That’s CNN for ya.
???
CNN did not post anything outlandish. ISIS is talking about attacking Italy. Several prominent Italian leaders have expressed concern that ISIS could/would launch attacks against Italy as propaganda moves. (They would not have to actually take ground, just demonstrate to their potential recruits that they are willing to “attack” “Christian” Europe.). The military analyst concurred that there was danger of an attack. No one claimed that there was a danger that ISIS would be successful in conquering Italy. Italy seems to be taking the threat seriously: http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/03/01/italian-coastguard-arms-itself-to-defend-against-isis/
Pffft. Italy will be fine.
I do want to retract my indifference towards the snuffing of the lives of innocents, an aping of the Daesh position that I just can’t countenance. I don’t think “According to us, they worship Satan” amounts to an adequate death sentence. I think that thinking can only occur in looneyland, and if you disagree, you better mount a solid defense real quick.
Well, “threatens” can mean both “issues a threat against,” and “seems poised to overrun,” right?
With the headline “ISIS gaining ground in Libya, threatens nearby Italy,” CNN seems to be flirting with the latter meaning - which I think is outlandish, misleading, and blatantly click-baitish.
[QUOTE=Steken]
With the headline “ISIS gaining ground in Libya, threatens nearby Italy,” CNN seems to be flirting with the latter meaning - which I think is outlandish, misleading, and blatantly click-baitish.
[/QUOTE]
I think the main issue here is you are obviously operating under a different definition of what ‘threat’ means than, well, most other people.
[QUOTE=Try2B Comprehensive]
Pffft. Italy will be fine.
[/QUOTE]
Oh, well, I’m sure that they will weigh in your assurance that they will be fine with the threats being made by ISIS about attacks into Italy and assured that they will be fine then. I mean, I’m sure you are fully briefed on ISIS activities in Libya, on the threats being made against the Italians, on their current security posture and possible avenues of attack and their threat board, and you have been able to judge all of this to come to your conclusion, right?
I don’t think so.
Steken is absolutely right about there being two equally widely-used definitions of “threaten.” One means that a threat has been issued, whether credible or not. Another means “is close to happening.”
“Climate change threatens to put Alaska village under the sea,” for example, is using the second definition.
CNN juxtaposed a non-credible threat with actual conduct in Libya so as to suggest the second meaning of threat.
Why do you think it’s ‘non-credible’? Why are the Italians seemingly taking this ‘non-credible’ threat seriously, IYHO?
Well, so far ISIS has tossed a couple of smoke bombs and hacked a political party’s website. If they could do worse, wouldn’t they have started with worse?
I don’t think they are seemingly taking it seriously. I believe their first response was to mockingly advise ISIS that getting around in Rome is really difficult right now, with all the construction.
And the threat isn’t credible because Italy isn’t a failed state, like everywhere else that ISIS operates. What exactly is ISIS going to do? Build a navy? Go through Turkey?
Um…you don’t know that there is boat travel between Italy and Libya? There was a story not long ago about a bunch of migrant workers coming from Libya to Italy that capsized and there were a lot of deaths. I really think you should look into this more before just handwaving the threat away.
Getting back to the earlier point about the Iraqi’s ability to fight ISIS without US ground support, here is a video from CNN about them closing in on Tikrit. Warning, the video has some rather graphic scenes of death in it.
Their primary objective RIGHT NOW is in Libya for this faction, so no…I would expect them to focus on that goal before doing more. Assuming they (this faction of ISIS) manage to do in Libya what they did in Syria and parts of Iraq and consolidate what they gain, THEN they might become a threat to Italy. Again, ‘threat’ doesn’t mean they will be invading Italy and taking over their cities, it probably means sending over guys to assassinate comic writers and blow up malls and shit like that. I know, you guys think that’s no big deal, but if I were Italian I’d at least take the threat seriously enough to do more than wave my hands about it.
Iraqi forces have taken parts of Tikrit.
They’ve also taken al-Alam, a strategic town to the north of Tikrit.
That’s uncalled for.
BrainGlutton, thanks for the links.
I’m thinking they don’t “send” anyone anywhere. Seems like what they do is broadcast their jihadi call to prospective martyrs everywhere to take individual action on their own. Or, put another way, try to provoke nutcases to insane actions and they’ll take “credit” for the ones that are effective. It costs them nothing, requires no planning or logistics.
The only thing that can go wrong is if nothing much happens, and they don’t worry about that because Allah. But miracles are not a strategy, and enraging your enemies without weakening them is as dumb as bowling ball.
Got a nickel says first major failure, they turn on each other.
Kind of like gun control advocates saying that the NRA thinks mass shootings are no big deal.
I think the threat ISIS/ISIL poses is a teeny bit more real than that of another mass shooting. While mass shootings are certainly nothing to laugh about we are talking about a relatively small number in any given year (cold comfort, to be sure, to those who lose loved ones), while an ISIS/ISIL spreading into Libya is a more immediate and direct threat that was being totally handwaved away as if it was non-existent. So, I don’t see this as a one for one analogy, no. YMMV of course.
You’re asking if I’m aware of the technology known as boats? Really?
The disconnect here is this: you are thinking about ISIS as a trans-national terror organization like Al Qaeda. So for ISIS to “threaten” Italy (in the second sense of the word), all that is necessary is that they could kill some innocent people there. That’s undoubtedly true. In that sense, ISIS threatens every country.
But ISIS is much more than a trans-national terror unit. They are principally a proto-state, obsessed with territory. So the phrase “ISIS gaining ground in Libya, threatens nearby Italy” is phrased in a way to suggest that ISIS may “gain ground” in Italy in the way they have taken territory in Libya, Iraq, Syria, and other nations.
But there is no credible threat of them taking Italian territory. Among other reasons, trying to reach Italy by ragtag naval convoy large enough to take and hold territory would be very easy for Western powers to stop.
[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
You’re asking if I’m aware of the technology known as boats? Really?
[/QUOTE]
You seemed to be unaware that ISIS doesn’t have to build boats to get from Libya to Italy, yes. If you were aware of this then your response earlier that I was quoting is a bit strange.
But we aren’t talking about the second sense of the word, as in existential threat (presumably), but in ‘they are a threat to the people of Italy who might not enjoy car bombs or other playful bits of mayhem that ISIS is threatening them with’.
They have SPECIFICALLY threatened Italy, and because of events in Libya and the fact that there is a pipeline of travel available between Libya and Italy that you might or might not have known about (I concede you do know about those ‘boat’ thingies) it’s something to be taken seriously…which was all I was saying. Me saying that however brought out quite a bit of push back though.
To amplify on this, they have also threatened the US with similar things. They have tried a few things as well, but since it’s kind of a long way for them to get to the US it’s not that easy. However, if they were operating in, say, Mexico, and were gaining a credibly foothold in Mexico, well, then we’d need to say that the threat had increased. This doesn’t mean that we expect ISIS to invade the south west via Mexico and make all our base theirs, but that ISIS operating and having a foothold in Mexico increases the threat that they could operate in the US in the future.
And no one said that ISIS would be rolling through the streets of Rome…I certainly didn’t say nor imply that, nor was that the obvious threat the Italians were referring to in Toms cited link. That’s a strawman using sophistry wrt alternative definitions of ‘threaten’ or ‘threat’ to justify that push back, IMHO, because I think folks realized that, well, ok, maybe there IS a threat from ISIS gaining a foot hold in Libya to Italians when ISIS says they will do something and have the means to do so, and perhaps handwaving that away isn’t the smartest thing…but, you know, there isn’t an EXISTENTIAL threat to Italian territory from ISIS, so it’s all good.
Fucking ISIS just beheaded Filipino guards at the Lybian oil camp that my husband used to work. Fuckers!