Big Guy Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 Innocent men, women and children are in danger of extermination in Iraq. The initial reports indicate that ISIS has attacked their homes, isolated them on to a mountain and intend to kill, them all. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28698586 The USA is reacting to this outrageous possibility that 40,000 innocent old men, women and children. “ The Obama Administration is considering “both passive and active options,” ranging from airdrops of food and medicine to strikes against Islamic State fighters who continue to besiege the refugees, largely members of Iraq’s Yezidi minority.” http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-08-07/is-the-u-dot-s-dot-going-back-to-war-in-iraq The Western world cannot stand by and watch innocent women and children killed by an organized military force – can they – We? Didn't we just recently see innocent women and children killed in Gaza because .... I guess there are innocents and there are innocents. Some appear to be more innocent and important than others. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Bonam Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 The Western world cannot stand by and watch innocent women and children killed by an organized military force – can they – We? Of course "we" can. Are you aware of how many have already died in Syria? In Iraq, the extermination of the Yezidi and other minority groups is already well under way and has been for months. The "West" did not lift a finger. Didn't we just recently see innocent women and children killed in Gaza because .... I guess there are innocents and there are innocents. Some appear to be more innocent and important than others. Maybe you're starting to get it. Why does the death of 1000 people in Gaza get 100x more attention than the deaths of tens or hundreds of thousands in Iraq and Syria? Doesn't make much sense, does it. Quote
Hal 9000 Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 Innocent men, women and children are in danger of extermination in Iraq. The initial reports indicate that ISIS has attacked their homes, isolated them on to a mountain and intend to kill, them all. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28698586 The USA is reacting to this outrageous possibility that 40,000 innocent old men, women and children. “ The Obama Administration is considering “both passive and active options,” ranging from airdrops of food and medicine to strikes against Islamic State fighters who continue to besiege the refugees, largely members of Iraq’s Yezidi minority.” http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-08-07/is-the-u-dot-s-dot-going-back-to-war-in-iraq The Western world cannot stand by and watch innocent women and children killed by an organized military force – can they – We? Didn't we just recently see innocent women and children killed in Gaza because .... I guess there are innocents and there are innocents. Some appear to be more innocent and important than others. So, you agree that the US needs to get involved militarily...or because of Gaza, they should stay away? Quote The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball
dre Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 Maybe you're starting to get it. Why does the death of 1000 people in Gaza get 100x more attention than the deaths of tens or hundreds of thousands in Iraq and Syria? Doesn't make much sense, does it. Makes perfect sense to sentient beings. Conflict: Dirtfarm has gone on for 60 years, and arguing about those idiots over there has become part of the great western culture war. Its a sport of sorts, and theres all kinds of reasons why people tune in. 1. Underdog syndrome 2. Terrorism 3. Anti-Semitism directed towards jews 4. Anti-Semitism directed towards arabs 5. Anti muslim sentiment 6. Its in the middle east and could lead to a broader regional conflict. Mostly though for the people in places like this its just good old sports fan-dom. Once you pick a team you embrace all the necessary flaws logic, cherry picking of history, and the version of events favorable to your team. Every call the ref makes against you is unfair, and the ref is ignoring all the penalties commited by the other side. And this is just a fun sport to watch... It never goes away... you get to tune in year after year after year and theres always another fresh set of Conflict: Dirtfarm episodes. As for your mention of Iraq... Not sure what youre talking about there. There has been a GLUT of coverage and debate over that for the last 12 years. Syria? Just not as fun to watch... ITs terrorists vs a dictator.... hard to cheer for anyone. Whats strange is why people like you have such a hard time fathoming that interest in a conflict is not just based on casualty statistics. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
WestCoastRunner Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 Maybe you're starting to get it. Why does the death of 1000 people in Gaza get 100x more attention than the deaths of tens or hundreds of thousands in Iraq and Syria? Doesn't make much sense, does it. Give it some time. The conflict between Israel and Gaza is coming to a close. The media will start to focus on another conflict. Guess where? Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
Bonam Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 Mostly though for the people in places like this its just good old sports fan-dom... And this is just a fun sport to watch... It never goes away... you get to tune in year after year after year and theres always another fresh set of Conflict: Dirtfarm episodes. As for your mention of Iraq... Not sure what youre talking about there. There has been a GLUT of coverage and debate over that for the last 12 years. Syria? Just not as fun to watch... ITs terrorists vs a dictator.... hard to cheer for anyone. Whats strange is why people like you have such a hard time fathoming that interest in a conflict is not just based on casualty statistics. That's all well and good. So next time someone complains about some Israeli strike hitting a civilian in Gaza we can all just dismiss them as just another sports fan, right? They're just sitting around being entertained by the latest episode. While more serious people like yourself can discuss the serious issues in places like Iraq and Syria, where a new "Islamic Caliphate" is arising... So getting back to the subject of the thread... ISIS is executing people by the thousands based on their ethnicity or religion. They are engaged in a true genocide, likely to eclipse anything else in the current millenium before they are through. But in addition to that, we are likely looking at the birth of a new state that will control a large portion of Iraq and Syria and possibly continue spreading from there. I find that by far the most interesting story currently going on in the world. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 The Western world cannot stand by and watch innocent women and children killed by an organized military force – can they – We? Didn't we just recently see innocent women and children killed in Gaza because .... I guess there are innocents and there are innocents. Some appear to be more innocent and important than others. To summarize the reason why there will be Western intervention in Iraq and not Syria or Gaza is very simple, unlike conflicts in Syria and Gaza, the continued destabilization of Iraq (and its neighbours) will jeopardize the flow of the World’s economic lifeblood: Quote
Bonam Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 (edited) I doubt we'll see much Western intervention in Iraq this time. Maybe a few air strikes or drone strikes or something but that's about it, doubt they are gonna stem the tide of IS. The only effective force holding its own against IS seems to be the Kurdish militia in northern Iraq. Edited August 8, 2014 by Bonam Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 I doubt we'll see much Western intervention in Iraq this time. Maybe a few air strikes or drone strikes or something but that's about it, doubt they are gonna stem the tide of IS. The only effective force holding its own against IS seems to be the Kurdish militia in northern Iraq. Perhaps, but a few targeted air strikes, once they prove ineffective, will lead to further equipping and the training of Iraqi and Kurdish forces……..which will lead to Special Forces on the ground, both shadowing the Iraqis to provide both operational advice and to act as forward air controllers, well also deploying more covertly to both locate and aide in the targeting of further targets……. I would personally be surprised if SEALs or Green Beret were not already on the ground with the refugees to aide in the air drop of humanitarian relief. Quote
Bonam Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 (edited) Perhaps, but a few targeted air strikes, once they prove ineffective, will lead to further equipping and the training of Iraqi and Kurdish forces US already did that, for 10 years. And all it got them was an Iraqi military that runs or gets steamrolled at the first sign of trouble. Iraq has no unity as a country, and nothing will hold it together besides continuous occupation or tyranny. Better to let the map of the mid-east be redrawn along sectarian lines. Probably the best thing the West can do is help minorities in the areas escape extermination by providing cover for their flight. Edited August 8, 2014 by Bonam Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 (edited) US already did that, for 10 years. And all it got them was an Iraqi military that runs or gets steamrolled at the first sign of trouble. Iraq has no unity as a country, and nothing will hold it together besides continuous occupation or tyranny. Better to let the map of the mid-east be redrawn along sectarian lines. Probably the best thing the West can do is help minorities in the areas escape extermination by providing cover for their flight. Yet coupled with the USS George H.W. Bush carrier strike group in the Gulf ,from which the air strikes will likely be launched, the United States also has the USS Bataan ARG in the Gulf full of Marines........I wouldn't bet against this intervention eventually escalating further, as air strike alone will likely not prove effective... Edited August 8, 2014 by Derek 2.0 Quote
Big Guy Posted August 8, 2014 Author Report Posted August 8, 2014 Yet coupled with the USS George H.W. Bush carrier strike group in the Gulf ,from which the air strikes will likely be launched, the United States also has the USS Bataan ARG in the Gulf full of Marines........I wouldn't bet against this intervention eventually escalating further, as air strike alone will likely not prove effective... You were absolutely correct. The USA has just launched air strikes against specific targets in Iraq with a promise to try to stop a potential "genocide" on that mountain. The promise is that this is "short term" and "targeted" - that sound familiar? Anyone else find it ironic that the air strike came from planes from the "USS George H.W. Bush"? We will soon find out if those innocent people on that mountain are more or less important than those innocent people in Gaza. Maybe the answer for those innocent is not your importance or not, it is the reason why you are being slaughtered. That must be important to those women and children being killed. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Keepitsimple Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 Where are all the UN resolutions? Quote Back to Basics
GostHacked Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 Give it some time. The conflict between Israel and Gaza is coming to a close. The media will start to focus on another conflict. Guess where? It's not coming to a close, just on hiatus for a while. In time it will brew up gain. Quote
Big Guy Posted August 8, 2014 Author Report Posted August 8, 2014 BTW - Saddam used to have an elite paramilitary force called the Republican Guard. When the USA invaded it found only a few uniforms with the rest of the guards missing. Where did these 75,000 elite soldiers go? Where did these dedicated Sunni's disappear to? There is another dedicated Sunni group. Can anybody say "ISIS"? Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
GostHacked Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 BTW - Saddam used to have an elite paramilitary force called the Republican Guard. When the USA invaded it found only a few uniforms with the rest of the guards missing. Where did these 75,000 elite soldiers go? Where did these dedicated Sunni's disappear to? There is another dedicated Sunni group. Can anybody say "ISIS"? I had put the notion before that when the military and police were disbanded at the time of the 2006 invasion, that we would find many of these people in terror groups. Another bonehead move by the US was to leave all that military equipment behind. It was too expensive to bring home apparently. ISIS thanks the US military and maybe even the CIA for their continued assistance in bringing down Iraq. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 You were absolutely correct. The USA has just launched air strikes against specific targets in Iraq with a promise to try to stop a potential "genocide" on that mountain. The promise is that this is "short term" and "targeted" - that sound familiar? Anyone else find it ironic that the air strike came from planes from the "USS George H.W. Bush"? ............Yet I can't pick lotto numbers. I agree, there is level of whimsy with the Bush being the carrier in the Gulf. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 .....I agree, there is level of whimsy with the Bush being the carrier in the Gulf. That's why we like to name them after former U.S. presidents.....whimsy. New Ford Class has launched...Kennedy is building. Maybe President Obama will get one too. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Derek 2.0 Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 That's why we like to name them after former U.S. presidents.....whimsy. New Ford Class has launched...Kennedy is building. Maybe President Obama will get one too. For some reason I'm doubting Obama (or Clinton or Bush jr) will get one named after them any time soon From my understanding, the next one will be Enterprise......I'd think recycling Lexington, Saratoga, Yorktown and Hornet would be more fitting going forward. Quote
Moonlight Graham Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 The US airstrikes have little to do with protecting Iraqi civilians, and are mostly about protecting US military assets in the areas ISIL is now threatening, along with ISIL's greater overall threat to Iraq (which the US has geopolitical interests in, especially for oil). The US claimed the militants were using artillery to shell peshmerga forces defending Irbil and threatening US personnel in the city. “As the president made clear, the United States military will continue to take direct action against Isil when they threaten our personnel and facilities,” said Pentagon spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby. Obama’s orders to his military commanders were widely drafted and included permission to take action against Isis forces threatening either the thousands of Yazidi refugees trapped on Mount Sinjar, or the cities of Irbil and Baghdad, where US “military advisers” are based. The US portrayed its initial action on Friday as a necessary step to protect its joint operation centre in Irbil, which is being used to co-ordinate defences with Peshmerga fighters. “The fact of the matter is we have people in Irbil and if Irbil is allow to fall, they will be at risk,” said national security adviser Ben Rhodes on Friday. The Guardian I'm pretty confident the US would never act militarily to protect Iraqi civilians unless Iraq held other wider geopolitical interests to the US. The US did nothing in Rwanda, nothing in Darfur, nothing in the Central Africa/Congo area in the early 2000's during The Great African War. This "helping Iraqi civilians" is mostly White House PR spin to legitimize military action, similar to Bush's "Operation Grab Iraqi Oil" "Operation Iraqi Freedom". Dropping some humanitarian supplies isn't going to change that. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 Actually, the U.S. has been quite active in Africa, combining previously separate commands into the unified AFRICOM command as of 2008. As for Rwanda, Darfur, and Congo, the U.S. did more than Canada, which proudly brands itself as the protector of human rights with a "Responsibility to Protect", but is really only interested in the mining rights. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
PIK Posted August 8, 2014 Report Posted August 8, 2014 If you can't blame the jew, nobody cares. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
GostHacked Posted August 9, 2014 Report Posted August 9, 2014 The US airstrikes have little to do with protecting Iraqi civilians, and are mostly about protecting US military assets in the areas ISIL is now threatening, along with ISIL's greater overall threat to Iraq (which the US has geopolitical interests in, especially for oil). Quite right. When listening to news tidbits here and there, that point of ISIS attacking US military installations was the reason that the US started bombing. Not because of these Christians being slaughtered. The US does not care if it is Muslims killing Muslims (Or more specifically Arabs killing Arabs).... but the moment US 'interests' are threatened, and that means a wide range of things these days, then the bombing commences. I brought up the question in another thread earlier this year (back in January) 'When will the US go back to Iraq?' .... We now have our answer. I'm pretty confident the US would never act militarily to protect Iraqi civilians unless Iraq held other wider geopolitical interests to the US. The US did nothing in Rwanda, nothing in Darfur, nothing in the Central Africa/Congo area in the early 2000's during The Great African War. This "helping Iraqi civilians" is mostly White House PR spin to legitimize military action, similar to Bush's "Operation Grab Iraqi Oil" "Operation Iraqi Freedom". Dropping some humanitarian supplies isn't going to change that. Yes it is PR spin. Same 'humanitarian' reasons that Iraq was invaded twice before. Kuwait was not about people, it was about resources. The second time it was all about keeping the petrodollar, king in Iraq. Each time we had heard from the media that it was about humanitarian reasons. Yeah we know that is all bull. Quote
Keepitsimple Posted August 9, 2014 Report Posted August 9, 2014 Quite right. When listening to news tidbits here and there, that point of ISIS attacking US military installations was the reason that the US started bombing. Not because of these Christians being slaughtered. The US does not care if it is Muslims killing Muslims (Or more specifically Arabs killing Arabs).... but the moment US 'interests' are threatened, and that means a wide range of things these days, then the bombing commences. I brought up the question in another thread earlier this year (back in January) 'When will the US go back to Iraq?' .... We now have our answer. Yes it is PR spin. Same 'humanitarian' reasons that Iraq was invaded twice before. Kuwait was not about people, it was about resources. The second time it was all about keeping the petrodollar, king in Iraq. Each time we had heard from the media that it was about humanitarian reasons. Yeah we know that is all bull. Who cares? What you should care about is that the ugly face of extreme Islam has again been murdering thousands of innocents. ISIS, Hamas, the Taliban - all cut from the same cloth. Quote Back to Basics
Shady Posted August 9, 2014 Report Posted August 9, 2014 Who cares? What you should care about is that the ugly face of extreme Islam has again been murdering thousands of innocents. ISIS, Hamas, the Taliban - all cut from the same cloth. Exactly. There isn't really an option not to do anything. Too much is threatened. Kurds, Christians, Baghdad itself, even Jordan. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.