War Against ISIL

bush_cheney2004 · January 2, 2015

What are you taking about, everyone knows it was the Cold War. The part you guys conveniently/deliberately edit out is why/how the disgraceful way that involvement was conducted led to 9/11.

What's convenient is how some deliberately forget the rampant "diddling" of imperialism for God and crown. "The sun never sets on the British Empire"...and all that royal jazz. The U.S. did not carve up the Middle East.

Big Guy · January 2, 2015

It looks like a good year for our coalition and especially the American liberation of Iraq. It has just been reported that about 15,000 Iraqi civilians were killed in 2014 - the largest number since the Sunni/Shia massacres of 2007.

Glad the USA went in to stop the killing in 2003. They have sure "fixed" things in those 13 years.

Time to go into Syria, Jordan and maybe Iran to fix things "The American way!".

bush_cheney2004 · January 2, 2015

No worries....once Justin Trudeau is leading Canada, warm blankets will save the day. Peacekeeping and Canadian leadership will save the civilians, just as it did in Rwanda.

jbg · January 2, 2015

You don't have a freaking clue what I'm talking about do you? How convenient.

I would care if the American Air Force piloted planes into buildings full of innocent Afghans.

eyeball · January 2, 2015

The problem is how many Americans are fine with their government's brothel of puppets and dictatorships being inflicted on countries full of innocent people. It's what pretty much makes the whole voting public a target.

bush_cheney2004 · January 2, 2015

The problem is how many Americans are fine with their government's brothel of puppets and dictatorships being inflicted on countries full of innocent people. It's what pretty much makes the whole voting public a target.

That's OK....we get to watch college football all day today while ISIL gets inflicted with American and Canadian bombs.

GostHacked · January 2, 2015

I guess the Afghan military is taking notes from the Americans.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/afghanistan-dozens-killed-at-wedding-party-by-army-in-helmand/

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan -- The Afghan government says it has sent a team to southern Helmand province to investigate the deaths of at least 28 people, mostly women and children, killed when soldiers fired artillery at a wedding party.

Gen. Dawlat Waziri, deputy Defense Ministry spokesman, said Friday a delegation was dispatched from Kabul to Sangin district after initial investigations found that army soldiers had fired at a house from two directions while the wedding party was in full swing on Wednesday night.

Big Guy · January 9, 2015

That other war in Iraq and Syria is still going strong. The coalition bombing has "stopped the advance" of ISIS - but that may ne the best they can do. Those air sorties keep pounding the bejeebers out of anything that seems to be the enemy (how can we tell?) and the planes just keep on coming.

Meanwhile, a UN Security Council report finds that 15,000 foreign jihadists have come to join the battle from more than 80 countries in November only. These countries include many that had not previously faced challenges relating to Al Qaeda among them such unlikely places as the Maldives, Chile and Norway.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/11/03/fred-kaplan-why-the-west-is-losing-the-war-against-isis/

Will we ever learn?

bush_cheney2004 · January 9, 2015

Sounds good to me....Roach Motel...."Jihadists check in, but they don't check out!"

January 9, 2015

That other war in Iraq and Syria is still going strong. The coalition bombing has "stopped the advance" of ISIS - but that may ne the best they can do. Those air sorties keep pounding the bejeebers out of anything that seems to be the enemy (how can we tell?) and the planes just keep on coming.

Meanwhile, a UN Security Council report finds that 15,000 foreign jihadists have come to join the battle from more than 80 countries in November only. These countries include many that had not previously faced challenges relating to Al Qaeda among them such unlikely places as the Maldives, Chile and Norway.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/11/03/fred-kaplan-why-the-west-is-losing-the-war-against-isis/

Will we ever learn?

I'm curious as to what you mean by learn. If you think there is anything we can learn that will make Islamists think it is okay to ridicule their Prophet I'd be all ears.

Same with blasphemy and apostasy. If I can take a night class that will make those two crimes punishable by a good talking to in countries with Sharia law I'd give up an evening or two.

Big Guy · January 9, 2015

I hope that we have learned from our mistakes; Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria to name a few. We get involved in local and regional civil wars, exacerbate the situation, get whomped, declare victory and leave a festering problem. Then when the results of our mistaken meddling crosses the oceans and starts playing out in our back yards we wonder why.

Does anybody believe that we would be having all these terrorist problems if we had just stayed the Hell out of their countries and allow them to resolve their own problems to THEIR benefit. If they want Sharia Law for their countries then let them have it.

jbg · January 10, 2015

That other war in Iraq and Syria is still going strong. The coalition bombing has "stopped the advance" of ISIS - but that may ne the best they can do. Those air sorties keep pounding the bejeebers out of anything that seems to be the enemy (how can we tell?) and the planes just keep on coming.

Meanwhile, a UN Security Council report finds that 15,000 foreign jihadists have come to join the battle from more than 80 countries in November only. These countries include many that had not previously faced challenges relating to Al Qaeda among them such unlikely places as the Maldives, Chile and Norway.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/11/03/fred-kaplan-why-the-west-is-losing-the-war-against-isis/

Will we ever learn?

Sounds good to me....Roach Motel...."Jihadists check in, but they don't check out!"

Yes. Get them in one place and kill them. The world won't miss them.

Big Guy · January 10, 2015

Put them into camps and systematically kill them?

Sounds familiar.

Rue · January 11, 2015

You mean like the Jews in the market place two days ago Big Guy? No of course not.

January 11, 2015

Put them into camps and systematically kill them?

Sounds familiar.

You see, that's kind of offensive right there. Comparing the incarceration and execution of Jihadists (perfectly reasonable course of action) to the holocaust, where murderers and religious primitives were not overly represented among those gassed.

But I support your right to post it without government sanction.

Big Guy · January 11, 2015

I am not the one who suggested to round up a group of people and kill them. I tried to point out what kind of rationalization emerges when someone believes that the end justifies the means.

If one is able to rationalize that a country should round up and kill a group of people who it considers "murderers and religious primitives" then the precedence is set. The means are acceptable (annihilation) if the ends are valid for the group doing the killing.

In Rwanda, the Hutus wiped out Tutsis because they had a different background and their noses were different. That was enough for them to try to eradicate the race.

I am sorry you find my implied reference to the Holocaust as offensive. I thought it was a good example of rounding up a group of people you do not like and killing them all. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.

BTW - I have never looked to government sanction when I post here or have expressed my opinions in the public sphere under my own name.

January 12, 2015

I have to admit, I personally don't find it offensive. I knew what you meant.

The precedence would be a good one though. Save lots of lives, make people happier.

Definitely not for nose shape, though. That would be right out!

Edited January 12, 2015 by bcsapper

Bonam · January 12, 2015

Sounds good to me....Roach Motel...."Jihadists check in, but they don't check out!"

Yes. Get them in one place and kill them. The world won't miss them.

I am not the one who suggested to round up a group of people and kill them.

We round up groups of people and incarcerate (and in some jurisdictions kill) them all the time. These groups are known as murderers, rapists, or more generally "criminals". Internationally, we hunt down "terrorists", i.e. those who we believe have committed terrorist acts. BC2004 and jbg suggested that "Jihadists" should be targeted in the same way (hint: they already are). Note the term "Jihadist"... that is not a member of a group based on race, religion, language, national origin, etc. Feel free to refer to this definition of Jihadism, here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihadism

So what is a Jihadist? Basically a violent Islamist terrorist. I.e. a murderer, terrorist, criminal, and probably rapist as well. So why should they not be "rounded up" like the other criminals listed above? They are basically the worst of the worst. They are classified as Jihadists because of their actions, nothing else.

Yes, I realize you like to use every possible opportunity to shout about how non-racist you are and how much you condemn racists. That's fine, and maybe you would have had a point had BC2004 and jbg been referring to "Muslims" in their posts. But they weren't, they were referring to "Jihadists". There is a distinction there, an important one. You are aware of this, yes?

Edited January 12, 2015 by Bonam

Big Guy · January 12, 2015

I suggest that one has to be careful when using words and terms that can be looked at as having different connotations;

A Mujahideen is the plural form of Mujahid, a term describing one engaged in a Jihad. Those former Taliban that the USA and Canada were supporting when they were fighting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan were known as Mujahideen. Maybe they were murderers, terrorists, criminals and probably rapists as well but they were the "good guys" and on our side.

Also some Islamic scholars will tell you it is also a term for "struggle" and "survival".

But why waste our times knit picking.

As I analyze our disagreement, is that there are certain conditions when you feel that if we can gather a group of people who we believe plan to do us harm then we can murder them (I assume they are disarmed|) because we have the right to protect ourselves.

I do not agree - The end does not justify the means.

I am not trying to put words into your mouth or trying to rephrase your position. I am trying to find the various points of our disagreement.

There are nations which feel justified to gather and kill all members of a political party which preaches overthrow of the government. Do you consider that to be justifiable for killing unarmed people? I do not.

Perhaps if we could narrow the basis of our disagreements then we might better understand each other.

bush_cheney2004 · January 12, 2015

False premise.....jihadists who voluntarily travel abroad to join an armed insurrection hell bent on international terrorism are hardly "murder victims" when confronted by legal, military force. To the jihadists, the end more than justifies the means.

Big Guy · January 12, 2015

It has been reported that our coalition of bombers against ISIS has recently killed about 50 Syrian civilians (by mistake I assume). The news is late in coming because it has taken a while to dig out the bodies resulting from this airstrike. Apparently there are reports of other civilians mistakenly being killed during these airstrikes.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/01/11/us_airstrike_alleged_to_have_killed_syrian_civilians.html

"The deaths are seen by US allied moderate rebel commanders as one reason support for their movement has eroded in northern Syria while support for radical forces such as Al Qaeda's Nusra Front and Islamic State has gained."

"Rebel commanders say they have intelligence that could avoid civilian casualties, but that US officials refuse to coordinate with them."

Extended families in that part of the world tend to be very large and the sense of honor and vengeance very strong. I hope none of these "collateral damage" have hot blooded relatives in Canada.

So, at least 50 innocent civilians killed that probably means about 100 more moderates turning to ISIS.

What are we doing in that civil war?

Will we ever learn?

Big Guy · January 12, 2015

I believe that when we gather a group of people who are unarmed and kill them then we are committing murder. Others may disagree. There are a number of people who feel that action to be justified just as the killing of all Russian prisoners by the Germans, the slaughter of American POW's by the Japanese, the killing of prisoners of war by both the North and South during the American civil war etc.

It is like shooting fish in a barrel - except they are humans and not fish.

Edited January 12, 2015 by Big Guy

bush_cheney2004 · January 12, 2015

A poorly developed concept that will never go further than a personal belief. Domestic and "international" law is far more developed than this.

Rue · January 12, 2015

Big Guy your decision to throw out your reference to the holocaust speaks for itself. Your argument would have been more credible if you could have just once resisted the need to throw in the comment meant to insult Jews.

In one example JBG was referring to rounding up terrorists and killing them. The Jews or Roma, etc., rounded upand killed in the holocaust were not terrorists but your bias is so deep you can't differentiate.

On this particular comment JBG made, I disagree with him but unlike you I will not engage in holocaust inversion as a tactic to respond.

I would argue, as tempting as it is to just round up and kill terrorists, our true challenge will be in containing terrorists in a manner that does not endanger and strip us of our freedoms in the process.

That is exactly what terrorists want to do, turn us into a frightened police state, and it is precisely why, if you go to Israel which knows better than anyone about Muslim extremists, it will NOT allow them no matter what they do, to prevent democracy in Israel.

Israel is doing what other Western nations will need to learn and that is how to balance containing terrorism without fatally undoing democracy.

Britain has had experience from its time with the IRA and Spain with the Basques, Holland with Mollucans, Denmark with skinheads, Germany with neo Nazis, etc. Europe will find its balancing act just as Israel did and the US and Canada and Australia are doing.

It won't be easy but it will happen.

The more wide spread this behaviour becomes, the more it will challenge our individual rights to be free. Its inevitable.

Yes we do not Big Guy want to become the very terrorists we fight. We have to find a way to protect the very things they are trying to get us to remove by their terrorist actions.

Legal concepts such as the presumption of innocence, the need for a search warrant, yes they are important.

The point is Big Guy, we are also getting to the point where the ability of terrorists to use the very fundamental freedoms we cherish to carry out their attacks is coming to a head and we see a major social adjustment beginning to develop to contain terrorism now its spreading to our own lands and isn't a distant abstract thing.

All the arm chair geniuses lecturing Israel on how it should deal with Muslim extremists will soon have these same extremists in their face and we shall see how their beliefs change now it immediately impacts on their safety. Its no longer over there far away. Its no longer something blaming Jews or Israel or the US for will make it go away.

Yes people choosing to support certain terrorist views may very well find themselves arrested and placed in prisons for their views and/or under surveillance.

We are no longer at a point in our manifest destiny where words or certain passive activities by themselves do not assist or enable terrorist acts.

The whole concept of freedom of speech is under attack and being challenged.

I for one believe Israel has shown you have to sacrifice some individual rights, everyone regardless of who they are does, but you can still maintain dynamic freedom of speech as they do in Israel. It's an example of both and that ironically is why terrorists hate Israel so much. The more they attack Israel the stronger it becomes in resisting terror and protecting its democractic institutions. No Muslim terrorist has prevented over 125 pro Muslim legal rights groups to defend Muslim Israelis in court or to criticize the Israeli government in the media or elect politicians critical of Israel.

Israel treats all its extremists one way-you either are shot dead in the act or you go to jail.

The key to this all will be very blunt exchanges within inter faith groups and communities and the enunciation of common values by these communities reaching out to one another to resist terrorists trying to pit us agains each other.

Terrorists want us to turn on ourselves. We will not.

Edited January 12, 2015 by Rue

dre · January 12, 2015

Does anybody believe that we would be having all these terrorist problems if we had just stayed the Hell out of their countries.

Yes! Believe it or not, some people REALLY ARE stupid enough to think that 90 years of constant military and political meddling, and the hundreds of thousands of innocent people that foreigners have killed for oil over there has NOTHING AT ALL to do with why they dont like us.

Im not shittin ya!