It does seem like a waste of bacon. But while desecrating enemy corpses is certainly emotionally satisfying, it would probably just reinforce their sense of martyrdom and probably encourage them to fight harder
Well put. The confict betwen ISIS and the West is going to happen. 100% certainly. We know this because they have openly stated their desire to start such a fight, and their behavior gives us no reason to think they’re going to suddenly say “Just kidding!” and go back to their old lives. At this point, the only sensible thing to do is to crush them now, before they get any stronger.
Wasn’t he still in Hawaii? Not that that changes anything… And I thought the suit was way cool.
No, we don’t need to fight them. Perhaps “the world” needs to do so, and I would be willing to participate as part of an international effort. But not alone. They are much more of a threat to regional players and even European countries (the UK and France, in particular) than they are to us.
And it’s one thing to fight them in Iraq where the government has invited us to do so, but another in Syria where the government has not. If we can get Russia to agree to a UNSC and to get Assad to agree, then we can talk. But not before then. But we also need to think about what happen afterwards. Do let the rest of the Syrian civil war play out, or do we depose Assad? And if we depose Assad, do we “nation build” like we did in Iraq?
This idea that all we need to do is go gun down the barbarians and then walk away is not only facile but also dangerous.
I put on my gym clothes before braving the metro yesterday. I saw some poor sod start to smolder on the way home, but that flash downpour around 7:30 (I was at work late) quenched him in time. Good thing, too. Seeing a man reduced to a pile of ash haunts you for a long time.
How does one “nip it in the bud so to speak with relatively little effort” without walking away? I think Bouncer may be under the mistaken impression that this is an issue isolated to Iraq. It’s not. ISIS is operating out of Syria and Iraq. Destroying ISIS in Iraq just means driving them back into Syria until they’re ready to enter Iraq again.
Oh, there’s a terrorism problem in the Middle East? No problem. Just go in and kill them all. Then we’re done. Easy-peasy. No chance that another terrorist group is just going to pop up and replace them, but if they do, then: lather, rinse, repeat, repeat, repeat…
These terrorist groups flourish in failed states, which is what Syria has become and Iraq is becoming. It’s happening in Libya now, too. Unless you can bring about real political change that fosters a civil society, you’re going to have to choose between Assad-like dictators or Failed States with Terrorist Groups.
So, who has the plan to bring about such political change? I’ve not got a clue how you do that in the Middle East.
And speaking of which, does anyone here seriously believe that Afghanistan isn’t going to slip back into civil war once we pull out? That is, unless they, too, go the route of the strong-man dictator with police state type tactics.
This would not be helpful in any way. We need to make clear that we are not at war with Islam, just those radicals that kill in its name. To do as you suggest would show such contempt for the religion that we would lose all credibility and support in the Muslim world. On top of that, we do not show lack of respect for human remains. Japanese soldiers who died in the Pearl Harbor attack were given dignified burials. Osama bin Laden was given a proper Muslim burial at sea. This would be beneath the dignity of the US and rather than discourage them from fighting, would be like pulling the nitro switch on a racecar.
To me, Assad seems like a progressive and secular leader. We have to understand that democracy does not work in certain countries. Assad is the best option for syria.
The west made a mistake of supporting FSA in Syria, so can be partly blamed for the civil war and the death of 150K+ people.
He may be secular, but I don’t know how he could be considered “progressive”, unless you’re grading on a curve. A very curved curve.
I don’t accept that the US is partly to blame for Assad killing any of his people. He chose to brutally quell legitimate dissent and got a civil war in exchange.
I wonder sometimes how much different the Middle East would be right now if Saddam was still in power. He was an ass but he didn’t seem to be afraid to flex nuts when wackos were harassing Iraq.
Being secular is itself a sign of progressiveness.
In interviews, he seems more polite, more sophisticated and makes more sense than most world leaders.
And the west gave legitimacy, moral support to the armed rebellion. Their allies (Saudies) provided money and arms.