Topaz Posted December 8, 2015 Report Share Posted December 8, 2015 The west overall seems to favour ISIS. The US and the UK bashed Russia for doing what the west has not been able to do so far. And that is give a big push back against ISIS. The hypocrisy of calling out the Russians for doing exactly the same thing the west does, air bombing campaings against ISIS. Does that make any sense at all? Yes, it does make sense IF the US and UK help create ISIS, so NATO would have a reason to go to invade, destroy and take over the power of the countries they want in the ME. Every country the US invades, they setup military bases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 8, 2015 Report Share Posted December 8, 2015 Yes, it does make sense IF the US and UK help create ISIS, so NATO would have a reason to go to invade, destroy and take over the power of the countries they want in the ME. Every country the US invades, they setup military bases. The US/UK DID create ISIL with the idiotic, poorly planned, and poorly executed invasion of Iraq. But it was the result an epic blunder not some conspiracy to take over the middle east. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 The US/UK DID create ISIL with the idiotic, poorly planned, and poorly executed invasion of Iraq. But it was the result an epic blunder not some conspiracy to take over the middle east. The soft bigotry of low expectations. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 9, 2015 Report Share Posted December 9, 2015 The soft bigotry of low expectations. VS The naivety of unrealistically high expectations. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted December 10, 2015 Report Share Posted December 10, 2015 John J. Mearsheimer is an American international relations theorist. He has some interesting observations about the war against ISIS and Israeli policies: "It is also hard to see where we are going to get the troops that would be necessary to topple ISIL. And even if you topple ISIL and inflict a military defeat on it - let's just say the Americans and Europeans put down ground forces and roll up the ISIL military units that now control all that territory in Iraq and Syria - in the end, this will not matter because you cannot defeat an ideology.ISIL fighters will not stand and do battle with the American military. What they will do is melt away into the towns, countryside and cities, and they will come back to fight another day, so there is no military solution to defeating ISIL." He adds some observations of recent moves by Netanyahu: "Obama failed in his attempt to convince the Israelis to accept the two-state solution and, as a result of the ensuing conflict between Obama and Netanyahu over that issue and Iran's nuclear deal, relations between the US and Israel are at an all-time low. I have been an advocate of the two-state solution. It is not the best alternative, but it is a good one. However, I think we are past the point where it is a viable option.There is not going to be a two-state solution. There is now - and will continue to be - a greater Israel, and inside that greater Israel Palestinians will soon outnumber the Israeli Jews. That means you will have an apartheid state. I agree on both points of his. This is the guy who co-wrote the groundbreaking "Israel Lobby" scholarly article and book, so he knows pretty well what he's talking about. With his ISIL comments, it's true because that's exactly what the Taliban did. It became a guerrilla war, and the Taliban disappeared and attacked from the fringes, and as NATO tired and has virtually all left, the Taliban have risen again in the country. Mao Zedong summarized basic guerrilla tactics at the beginning of the Chinese "Second Revolutionary Civil War" as: "The enemy advances, we retreat; the enemy camps, we harass; the enemy tires, we attack; the enemy retreats, we pursue." This is essentially the tactics of jihadist terrorist groups as well. But, while you can't completely defeat an ideology militarily, as seen with communism and fascism, it may be possible to marginalize it, contain it, and (most importantly) discredit it in the minds of the masses as a viable solution to their problems. It's just REALLY hard, and as with communism, the US had a hand in containing and weakening it but it was only finally discredited because of the ideology's own inherent weaknesses (see: China, USSR) that has led to its own collapse. As for Israel, he's bang on 100%. Israel clearly does not want a 2-state solution in any way. Netanyahu would like no better than to rid virtually all Palestinians/Arabs from what he sees as historical Israeli territory (the West Bank etc). The continued settlement building in the WB and his actions and rhetoric proves this. Since this is politically not really possible (now), the 2nd best solution for leaders like Bibi is an apartheid state of marginalized/oppressed Palestinians/Arabs. And it's a wonder why the Muslim middle-east hate the Israelis/Jews? Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted December 10, 2015 Report Share Posted December 10, 2015 Corps are running governments, and IF one doesn't think that corps are supporting the war in the ME, think again US oil companies, precious metals, in other words natural resources. The only problem now is this stupid war is taking so long to end, that oil is going to worth nothing and water will take it place, if its already hasn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted December 11, 2015 Report Share Posted December 11, 2015 VS The naivety of unrealistically high expectations. The notion of 'they will be welcoming us as liberators' by Rumsfeld seemed a bit ambitious. IT proved to be 100% wrong. Quote Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser ohm on soundcloud.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted December 11, 2015 Report Share Posted December 11, 2015 The notion of 'they will be welcoming us as liberators' by Rumsfeld seemed a bit ambitious. IT proved to be 100% wrong. I was unaware I supported the invasion of Iraq. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted December 11, 2015 Report Share Posted December 11, 2015 I was unaware I supported the invasion of Iraq. Reading comprehension is key when making a proper reply. Quote Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser ohm on soundcloud.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted December 11, 2015 Report Share Posted December 11, 2015 Reading comprehension is key when making a proper reply. I'll hold you to it. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted December 11, 2015 Report Share Posted December 11, 2015 I'll hold you to it. I don't understand. Quote Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser ohm on soundcloud.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted December 11, 2015 Report Share Posted December 11, 2015 Corps are running governments, and IF one doesn't think that corps are supporting the war in the ME, think again US oil companies, precious metals, in other words natural resources. The only problem now is this stupid war is taking so long to end, that oil is going to worth nothing and water will take it place, if its already hasn't. I wonder if it ever gives you a slight pause, a momentary thought you might be wrong, when you see the oil companies profits and stock plunge month after month on dirt cheap oil, and when precious metals continue to decline. If the oil companies were running governments don't you think by now they'd have done something to INCREASE the price of oil? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted December 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2015 Turkey, our partner in this coalition, has the only effective ground troops and is using them against ISIS. They attack ISIS in Iraq. USA and Canada say- BRAVO - Well done! Iraq says - who the hell allowed you on our soil, so get off! http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/12/iraq-file-complaint-turkish-incursion-151211150935433.html Iraq is filing UN complaint over Turkish 'incursion'. Haider al-Abadi instructed his foreign minister to make a complaint over what he calls a 'violation of Iraqi sovereignty'. We have the USA and Russia taking agreed turns over Syria but with Russian anti-air missiles pointing at the sky. French and Turkish (and a few Canadian) jets flying around trying to keep out of each others way and bombs dropping from the sky on everybody on the ground with no understanding who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. Please Justin, get our planes out of that shooting gallery ASAP and Canada out of that fiasco. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted December 12, 2015 Report Share Posted December 12, 2015 I wonder if it ever gives you a slight pause, a momentary thought you might be wrong, when you see the oil companies profits and stock plunge month after month on dirt cheap oil, and when precious metals continue to decline. If the oil companies were running governments don't you think by now they'd have done something to INCREASE the price of oil? So you want us to go bomb the country where we make a crap ton of our oil money and military arms sales from so they can kick us out, & buy from other arms makers? Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted December 12, 2015 Report Share Posted December 12, 2015 Turkey, our partner in this coalition, has the only effective ground troops and is using them against ISIS. They attack ISIS in Iraq. USA and Canada say- BRAVO - Well done! Iraq says - who the hell allowed you on our soil, so get off! http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/12/iraq-file-complaint-turkish-incursion-151211150935433.html Iraq is filing UN complaint over Turkish 'incursion'. Haider al-Abadi instructed his foreign minister to make a complaint over what he calls a 'violation of Iraqi sovereignty'. Thanks to Bush and Obama, they've introduced this disturbing international norm that nobody needs to go the UN to make war in another country's territories. So this allows Putin enters Crimea, and Turkey to enter Iraq etc. The UN and UNSC is essentially becoming irrelevant if not already, so we're back to the insanely dangerous pre-WWII shit-show in the international sphere. Thanks Uncle Sam! Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted December 12, 2015 Report Share Posted December 12, 2015 (edited) Thanks to Bush and Obama, they've introduced this disturbing international norm that nobody needs to go the UN to make war in another country's territories. Actually, the precedent was set when Chretien, Clinton, Chirac, Blair, and other NATO partners ignored the UN to make war on Serbia to force Milosevic back to the negotiations table (Kosovo War - 1999). Edited December 12, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted December 12, 2015 Report Share Posted December 12, 2015 So you want us to go bomb the country where we make a crap ton of our oil money and military arms sales from so they can kick us out, & buy from other arms makers? So, it is about human rights, Islamic terrorism or economic resources? Quote Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser ohm on soundcloud.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted December 12, 2015 Report Share Posted December 12, 2015 (edited) Argus you make an interesting comment to Topaz and it applies to me too because like Topaz I believe oil politics, oil corporations have a lot to do with manipulating government policies in the ME. To be fair to Topaz many of us left and right of politics question the role of OPEC, oil cartels, oil syndicates, etc. My personal opinion,, and its only that is that Saudi Arabia and Iran and OPEC are orchestrating a flood or glut of oil on world markets deliberately to prevent shale, frac and tar sands oil extraction from being lucrative in an effort to bankrupt them and prevent competition from them. In the short term they lower the prices, then once the competitors are maimed or knocked out, back up go the prices. I think its as much a war against Russian oil and gas supplies as it is North American. Now is that orchestrated through companies, governments, probably both. The US up until about a year ago was providing competitive oil supplies and prices to OPEC and pow is it a coincidence now shale, fracing, tar sands are now all halted? You do make a good point and I must concede it is a tad simplistic simply saying companies manipulate governments. It works both ways for sure and I concede trying to decipher the actual market place and who is monopoliizing that market place is a crap shoot. I mean I take all the conspiracy stories with a grain of salt yes. So your point is taken. But like Topaz I still think the oil companies have their hands all over the ME. I also think Saudi Arabia is independent not a puppet of the US but the other way around if anything and is a shrewd market manipulator as tricky as China. In fact I think Putin is an idiot and would have been far better off allied with the West selling us his oil and gas than China. He would have gotten much better prices from us and could have undercut ME oil supplies. I think the Chinese, Saudis and Iranians manipulated his ego into engaging in oil policies that were not in his country's best interests I myself think Saudi Arabia is as much of a destabilizing force in the world as Iran, China or Russia is. Edited December 12, 2015 by Rue Quote I come to you to hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted December 12, 2015 Report Share Posted December 12, 2015 (edited) So, it is about human rights, Islamic terrorism or economic resources? Isn't it a combo of them all, some more of priority to our government than others, with the vast majority of concern in the ME going to economic interests and terrorism, and only a very small segment going to human rights? Add a few other factors, like pleasing the Israel lobby etc.? Oil companies don't run our governments. But they do have significant influence on government officials, among many other competing non-government entities that have significant political power. If a certain private entity like an energy corporation provides many millions in campaign funds to a party/candidate(s), they're going to have significant pull among government officials, period. Not to mention the iron triangles in the oil and arms industries (ie: military-industrial complex). Edited December 13, 2015 by Moonlight Graham Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted December 13, 2015 Report Share Posted December 13, 2015 (edited) Isn't it a combo of them all, some more of priority to our government than others, with the vast majority of concern in the ME going to economic interests and terrorism, and only a very small segment going to human rights? Add a few other factors, like pleasing the Israel lobby etc.? Oil companies don't run our governments. But they do have significant influence on government officials, among many other competing non-government entities that have significant political power. If a certain private entity like an energy corporation provides many millions in campaign funds to a party/candidate(s), they're going to have significant pull among government officials, period. Not to mention the iron triangles in the oil and arms industries (ie: military-industrial complex). It is a combo and you are correct on the ratio of the components. This is more to sustain a military industrial complex than the need to win wars, defeat terrorism and such. Without such 'threats' there is no justification to have such a large army with that kind of far reach. So, might as well keep us all scared of the Muslims while the military contractors are making money regardless of the economic hardships that occur. The propaganda runs long with the perceived threat related to Islam, but yet as we see some of those tyrannical nations get a pass because of economic benefits to the USA and it's allies. Turkey;'s actions have been essentially sanctioned by NATO. This is not helping to resolve anything in Syria. It's made it much worse, again, very predictable and more than expected from people who have been following this. Rue has made many posts on Erdogan and the close relationship with Saudi Arabia. I don't see eye to eye with Rue on most things, but that notion is well documented and had been part of the problem from the get go. However not many want to deal with that thinking it is a different problem than what we see in Syria. It's all connected and all part of the same problem. The west has attempted to pacify Afghanistan and Iraq, which has failed. But I am sure more bombs and military action will resolve this as it had in 2003 with Mission Accomplished. Edited December 13, 2015 by GostHacked Quote Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser ohm on soundcloud.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted December 14, 2015 Report Share Posted December 14, 2015 Many are wondering who is really supporting ISIS and how it came to be. Who gave ISIS the money to ride around in new pickups that many have seen in past pictures. Many articles and books of former agents and reporters have their own views and its getting a little confusing who can one believe. Here is one that explains how ISIS came to be and who is funding it and in some ways make sense and if it makes sense, what part, if any, is the US and others, playing? http://www.globalresearch.ca/where-will-this-war-frenzy-lead-what-stinks-in-saudi-aint-the-camel-dung-isis-is-a-saudi-army-in-disguise/5495036 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted December 16, 2015 Report Share Posted December 16, 2015 So you want us to go bomb the country where we make a crap ton of our oil money and military arms sales from so they can kick us out, & buy from other arms makers? I have no idea why you're asking me that question. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted December 16, 2015 Report Share Posted December 16, 2015 They can't since Saudis hold most of the cards in this industry, but I suppose they could create a reason to attack them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted December 16, 2015 Report Share Posted December 16, 2015 (edited) Well, now an Australian newspaper has come out with a report that the leader of ISIS, admitted that they were being supported by the US. The Iraqi government had said in the past, they have pictures of US planes dropping supplies to ISIS. Open your minds people and start asking questions. http://www.australiannationalreview.com/isis-leader-admits-funded/ Edited December 17, 2015 by Charles Anthony fixed link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted December 17, 2015 Report Share Posted December 17, 2015 Well, now an Australian newspaper has come out with a report that the leader of ISIS, admitted that they were being supported by the US. The Iraqi government had said in the past, they have pictures of US planes dropping supplies to ISIS. Open your minds people and start asking questions. http://www.australiannationalreview.com/isis-leader-admits-funded/ I would like to see this information from a better news source. The site you've linked to isn't an Australian newspaper, it's straight-up loony-tunes. Look at some of the other headlines they're currently running: Paris: You Don’t Want to Read This Who created ISIS, and can you really handle the truth? Russian troops may have discovered secret ISIS base in Tennessee ISIS leader admits to being funded by the US How this journalist just exposed the fake news being spread about Paris and ISIS Infant dies after receiving 13 vaccines in one day without mother’s informed consent Health expert David Wolfe divulges truth about vaccine and vaccine safety Wormwood and iron annihilate 98 per cent of cancer cells in 16 hours Iraqi army downs two UK planes carrying weapons for ISIL It's just a weird mash-up of conspiracy theories, anti-vaxxer stuff, "super-food" stuff, and get-rich-quick schemes. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.