what?
I think what he’s trying to ask is do you actually have anything substantial to add to this discussion? I mean, drive by posts saying basically ‘bombing is bad’ doesn’t really address, well, anything. So, what’s your alternative? Do nothing? Do less than what we are doing now?
Perhaps you could go for 2 paragraphs with your next post and detail your vast understanding of the complex situation, ramifications of that situation and alternatives of what could be done to make the situation better that draws upon your non-network news perspective and insights and aren’t limited to trite drive by slams and cryptic CT leaning MSM is the evil? Just a thought.
He asking if you have a suggestion for what the U.S. ought to do that doesn’t consist of drive-by posts.
Personally, I bet that quite a few critics of the current policy will cluck in disgust how the U.S. didn’t do enough to stop wanton violence in Sudan and Rwanda, and would be perfectly happy to complain again how the US doesn’t value poor people’s lives enough were the U.S. to do nothing about the slaughter in Syria and Iraq.
Marshmallow - Here’s what puzzles me about your view that the U.S. is doing too much. On one hand there are several dozen Americans flying at 25,000 feet over Iraq and Syria, without a huge amount of risk to them personally. On the other hand, there is untold thousands of civilians who have been executed for no reason, with who knows how many other men killed in battle trying to repel this disgusting terrorist group. And you think that the U.S. is doing too much?
ISIS is an outlaw state that practices slavery and forced marriage (including child marriage), has conducted summary executions of foreigners and religious/ethnic minorities, and has stated their goal as world conquest and the forcible conversion or execution of all mankind.
What should the US do about that?
“We should stop policing the world” is one of those nice-sounding truisms that plays well to the voters but sometimes the world offers stark choices.
Stark choices, like, military intervention or watch 100,000 people die from genocide.
In that sort of situation, suddenly that comfortable, trite-sounding truism isn’t so easy or breezy anymore.
Oh my, I fear you’re committing genocide on my integrity.
There are two keys to ISIS; one is reveunes from the oil fields it captured: what does the international community usually do about that, and a giant elephant: Saudi Arabia. The USA’s great partner.
Tell me, how much does the nightly news focus on the financial, religious, recruiting, military backers of the genocidal ISIS? CNN, all over the Wahabbi headbangers, right? NBC investigating the money trail?
The US - politicians, networks and people - is almost as disabled by Wahabbis as it is by Israel.
And almost nobody in the country has a fucking clue so, you know what, lets just bomb people to shit cos at least we’re validating all that expenditure on military bullshit.
Alright, so what’s your plan?
Your commentary is no more helpful than that article linked to in the previous page, which suggested that the U.S. should “fix the U.N.” instead of intervening. The explanation of what it means to fix the UN, or what a fixed UN would do, is as lacking as your empty exhortations to pay more attention to finances.
So what? What does anything that you have posted mean in a practical sense?
Then ignore it. Let the nightly news do the work for you and bask in the reflected glory of the worlds policeman in bombing action.
Do you have any suggestions at all as to what should be done about ISIS?
Complaining about the nightly news won’t stop the genocide.
This is getting to be very Nixonian: BOOM! has a secret plan not to get involved in a war, but won’t tell anyone what it is, because we’re too brainwashed by propaganda to understand the perfection of his plan.
The idea is you - yes you, Ravenman - have a view, maybe even one beyond the parameters of the tv narrative.
Have a think about how you cut off organisations like ISIS, what has demonstrably worked before and what has backfired.
Maybe even wonder what’s being excluded from that simple cowboys and injuns narrative you hear about before switching off and going to bed.
Alright.
How do you cut off organizations like ISIS?
The problem here isn’t TV news - I don’t watch any - it’s a simple problem of someone claiming to know better than anyone else, but when it comes time to explain something, we get a song and dance that’s worthy of a tarot card reader or newspaper astrology column. Vague platitudes made up to sound profound.
Shut down over half of the existing bases, cut the military budget in two (I think that STILL leaves it higher than any other country) Reform our prisons. Reform the war on drugs laws.
And this will stop ISIS how?
So, you gots nuffin but some cryptic BS about the nightly news. Ok, got it. Thanks for playing…for your parting gifts you get the SDM board game, this copy of How to BS and Handwave and Think You are Looking Good, and this fabulous ceramic dog!..
Yeah, I’m sure ISIS/ISIL will tuck tail if we do all of that!! Plus, we should obviously start a war on the Nightly News™ and perhaps rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, fire up the green economy and save the seals (not those Navy guys, these guys here…I mean, how cute are they??)! I’m not sure what other bullet points we could hit, but I believe I have nearly won talking points Buzz Word Bingo…
I believe you still have to make amends with those you have aggrieved, check your privilege, neutralize your carbon footprint, and make a donation to a charity that raises awareness of transgender issues in the Lesser Antilles.
Not to derail this, Smapti, but you’re one of the more confusing posters on the SDMB… One moment you seem more left-wing than the leftest of left-wingers; the next you seem more right-wing than the rightest of right-wingers.
Not criticizing; just saying.