Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes, we need one anyway.

17 (21.8%)

No, we should take that elsewhere and keep this thread as-is.

27 (34.6%)

I don't care, let's see what happens.

34 (43.6%)

Total Members Voted: 75

[Bohandas]

Instead of trying to outright control things there, we should support the things that would help make them better, and help them with things that they want help with.

...for example?

Are you proposing that we stop funding revolutions and terrorists and dictators and instead remove embargoes and give them food aid and internet access?

Whining and complaning about the past isn't going to change history or solve things.

Ok. That's a legitimate point.

So what do you propose?

Recognizing that our interference has historically been a tremendous contributor to problems over there, how do you propose to interfere without causing more problems?

Most of that interference has been either militarily, controlling the territory like a colony (France and England mostly), and political interference (see the Cold War, too many to name here, also maybe Lawrence of Arabia), right?

Instead of trying to outright control things there, we should support the things that would help make them better

Like ham.

[Bohandas]

Have there been any major moves by politicians to take away our civil liberties because of these attacks yet?

[Strife26]

Yeah, the Iraqi government did such an amazing job with American support.

UC- Unconventional warfare:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconventional_warfare_(United_States_Department_of_Defense_doctrine)
Sending SF units to give the Kurds support and training.

DA- Direct action:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_action_(military)
The other side of modern Special Operations. Sending SF units to kick down a door, shoot people in the face, and take anything that's of intel value. Becomes the unblinking eye when you immediately process that intelligence and go kick down the next door.

Assassination/ Drone strikes
Using a Reaper to shove a hellfire up Jihadi John's ass.

[smjjames]

Lordbucket, stop putting words in my mouth would you? I didn't actually say the first two quotes (though of course I find them reprehensible for rape and torture, wouldn't you?) and as for the questions, I don't freaking know, I'm not a statesman or a genie.

For one, I'd like to see your ideas, you keep asking how I would go about it, how about you give yourself a chance to explain how YOU would do it.

EDIT: Wait, now that I read it again, I see that the whole post was meant as a response to LW, I think. Edit2: Yeah, definetly a case of accidential misquoting.

[Loud Whispers]

Lordbucket, stop putting words in my mouth would you? I didn't actually say the first two quotes (though of course I find them reprehensible for rape and torture, wouldn't you?) and as for the questions, I don't freaking know, I'm not a statesman or a genie.
For one, I'd like to see your ideas, you keep asking how I would go about it, how about you give yourself a chance to explain how YOU would do it.

LB already said they want to do nothing for the next 70 years and pray Islamists don't punch them in the face

Assassination/ Drone strikes
Using a Reaper to shove a hellfire up Jihadi John's ass.

So glad they got that fucking prick. Worst maggot to come out of the rotting Elms.

Not to mention having most of them getting killed or captured.

At least the Kurds don't have that many defections.

[k33n]

Now I'm happy for the first time that I live in shit country where no economic immigrants want to go.

I'm very skeptical about the Paris attacks affecting the prevalent mood about immigrants. At most it will make the politicians tattle about how we need to be more tolerant and accepting and nothing will change. The cat is already out of the bag, the Islam is already here to stay, this kind of thing will be happening more often and this is the destiny that your politicians have chosen for you with their uncontrolled immigration.

There is nothing you can do in western Europe to stop the march of Islam, but to be more and more tolerant and hope that you will be unnoticed. If you are white or christian, you will be slowly assimilated and bred out of your country. This is natural progress, the conqueror destroys the conquered.

The issue is not Islam, it is Islamism - the fusion of the concept of the ummah and a fascist super-state. It is still an Islamic religious organization, and there are are hundreds of millions of Islamists globally, but they do not represent all Muslims. In fact non-Islamist Muslims are usually the first on the chopping block when Islamists begin Jihad. This makes them an ally in the ideological war against Islamists and an invaluable asset to destroying utterly the Islamist world view.

It may seem stupid, but this is an ideological war and nuance of language and propaganda-like speaking are the weapons. Calling it the 'March of Islam' is not as powerful a tool in destroying Islamism as saying the "March of Islamism". Be a productive member of the struggle and finesse your language.

[LordBucket]

Lordbucket, stop putting words in my mouth would you? I didn't actually say the first two quotes (though of course I find them reprehensible for rape and torture, wouldn't you?) and as for the questions, I don't freaking know, I'm not a statesman or a genie.

For one, I'd like to see your ideas, you keep asking how I would go about it, how about you give yourself a chance to explain how YOU would do it.

EDIT: Wait, now that I read it again, I see that the whole post was meant as a response to LW, I think. Edit2: Yeah, definetly a case of accidential misquoting.

Sorry. Quote error on my part during the copy and paste process. Should be fixed now.

[scrdest]

..well, when that action involves things like rape and torture and

How would you justify your own position without listing things they've done to deserve what you want to do to them?

From where I sit, you sound like a person complaining that it's unfair for someone to point out that you punched them first when justifying why you want to punch them again. Even the CIA has acknowledged that a great deal of terrorism is retaliatory in nature.

Dude, do you actually read your own sources?

Re: rape & torture: while the latter is surprising to a numerous population of people who hibernated in 2004 only to awake recently, it's hardly to most of everyone. Yeah, they tortured people, and that's plusungood. But your source does not corroborate your claim that they raped anyone (unless you count weird unnecessary enemas and exams, which is technically correct but weasely as hell). They threatened to, yeah. Not the same thing.

Re: blowback - not according to that wikipedia page. I'm not denying that it might, but right now, you're making stuff up as far as sourcing is considered.

[Loud Whispers]

Dude, do you actually read your own sources?
Re: rape & torture: while the latter is surprising to a numerous population of people who hibernated in 2004 only to awake recently, it's hardly to most of everyone. Yeah, they tortured people, and that's plusungood. But your source does not corroborate your claim that they raped anyone (unless you count weird unnecessary enemas and exams, which is technically correct but weasely as hell). They threatened to, yeah. Not the same thing.
Re: blowback - not according to that wikipedia page. I'm not denying that it might, but right now, you're making stuff up as far as sourcing is considered.

Don't break the narrative, Islamists are innocent stalwart individuals following the Geneva convention to remove American shitlords from the premises. All dismemberments along the way were actually done by Americans.
Don't even get me started on the dancing boys of Afghanistan.

[smjjames]

.

[Loud Whispers]

skibbilydibily

[smjjames]

Okay then, just thought I'd let you know of that absurdity, but yeah, what was I thinking bringing the link over here.....

[Sergarr]

Ok. So, same question I asked smjjames: what do you propose? Stirring up the hornets has not ended well for us previously. And it hasn't ended well for the civilians over there either. If military action is what you want, in order to put an end to what you perceive as a threat...how do you propose to go about that? I already asked this same question several thread pages ago.

How do you do it?

How do you send troops in and selectively identify the people you want to kill, and kill only the people you want to kill? How do you send troops in and kill people without turning their friends and neighbors into jihadists in the process? How do you take military control of a host population without breeding widespread resentment?

How do you accomplish your specific goal without creating more problems in the process?

Pick an existing force in the region that does not support the undesirables and has a durable platform, make a deal with it that it clears up all undesirable people in exchange for you supporting it with money/advisors/intelligence/weapons/airstrikes/drone strikes. Any resentment generated is tanked by the proxy force, any collaterals, too.

Giving them internet access might be the best thing we could do. Let them see how the rest of the world lives, and the next generation will probably want to give up the old way of doing things.

Do you know that most of the terrorists in that recent Paris attack were native Europeans? You know, the ones that most likely had access to Internet? You know that Daesh is extremely active on the Internet and, in fact, managed to pick up some few thousands of fighters and innumerable numbers of gullible idiots through it?

Well clearly you don't, but these were rhetorical questions.

[Strife26]

Yes. Supporting proxies in the middle east has such a proven track record of not blowing up in everyone's faces.

[Loud Whispers]

Yes. Supporting proxies in the middle east has such a proven track record of not blowing up in everyone's faces.

Proxy forces, proxy states have worked well (by ME standards) until you topple them