Page 1 of 2 [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

11 Jun 2014, 10:35 pm

has anyone considered the probability that the intent of Al-Queda is to topple the US financially by dragging us into all of this BS? That from the very beginning, 9-11 (conspiracy theories aside) the intent has been to bait our warmongering establishment into wasting our financial resources chasing the illusion of terrorism. And we keep biting the hook.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/12/world ... .html?_r=0



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,254
Location: Long Island, New York

11 Jun 2014, 11:34 pm

Bin Ladin in his tapes said that was the goal.

US will say nice words but they are not going back to Iraq. Dems don't want it and the tea party libertarians that control the Republican Party now are not the neo-cons of the Bush Administration. Even if a terrorist attack is launched from there on US soil the most you will see is a few cruise missiles launched for show purposes.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

12 Jun 2014, 12:00 am

war must just be profitable as hell for these self appointed elitists to destroy their own country for profit. Not hard to do I guess when they know how to spew the propaganda that keeps Americans gnawing on each others jugular so viciously that no one is willing to look at the voice behind the curtain.

"Blame the poor people, the hungry, the elderly and the sick. All that damned government assistance. Those "takers," those godamned takers"

And the low information voters pick up the hatchets and start sniping on the victims instead of focusing on the vultures.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

12 Jun 2014, 1:07 am

They're going to need a lot of assistance.

ISIS, a conglomerate of jihadi groups and Sunni nationalists/tribals (the latter being those kicked out of power in 2003) can't seem to be stopped by the current Iraqi forces, and I doubt the Shiite militias will stop them either when they reform.

One can say the US has a responsibility to help with this mess, but apart from another combined arms assault on ISIS held areas (another Fallujah and Ramadi), it doesn't look like any aid will do any good.



micfranklin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,272
Location: Maryland

12 Jun 2014, 8:40 am

And we don't need to go back to Iraq anyway. If they're that ineffective at preventing militants from taking over then try asking for a neighboring country's help instead of ours.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

12 Jun 2014, 12:27 pm

micfranklin wrote:
And we don't need to go back to Iraq anyway. If they're that ineffective at preventing militants from taking over then try asking for a neighboring country's help instead of ours.


As Iran sees Al Qaeda as their enemy, they should send in troops. I know, I know, people will jump on me and say that will seal Iraq's fate as an Iranian satellite, but as the Iranian and Iraqi government's have been making overtures to one another for years now - while we were still occupying Iraq, in fact - that ship's already sailed.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


chris5000
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Aug 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,599
Location: united states

12 Jun 2014, 4:30 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
micfranklin wrote:
And we don't need to go back to Iraq anyway. If they're that ineffective at preventing militants from taking over then try asking for a neighboring country's help instead of ours.


As Iran sees Al Qaeda as their enemy, they should send in troops. I know, I know, people will jump on me and say that will seal Iraq's fate as an Iranian satellite, but as the Iranian and Iraqi government's have been making overtures to one another for years now - while we were still occupying Iraq, in fact - that ship's already sailed.

if iran did anything israel will be chomping at the bit to bomb them

I think iraq should be left to deal with its problems internally and the UN should try and keep foreign fighters out not invite them in with cash and guns like they did with Syria



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

12 Jun 2014, 5:53 pm

chris5000 wrote:
I think iraq should be left to deal with its problems internally and the UN should try and keep foreign fighters out not invite them in with cash and guns like they did with Syria


Nice thought, especially considering the US f****d the place up to begin with.

Now, you have the Sunni minority coming back, probably stronger than ever. What do you think is going to happen to all of those Shiites, especially considering most of the resurgent Sunnis are majorly radicalized now (at least the Baath Party was somewhat benevolent as long as you didn't try to take their power or speak against them).

If the US doesn't send the Marine Corps to stop the tide right now, then it'll be privy to one of the worst humanitarian disasters in modern times.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 33,882
Location: temperate zone

12 Jun 2014, 6:12 pm

So the ISIS is invading from the west (the Syrian border).

If the US stays out that means that Iran will invade Iraq from the east (the Iranian border).

The two will clash in the middle.

Iraq will become Lebanon- civil war with foriegn occupiers at the same time. But Lebanon scaled up to the size of Texas.

Iran being stronger will likely roll over Iraq and push into Syria.

This will scare Israel.

The US and Israel will likely back Al Queda (talk about strange bedfellows) to resist the onslaught of the Iran-hezbollah-assad-putin alliance in Syria.

If that fails- then-yes- Isreali nukes might fly.

And since Iraq is falling apart anyway- the Kurds will get emboldended towards more autonomy from Iraq. This might embolden the Kurds of Turkey and Iran to rise up. This will further insight Iran, and it could draw NATO member Turkey into the fracas. And the whole middle east will become unraveled.

It just keeps getting better and better!



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

12 Jun 2014, 6:41 pm

Dillogic wrote:
chris5000 wrote:
I think iraq should be left to deal with its problems internally and the UN should try and keep foreign fighters out not invite them in with cash and guns like they did with Syria


Nice thought, especially considering the US f**** the place up to begin with.
It was F'ed up before we got there. They simply will not help themselves over there.


Quote:
If the US doesn't send the Marine Corps to stop the tide right now, then it'll be privy to one of the worst humanitarian disasters in modern times.
We'd have to make Iraq the 51st state in order to even begin to sort it out and fix it. No thanks!


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

12 Jun 2014, 6:56 pm

ISIS has generally been stationed in Iraq (it's where it started), with its fighters crossing over into Syria (plus recruiting inside of Syria of the more radical types) -- they've been calving out a nice little country for themselves from Iraqi and Syrian soil. They seem to want all of Iraq + parts of Syria for now (well, they want far more than that in the future). They have a lot of warm and motivated bodies to fight for them from local stock + globetrotters (Chechnya, Somalia, Afghanistan, the Western world and so on, but these aren't the bulk at all). They are extremely radical (Al-Qaeda isn't even a fan of them).

Iranian forces, mostly Hezbollah from Lebanon and Iranian Quds from Iraq (Hezbollah in Iraq) and Iran itself have been heavily engaged in Syria. They're already pulling some back to help defend Shiite areas in Iraq. Shiite militias have been mobilizing (Mahdi Army analogues), but they're nowhere near as effective as the battle hardened ISIS fighters (survivors of the US occupation and the current Syrian war). Iran will be stuck with just sending in Quds (Hezbollah), as a conventional force won't be allowed by anyone. Quds won't stop ISIS by themselves.

The Kurds will more than likely just fortify themselves as much as they can in their held areas (assaulting ISIS outside of such will make them lose forces they need for defense), though I doubt they can stop ISIS on their own if ISIS remains unchecked.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

12 Jun 2014, 7:00 pm

Raptor wrote:
It was F'ed up before we got there. They simply will not help themselves over there.


Eh, it wasn't too bad. Sunnis and Shiites were getting along due to the iron fist of the Baath party.

Enter invasion, and a million deaths later you have one of the biggest and most extreme terrorist organizations ever making a large portion of it their home.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

12 Jun 2014, 8:09 pm

Raptor wrote:
Dillogic wrote:
chris5000 wrote:
I think iraq should be left to deal with its problems internally and the UN should try and keep foreign fighters out not invite them in with cash and guns like they did with Syria


Nice thought, especially considering the US f**** the place up to begin with.
It was F'ed up before we got there. They simply will not help themselves over there.


Quote:
If the US doesn't send the Marine Corps to stop the tide right now, then it'll be privy to one of the worst humanitarian disasters in modern times.
We'd have to make Iraq the 51st state in order to even begin to sort it out and fix it. No thanks!


It was F'ed up when the British and French decided to carve up the Ottoman Empire after WWI, and create artificial countries like Iraq, consisting of tribal and sectarian groups that hated each other. A lot like they did in Yugoslavia.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


AntDog
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2010
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,967
Location: Riding on a Dragon

12 Jun 2014, 9:31 pm

We should end all involvement in the Middle East until they decide to get out of the stone age.



TheGoggles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060

13 Jun 2014, 1:33 am

AntDog wrote:
We should end all involvement in the Middle East until they decide to get out of the stone age.


It would probably helped if we stopped financing and arming militant groups over and over and over again.



micfranklin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,272
Location: Maryland

13 Jun 2014, 7:49 am

chris5000 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
micfranklin wrote:
And we don't need to go back to Iraq anyway. If they're that ineffective at preventing militants from taking over then try asking for a neighboring country's help instead of ours.


As Iran sees Al Qaeda as their enemy, they should send in troops. I know, I know, people will jump on me and say that will seal Iraq's fate as an Iranian satellite, but as the Iranian and Iraqi government's have been making overtures to one another for years now - while we were still occupying Iraq, in fact - that ship's already sailed.

if iran did anything israel will be chomping at the bit to bomb them

I think iraq should be left to deal with its problems internally and the UN should try and keep foreign fighters out not invite them in with cash and guns like they did with Syria


Why not Turkey? Turkey is a secular state, from what I understand and they share a border so why not let them take care of it?