the guy in Yemen. Now we wonder why all these places have fallen into chaos.

A natural reaction to trying the exact same thing (supporting a strong-man in the region) with the Shah of Iran, only to have it backfire, later.

Damned if we do... damned if we don't... perhaps it's time to go back to supporting Strongmen in the region, as you suggest here.

 

[initforme]

Just what Americans want another long drawn out battle. A large percentage would be against it at this time. America is tiring of this stuff. Continue to use air superiority.

 

[Iceweasel]

Americans are tired of it because we've been doing the heavy lifting. If Europe, Russia and sane ME countries get boots on the ground we should IF we don't have an obama or Hillary in charge. They care more about politics than anything else.

 

[The Rabbi]

Just what Americans want another long drawn out battle. A large percentage would be against it at this time. America is tiring of this stuff. Continue to use air superiority.

Obama has been doing exactly that and what has it gotten us? Nothing.
A large scale operation with clear goals and no restrictions will mop up those goat humpers in no time.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Tell France and Russia that it was their plane that was bombed, and their country that was attacked. We will help, but only at a 10 to 1 ratio. For every 10 troops that those countries provide, we will send 1. If they send in 10,000, we send in 1,000.

That way they are showing they have some skin in the game rather than just waiting for us to fix it for them.

As far as the refugees? Let 'em in after they've been vetted, and then tell their families that all the military age men are going back to Syria to take back their country. Keep tabs on the families here, and what the men are doing in Syria, and if any of them show any sign of trying to sabotage anything, they get a one way ticket back to Syria.

 

[Geaux4it]

It will take American fighting men to slaughter ISIS

Nothing short

-Geaux

 

[Unkotare]

Just what Americans want another long drawn out battle. A large percentage would be against it at this time. America is tiring of this stuff. Continue to use air superiority.

And just wait for the next attack to be one in an American city, genius? Then what? Call in James Taylor to sing with Kerry? Listen to obama give an empty speech where he sounds like a game show contestant who isn't 'allowed' to utter certain key words?

 

[initforme]

OK let's be the world's police. Let's send our troops to every corner of the world. Some will now clamor a draft will be needed someday. Bad bad idea america won't support it.

 

[Unkotare]

OK let's be the world's police. ....

We haven't been and we won't be, drama queen.

 

[JoeB131]

We waged 30 years of economic warfare on them because they kidnapped 55 of our people and held them for 444 days.

We supported Saddam against them because they kidnapped 55 of our people and held them for 444 days.

Gee, we could have gotten them out after one day if we sent back the Shah to face the justice he so richly deserved.

There's really no excuse for us to have continued abusing Iran after the hostages were released.

We supported the Shah because he was West-friendly and because we recognized the need for Strongmen to rule that region with an iron fist.

The gamble failed.

No, we backed the Shah because British Petroleum told us to, because the DEMOCRATICALLY elected government of Mossedeqi wanted to take back Iran's own resources. We told a small weaker country that what kind of government THEY wanted they couldn't have.

The Shah then proceeded to eliminated every other source of oppossition EXCEPT for the Clergy (whom he couldn't touch), leaving the Clergy as the only viable counter to his power.

The Mexican government was in negotiations with Germany to work against the United States in WWI in return for lost territories.

We did not continue to hold that over the heads of the Mexican People and government in perpetuity.

Guy, are you really trying to cite the shitty way the USA treats MEXICO as a shining example.

The Mexicans have a saying - "Pity Mexico- so far from God, so close to the United States!"

Our policy towards Mexico has been 165 years of racist bullshit.

A fundamentalist theocracy - especially one which routinely portrays us as The Great Satan - is no one's friend - especially not ours.

That doesn't make them our enemy. It just means they don't like us FOR GOOD REASON.

We were not there, century after century, as Sunni grappled with Shia, through the generations and the rise and fall of fortunes, and periods of action, and dormancy.

True. And for the most part, they lived together. Until Bush fucked it up.

A natural reaction to trying the exact same thing (supporting a strong-man in the region) with the Shah of Iran, only to have it backfire, later.

Damned if we do... damned if we don't... perhaps it's time to go back to supporting Strongmen in the region, as you suggest here.

Uh, no, what we need to do is NOT GET INVOLVED AT ALL.

We don't support any side. We don't get into their fights. We don't try to tell them what kind of government they should have. We stop supporting the ******* ZIONISTS in all the evil shit they pull.

Hey, when was the last time "Islamonazis" attacked Japan? Oh, that's right. they don't. The Japanese mind their own ******* business.

So should we.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Japanese mind their own ******* business.

So should we.

oh right so we can let the Girl Scouts be the world's policeman. Too bad we didn't use them in WW2 to save civilization on earth!!

 

[JoeB131]

The Japanese mind their own ******* business.

So should we.

oh right so we can let the Girl Scouts be the world's policeman. Too bad we didn't use them in WW2 to save civilization on earth!!

World War 2, Japan and Germany were invading other countries.

so, no, not really the same thing, Eddie.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Japanese mind their own ******* business.

So should we.

oh right so we can let the Girl Scouts be the world's policeman. Too bad we didn't use them in WW2 to save civilization on earth!!

World War 2, Japan and Germany were invading other countries.

so, no, not really the same thing, Eddie.

dear, Japan was not invading us and we bombed them anyway and won the war. Do you understand????????????????????????????????

 

[JoeB131]

dear, Japan was not invading us and we bombed them anyway and won the war. Do you understand?

That you suffer from some kind of brain damage? Yes, yes, i totally get that.

That you can't seem to form cogent arguments? Yes, we've established that.

Japan attacked us in WWII. That's why we attacked them back. Germany was just dumb enough to declare war on us.

 

[ABikerSailor]

The Japanese mind their own ******* business.

So should we.

oh right so we can let the Girl Scouts be the world's policeman. Too bad we didn't use them in WW2 to save civilization on earth!!

World War 2, Japan and Germany were invading other countries.

so, no, not really the same thing, Eddie.

dear, Japan was not invading us and we bombed them anyway and won the war. Do you understand????????????????????????????????

Maybe not invading, but definitely attacking.

Ever heard of Pearl Harbor?

 

[candycorn]

Do any of you civilians that are advocating throwing out the ROE (Rules of Engagement) really believe it's a good idea to do that? Most military people won't.

If we throw out the rules, we become no better than the terrorists.

You're right on the ROE. What I think a lot of people are wrong about is the interrogation tactics being too harsh. These folks beheaded Americans. To me, you limit collateral damage where and when you can but once you have assets in custody, I think there are no rules. They certainly do not respect any rules on their end. Anyone who thinks that if we are gentle, there will be quid pro quo is telling themselves a fairy tale.