Michael Hardner Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/isis-murdered-kenji-goto ISIS is less like a conventional authoritarian or totalitarian state than like a mass death cult. Most such cults attract few followers and pose limited threats; the danger is mostly to themselves. But there are examples in modern history of whole societies falling under the influence and control of a mechanism whose aim is to dictate every aspect of life after an image of absolute virtue, and in doing so to produce a mountain of corpses. ISIS doesn’t behave like a regional insurgency or a global terrorist network, though it has elements of both. It joins the death cult to an army and a rudimentary state. It presents itself as the avant-garde of a mass movement, like the Khmer Rouge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 One point of view on ISIS was of a US soldier who had been in Iraq and his view were that ISIS want to go back in time and have the Middle-East society live its life before the outside world invaded. How they were going to do that was kill ANYONE that lives in the ME area that doesn't agree with them and that could be the reasoning behind all their killings of the local people. I really think that NATO and the countries in the ME, who aren't helping ISIS, put boots on the ground and take them out. Of course, this will take a very long time and many countries may find they are losing man-power to the military or even the cost for this task. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Interesting read........I think the author's conclusion sums it up: One thing we’ve learned from the history of such regimes is that they can be stronger and more enduring than rational analysis would predict. The other thing is that they rarely end in self-destruction. They usually have to be destroyed by others. The Khmer Rouge of course was defeated by opposition Cambodians and Vietnamese, aided and supported by the Soviets...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 The Khmer Rouge of course was defeated by opposition Cambodians and Vietnamese, aided and supported by the Soviets...... That I did NOT know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 That I did NOT know. It is of course an interesting comparison, that I haven't thought of before, on reflection very apt.........of course the Khmer Rouge was supported and propped up by the Red Chinese (which invaded Vietnam in response)......in this incarnation though, ISIS doesn't have the outside support of a large State (nuclear armed) backer and is opposed by most nations........ Likewise, if one wishes to dive deeper, the Khmer Rouge grew (as did the death toll) within the vacuum created from the departure of US Forces in Southeast Asia post Vietnam......and continued to fester (as did the bodies left in its wake) under a weak American President. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 The Khmer Rouge of course was defeated by opposition Cambodians and Vietnamese, aided and supported by the Soviets...... The Khmer Rouge of course were born in the struggle to get out from under a US backed...dude...who followed the usual path to power - right wing military coups, savage repression of leftists yadda yadda yadda. One thing we’ve learned from the history of such regimes is that they can be stronger and more enduring than rational analysis would predict. The other thing is that they rarely pop up out of nowhere on their own. They usually have to be destroyed by others. There, fixed it for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 of course the Khmer Rouge was supported and propped up by the Red Chinese (which invaded Vietnam in response)...... Yes, I went to the Wiki page and was surprised to read that too. So China and Vietnam were effectively at war in the late 70s ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 It's terrible that such a brutal religious extremist organization was one of the consequences of the Iraq war. The responsible countries (USA, UK mainly) should be doing everything they can to clean up this mess. They should be sending in ground troops in an effort to destroy this group. This would be taking responsibility for the consequences of their actions. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/06/16/iraqs-crisis-dont-forget-the-2003-u-s-invasion/ http://www.vox.com/2014/8/25/6065529/isis-rise http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/iraq-war-created-isis-concedes-david-miliband-1460557 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Yes, I went to the Wiki page and was surprised to read that too. So China and Vietnam were effectively at war in the late 70s ... They certainly were and was a demonstration of the split between the Soviets and Chinese Communists a decade prior, likewise the Chinese thawing of relations with the West……..At the time, and is often forgotten, the possibility that the presumptive third World War would have been fought between the Russians and Chinese……. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Who side would we have jumped on? What am I thinking...both of course...duh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 What happened to the world famous Canadian peacekeepers (Operation Gallant) ? They were in 'Nam after the war, but didn't stay long ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter F Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 It's terrible that such a brutal religious extremist organization was one of the consequences of the Iraq war. The responsible countries (USA, UK mainly) should be doing everything they can to clean up this mess. They should be sending in ground troops in an effort to destroy this group. This would be taking responsibility for the consequences of their actions. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/06/16/iraqs-crisis-dont-forget-the-2003-u-s-invasion/ http://www.vox.com/2014/8/25/6065529/isis-rise http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/iraq-war-created-isis-concedes-david-miliband-1460557 But there's the goon that the rise of extremists is a consequence of the Iraq war what would be the consequence of the same thing repeated again? I suggest the result would be more extremism from the very same populations. Why should the west go in and clean up the mess? If the original mistake was going in to fix things resulted in this how would going in to fix this actually fix anything? It won't. Besides, is it the wests morale duty to wipe their asses for them too? Perhaps we should let the local powers deal with the extemists in their area while we deal with the extremists in our areas of responsibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/isis-murdered-kenji-goto Arent you supposed to post something about your link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 It's terrible that such a brutal religious extremist organization was one of the consequences of the Iraq war. The responsible countries (USA, UK mainly) should be doing everything they can to clean up this mess. They should be sending in ground troops in an effort to destroy this group. This would be taking responsibility for the consequences of their actions. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/06/16/iraqs-crisis-dont-forget-the-2003-u-s-invasion/ http://www.vox.com/2014/8/25/6065529/isis-rise http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/iraq-war-created-isis-concedes-david-miliband-1460557 But their attempts to clean up the mess will make more, even bigger messes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Arent you supposed to post something about your link? Yes, my mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-TSS- Posted February 8, 2015 Report Share Posted February 8, 2015 A strange co-incidence that this ISIS of which no-one had heard of before crops up right after the British parliament refuses to give green light to interference in the Syrian civil-war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.