What to do about ISIS (a.k.a. ISIL, Islamic State)

Bill's forum was the first! All subjects are welcome. Participation by all encouraged.

Moderator: Bill Glasheen

Re: What to do about ISIS (a.k.a. ISIL, Islamic State)

Postby NEB » Thu Jun 11, 2015 9:52 pm

A little late to the conversation, but this quote from Craig's site ...

"Watching the twin towers and WTC 7 come down, it was obvious to me that the buildings were not falling down as a result of structural damage. When it became clear that the White House had blocked an independent investigation of the only three steel skyscrapers in world history to collapse as a result of low temperature office fires, it was apparent that there was a coverup."

... betrays the US govt's account of 911 for me, and always has. How am I expected to believe the miraculous implosion of 2 giant towers struck in different places by jet liners, and a third build not even struck at all, but apparently felled by debris and vibration ... again .... in a manner consistent with well-planned implosive demolition? I can't, I am just not that stupid. Anyone who can is, in my not at all humble opinion, guzzling the koolaide a little too much.
"Well, let's get to the rat killing..."
User avatar
NEB
 
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Los Angeles,CA USA

Re: What to do about ISIS (a.k.a. ISIL, Islamic State)

Postby NEB » Thu Jun 11, 2015 10:04 pm

And more on topic, I heard a radio pundit whine on yesterday how the Iraquis themselves are becoming increasingly unwilling to fight ISIS themselves, in fact, how more of them are tending to join ISIS. If they aren't willing to deal with ISIS, I can believe how there's any justification for us to go there and fight them. All the nonsense I hear about how ISIS has WMDs (yes, again) is unconvincing. After the release of the CIA document stating the lack of any real reason to go into Iraq, and subsequent outright lies told by the entire W admin (continuing, laughingly, to the present) about how we NEEDED to go there and depose SH ... sorry, zero cred to the US gov't whatsoever, including the current regime.

Let the ISIS CRISIS (patent pending ;) ) be handled by them that's living with it, let the whole subterfuge spin out. Not that they aren't really bad and really slaughtering everyone, but the reasons, the whys and details just cannot be what we're told they are. Not given the source.

One last bit of reason ... when the BHO admin tabled the idea of providing a couple years free college to deserving students, one of the favorite reasons of how silly and misguided and typically big gubment spendocrat libtard an idea it was was the COST.

But no one seems concerned over the cost of going back to war in the mid east.

Hmmmmmmmmmm.
"Well, let's get to the rat killing..."
User avatar
NEB
 
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Los Angeles,CA USA

Re: What to do about ISIS (a.k.a. ISIL, Islamic State)

Postby Jason Rees » Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:31 pm

I won't entertain the conspiracy theories above.

Bill Glasheen wrote:

So.... Here are my questions. And don't worry... I don't expect there to be a right answer. (I do however expect smartaleck answers from one usual suspect.) Let's try to be civil, and try to enlighten.

1) What caused all this?

2) Do you blame anyone or not?

3) If you were the leader, what would you do?

Thanks in advance.

- Bill


What caused this:
1. A power vacuum. When a government is too weak militarily to control everything within its country's borders, and holds no authority with all of its people, someone or something will step in to fill the void.
2. Cultural homogony. A like-minded group tied together by common ideology and religion can accomplish a great deal. There's very little to squabble over, and it's easier to define objectives, command structure, and get 'er done.
3. Lack of effective opposition. This one really doesn't need any explanation.

Who do we blame? Nobody. To blame somebody would be to say it could have been prevented. I don't believe it could have been. The American people elected who they elected. The Iraqi government refused to give ground on wanting to prosecute our soldiers in their courts. Syria's despotic government clearly outlived itself.

I'm not sure whether you're asking if I were the leader of ISIS, or everyone else. I won't play the part of devil's advocate here. However, if I were a world leader, and I were responding to ISIS, here is how I would respond:

I would set boundaries.
Make clear to all parties, ISIS included, how I see the boundaries of ISIS. I would only do so, having already placed the necessary resources to make sure that no matter what they did, they could not expand beyond those borders.

I would make clear that I have no intention of attacking or allowing anyone else to attack, unless they seek to expand beyond those borders, or host terrorist camps, or export terrorism.

I would start binding them with trade agreements. We have no means at present to deter them from doing anything except through military force.

I would do everything in my power to bolster their neighbors, I'd I can trust those neighbors. Iran is mostly out. If I were a complete A-hole, I might even not rule out Iran as being within those borders I mentioned earlier. If I viewed ISIS as a threat, letting my enemies bloody each other works for me.

I would not use any state mechanism to pressure or otherwise interfere with the internal operations of ISIS, including its justice system, or social means of control.

Why? Because I've discovered something in my study of unstable countries, and stable countries, and political science in general.

The less outward threat a country faces, the more it will look inward. The less threat from without, the more a country will move to materialism, indistrialism, and eventually post-materialism.

We're a post-material society because we (or a supermajority of us) do not live under threat. We don't fear an end to our way of life is imminent due to any external power. The downside of this is that we're tearing apart the social institutions which bind us together. Another downside of it is we expect everyone else on earth to view life and liberty we do, even a people who have no reason to respect that, and no real physical stake in anything they can call their own.

Set limits. Hands off unless they're needed for international security. Watch. And wait.

The number one thing I would watch for is an invasion of Greece within the next five years, if that country destabilizes. That is the biggest, weakest front of 'Western' Europe atm. And all you need is one weak link.
Life begins & ends cold, naked & covered in crap.
User avatar
Jason Rees
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:06 am
Location: USA

Previous

Return to Bill Glasheen's Dojo Roundtable

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 2 guests

cron