Paris attacks

[dimreepr]

Somebody once posted a saying on another thread, said by a great thinker, that I don't remember the words of, but that had the idea that an intelligent mind, was one that could hold two conflicting ideas at the same time. I would extend that to also apply to an intelligent world.

 

 

 

Regards, TAR

As far as Daesh goes though, I don't pretend to be either their child or parent, I am just their enemy, pure and simple. They go, or I go.

I heard on the internet the other day that ISIS is telling their recruits to come to Libya, because getting to Syria is too difficult. Another place where the father of the house has been removed by the West.

And I reserve the right to feel the parent of the recruits and protect them from the abusive parent, AND arrest the wife beater.

 

 

Its called cognitive dissonance, for example, knowing why a terrorist commits such hateful acts and then doing exactly what they want us to, or wanting peace and bombing the crap out of them.

 

They are my enemies too but the only way to break the cycle is to forgive your enemies.

[Ten oz]

@ TAR, you seem to be trying to have it both ways. On one hand you are acknowledging that is many ways the west is the parent in this scenario. That the western world has excersized influence and control over the region for some amount of time now. On the other hand you saying it is their own fault they live like it is the 6th century and have themselves to blame.

 

Are we (The United States) interested in seeing the rest of the world catch up with us? As China has improved from 3rd world status the political rhetoric towards them has become more adversarial. Maintaining and or expanding market space is a simple neccessity in capitalism. We want to see others thrive provided there is something in it for us. That is natural. I am not calling the western world evil. We are akin the Coca-Cola ; we partner with others to expand our own bottom line. We have no honest desire to see Pepsi Co or any beverage competitor catch up with us. Until 9/11 the middle east to many in the western world was just a place where oil came from. It resources were a piece on a monopoly board we played. It gave us certain positions over Russia and China.

 

You say we should help Assad get his country back. Put boots on the ground and help exterminate ISIS. Explain to me why Assad needs our help? We have funded to rebels against him and at present Russia is onsite willing and able to help Assad. Wouldn't Assad get his country back without us if we just butted out at this point? Rather we are still in the middle of it more for political gamesmanship than to protect ourselves against terrorist. You keep posting about how they want us dead ("they go or I go") but at this point won't Russia and Assad just kill them if we stepped aside? We can't just step aside though can we. For the same reason Coke would need just step aside for Pepsi.

[tar]

Ten Oz,

 

I get your point, but we as Coke want to see our brand in the deli window. We already have contracted to supply the vendor who has their cart in the deli parking lot. We can't just allow the Pepsi truck to run over the vendors cart. We encouraged the street vendor to set up in the right of way.

 

There are other considerations here, other than fighting terrorism. And terrorism and rebel have some similar smell to them. Overtone wants to bring the leadership of the U.S. up on criminal charges for dropping bombs on people, for instance.

 

So yes, I am trying to have it both ways, but I am trying to do it with deliberation, and by gaining consensus as to how we should proceed.

 

My suggestion is to break our contract with the street vendor, and make an agreement with the deli owner to carry our product in exchange for our help in protecting him from Vito and the criminal mob shaking him down for protection money, scaring all the Coke drinkers away, and raping girls and beating up gays in the back parking lot.

 

Regards, TAR

We could then talk to the deli owner about his propensity toward killing the whistle blowers that are attempting to have him run an ethical business.

[Ten oz]

Ten Oz,

 

I get your point, but we as Coke want to see our brand in the deli window. We already have contracted to supply the vendor who has their cart in the deli parking lot. We can't just allow the Pepsi truck to run over the vendors cart. We encouraged the street vendor to set up in the right of way.

 

There are other considerations here, other than fighting terrorism. And terrorism and rebel have some similar smell to them. Overtone wants to bring the leadership of the U.S. up on criminal charges for dropping bombs on people, for instance.

 

So yes, I am trying to have it both ways, but I am trying to do it with deliberation, and by gaining consensus as to how we should proceed.

 

My suggestion is to break our contract with the street vendor, and make an agreement with the deli owner to carry our product in exchange for our help in protecting him from Vito and the criminal mob shaking him down for protection money, scaring all the Coke drinkers away, and raping girls and beating up gays in the back parking lot.

 

Regards, TAR

We could then talk to the deli owner about his propensity toward killing the whistle blowers that are attempting to have him run an ethical business.

Please address the last part of my post. Why does Assad need our troops on the ground in Syria?

[tar]

You know France is in a state of emergency. They are just as moral and Western and progressive and socialist as they were two months ago. But they have temporarily suspended a few rights, as we did in the U.S. after 9/11.

 

I would love to wait with my wife at the gate when she is flying to Atlanta. I can't now, because of Bin Laden.

 

It is impossible to stop other people from hurting other people. Plain impossible. Doing harm is so freekin easy. Helping people is hard.

 

Sometimes being right is not important, if being right makes you wrong.

 

Except, since 9/11 I have been cautious of the evil that exists in the world, that would take down the world trade center. WORLD TRADE center.

 

I need to stand against those folk. If they say I am the devil and they need to strive against me, the sides have been chosen already.

 

Whether I take interest is up for debate, whether I allow people to laugh at the prophet however, is not up for debate. I have already maid up my mind. But these things are debates on one level and are debates between good people. Daesh has been acting like criminals and insane killers. Such things are not up for debate.

 

So there might be an argument to pay the protection money so the store doesn't have a fire. But I think the argument is better for finding the mob boss and putting him behind bars. (or shoot him in the shootout) It has nothing to do with liking Italian food. Or with hating eating squid.

[Ten oz]

You know France is in a state of emergency. They are just as moral and Western and progressive and socialist as they were two months ago. But they have temporarily suspended a few rights, as we did in the U.S. after 9/11.I would love to wait with my wife at the gate when she is flying to Atlanta. I can't now, because of Bin Laden.It is impossible to stop other people from hurting other people. Plain impossible. Doing harm is so freekin easy. Helping people is hard.Sometimes being right is not important, if being right makes you wrong.Except, since 9/11 I have been cautious of the evil that exists in the world, that would take down the world trade center. WORLD TRADE center.I need to stand against those folk. If they say I am the devil and they need to strive against me, the sides have been chosen already.Whether I take interest is up for debate, whether I allow people to laugh at the prophet however, is not up for debate. I have already maid up my mind. But these things are debates on one level and are debates between good people. Daesh has been acting like criminals and insane killers. Such things are not up for debate.So there might be an argument to pay the protection money so the store doesn't have a fire. But I think the argument is better for finding the mob boss and putting him behind bars. (or shoot him in the shootout) It has nothing to do with liking Italian food. Or with hating eating squid.

From post #502:

"You say we should help Assad get his country back. Put boots on the ground and help exterminate ISIS. Explain to me why Assad needs our help? We have funded to rebels against him and at present Russia is onsite willing and able to help Assad. Wouldn't Assad get his country back without us if we just butted out at this point? Rather we are still in the middle of it more for political gamesmanship than to protect ourselves against terrorist. You keep posting about how they want us dead ("they go or I go") but at this point won't Russia and Assad just kill them if we stepped aside? We can't just step aside though can we. For the same reason Coke would need just step aside for Pepsi. "

[tar]

Assad has been trying to fight the rebels with limited success. Raqqa now belongs to ISIS and is their stated capital. Assad has the help of Hezbullah, and Iran and Russia and hence has soldiers and tanks and planes and bombs, and cannot get Raqqa back. We have, for the last however many years been in favor of a regime change in Syria. We have poured millions into the training and supplying of Syrian rebels, to dethrone Assad. Simply walking away and turning our back would be breaking faith with the people we have supported and they would be just as much terrorists and rebels to Assad as they were before we walked away. Reprisal killings would occur and our friends would die, along with Daesh. Plus Assad has not been able to get Raqqa back, with the current alignment of forces. This should not be a proxy war between Russia, the U.S. and Iran. The common power to rally around, against Daesh, is the Syrian people, and as is the reality of the situation, the Syrian President. To walk away would be to condemn our friends to death. Better to make Assad our friend, and be there in person to protect our rebel friends, and dispatch our rebel enemies as is appropriate. This would require boots on the ground. U.N. forces, doctors without borders, humanitarian groups and Arab policemen of all sorts, but Daesh is tough and smart, rich and strong, and will not go quietly. They are Saddam's guard that we never finished tracking down. We have the special forces, the capability and knowhow, the intelligence and the power, to go in, and get them out of Raqqa.

[Ophiolite]

Except, since 9/11 I have been cautious of the evil that exists in the world, that would take down the world trade center. WORLD TRADE center.

In the ten hours following the WTC attack the number of children dying globally from malnutrition or related illnesses at least equalled the number of persons who died in the attack. This has continued for every ten hour period since. Is that evil? Have you taken any precautions to address that issue? Or does your caution and concern about evil embrace only you and your fellow citizens? /Rhetorical Questions

[tar]

While having respect for Muslims and Arabs in general, by simultaneously suspending our support of the Arab Spring in that our support helped to cause 240,000 deaths, and helping to defend Syrians against the criminal organization Daesh, which only as an aside also has in the past and promises to, in the future, kill Western innocents.

[Ten oz]

Assad has been trying to fight the rebels with limited success. Raqqa now belongs to ISIS and is their stated capital. Assad has the help of Hezbullah, and Iran and Russia and hence has soldiers and tanks and planes and bombs, and cannot get Raqqa back. We have, for the last however many years been in favor of a regime change in Syria. We have poured millions into the training and supplying of Syrian rebels, to dethrone Assad. Simply walking away and turning our back would be breaking faith with the people we have supported and they would be just as much terrorists and rebels to Assad as they were before we walked away. Reprisal killings would occur and our friends would die, along with Daesh. Plus Assad has not been able to get Raqqa back, with the current alignment of forces. This should not be a proxy war between Russia, the U.S. and Iran. The common power to rally around, against Daesh, is the Syrian people, and as is the reality of the situation, the Syrian President. To walk away would be to condemn our friends to death. Better to make Assad our friend, and be there in person to protect our rebel friends, and dispatch our rebel enemies as is appropriate. This would require boots on the ground. U.N. forces, doctors without borders, humanitarian groups and Arab policemen of all sorts, but Daesh is tough and smart, rich and strong, and will not go quietly. They are Saddam's guard that we never finished tracking down. We have the special forces, the capability and knowhow, the intelligence and the power, to go in, and get them out of Raqqa.

Your words from post #495:

"We need to admit our mistake in backing the rebels against Assad, drop our desire to have everybody live by our rules, and let them come out of the 6th century at the speed that making such a transition might take (without revolution). I am thinking Assad is more likely to understand the situation in his country than I am. If Assad could promise to not kill in reprisal, I see no good reason, other than saving face, for not volunteering our support in taking Raqqa back from Daesh."

 

We have prevented Assad from being successful. It is silly to say Assad has been unable to take back Raqqa while admitting that we have being undermining his ability to do so. Further more just as was the case when we armed Al Quada and the Talibaban in the 80's is there a clear distinction between ALL the rebels we have support, ISIS, and potential future terrorist organizations? If all we need, as you have post, is a "promise to not kill in reprisal" from Assad why does that require boots on the ground? Why can't that he worked out diplomatically with a face to face between Assad, Rouhani, Obama, Putin, Hollande, Cameron, and Merkel?

[tar]

Ophilolite,

 

If I, or members of my family or close circle of friends have sponsored children, or established homes for crippled women in India, or done any good works, you cannot accuse me of not thinking about starving children. You know darn well that support for disaster victims flows generously from the U.S., both from the government, and the 1000 points of light. We illuminate the place. You can't blame me for the evil lurking in the corners.

 

Nor, in the theme of "who is whose parent" can you assume that my not eating my peas is causing a child to starve in Biafra.

 

Regards, TAR

Ten Oz,

 

Perhaps it could work out, without our boots on the ground. But look at what happened with Maliki after our police force left Iraq.

 

I am not thinking we should make a 180 degree turn here.

 

Regards, TAR

Edited December 15, 2015 by tar

[dimreepr]

But look at what happened with Maliki after our police force left Iraq.

 

 

Maybe, you should look at what happened when your police force 'entered' Iraq.

 

BTW I’m feeling decidedly left out of this conversation, any idea why?

[tar]

Ten Oz,

 

My president is still in favor of regime change in Syria. It is hard for me to know all the reasons for why he might be in favor of such. I am looking for a way to suspend such wishes, in the name of peace for the Syrian people, AND to simultaneously remove a worse threat to peace and human rights and women's rights than even Assad could present.

 

I wish I could remember the article that stated the U.S. long term plan against terrorism, suspended after Iraq and Afghanistan, that took us, into Syria and Libya, and some Arab Peninsula states, and some other African states, and elsewhere.

 

We simply do not want terrorists to have a state from which they can plan, finance and launch attacks against us.

 

We might have some difficulties, like with the Taliban, where we have to put some boots on the ground to keep the powers in a country, from protecting our enemies .

 

I am thinking that boots on the ground, in terms of special forces is already our president's plan against ISIL in Iraq. And we are probably helping the Kurds and the Turkmen as well. But we need authorization to go further. Authorization from Assad is the only way I see it working. Put our power behind Assad's forces, but in a way that the Turkmen and the Kurds would not suffer retribution.

 

We have to change our stance to accomplish this. As we would have to change our stance to sit down with Assad in the first place.

 

Question is, should we suspend our support for the Arab Spring, temporarily, to get hunting rights to trespass on Assad's property to kill the fox that just stole eggs from France's henhouse?

 

Regards, TAR

Maybe, you should look at what happened when your police force 'entered' Iraq.

 

BTW I’m feeling decidedly left out of this conversation, any idea why?

No, I don't know why.

 

If the U.S. is going after Assad for his connection to Saddam and his guard, in the first place, there is a chance he would be just as much pro guard as pro U.S.

 

Regards, TAR

so if we separate the guard from the caliph, the caliph would just be a hot air bag

Edited December 15, 2015 by tar

[dimreepr]

If the U.S. is going after Assad for his connection to Saddam and his guard, in the first place, there is a chance he would be just as much pro guard as pro U.S.

 

 

And there I was thinking your verbosity was confusing.

[tar]

Thread,

 

I suggested earlier something about offering ISIS fighter 100 dollar and a promise to take them back to their town of birth...or something like that, thinking they were poor disadvantaged pawns of the ISIS leadership. Well I think that is not going to work one single bit. The ISIS fighters are part of a racket, where they get a fifth of the value of a looted item they were responsible for, and then when the item is put on the market in a loot market, they can purchase it at half its value. Steal three, and you can buy one back for yourself, with money left over.

 

Legal looting.

 

I think perhaps I should not have referred to Daesh as vermin, as that makes one think they are somehow lower forms of life.

 

I think it perhaps better to think of these guys, the leadership, as having Unibomber type intelligence. And they have a scheme going, more workable to the fighter, that a pyramid scheme to a sales person. They have the guns and the go ahead to loot an area the size of England, and have a reliable fence to give them money for it in such a way as each fighter is in business for themselves and can become rich and powerful, by stealing for the association. I am sure some of the value of the food we airdrop in, winds up in a fighters pocket. No wonder they look so smug and victorious in the photos. No wonder they have such a powerful draw. We absolutely have to put these guys out of business, or they will take over the world.

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/inside-the-isis-loot-market-%e2%80%94-heres-how-much-fighters-can-sell-their-war-spoils-for/ar-BBnIY4S?ocid=spartandhp

 

Regards, TAR

[iNow]

So, basically you support the policy already being enacted by the Obama administration and our allies.

[tar]

to say nothing of the vehicles and ammunition and generators and other stuff we send into the area as humanitarian aid and assistance to anti ISIS fighters

Everything we send into the area for whatever purpose probably goes through the hands of ISIS and into ISIS controlled marketplaces which enriches the Association, and its members.

 

I think perhaps "to the victor, goes the spoils" is being utilized big time, in this abomination, that is Daesh.

iNow,

 

Why yes I do.

 

As I have always supported my commander and chief.

 

Why did you think otherwise?

 

Regards, TAR

 

But we are only going after the oil revenue. We need a way to disrupt the looting scheme on the ground. And that part of our strategy is not apparent. I am suggesting we think of a way to disrupt the scheme on the fighter enrichment level. This is going to take some good ideas. You have any?

Edited December 19, 2015 by tar

[iNow]

Beyond coalition coordinated targeted killings of the looters and leaders themselves and supporting locally led opposition to those doing it, I suggest it's both arrogant and naive to assert we can do more to stop the "looting scheme on the ground.

[Shelagh]

Wasn't President Obama awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for trying to bring peace to the Middle East? I vote we let him sort out the mess that is destroying Syria and displacing hundreds of thousands of refugees around the globe to countries that don't really want to take them, but feel obliged to do so.

[iNow]

Wasn't President Obama awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for trying to bring peace to the Middle East?

No, not exactly.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_Prize

The 2009 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to United States President Barack Obama for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people".

[Shelagh]

No, not exactly.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_PrizeThe 2009 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to United States President Barack Obama for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people".

Okay, I'll go along with that. Maybe President Obama should increase his efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between Middle Eastern countries. His present day efforts fall woefully short.

[iNow]

Okay, I'll go along with that. Maybe President Obama should increase his efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between Middle Eastern countries. His present day efforts fall woefully short.

Is it possible that you're unaware of the facts, or is it simply that they don't matter to you?

 

It's telling that you blame him despite building a huge coalition, even when it's the leaders of those coalition nations that have fallen woefully short in terms of stepping up to help.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/30/us/politics/a-coalition-in-which-some-do-more-than-others-to-fight-isis.html?_r=0

“We have mobilized 65 countries to go after ISIL,” Mr. Obama told reporters while on a trip to Turkey, using an acronym for the group. “The United States has built and led a broad coalition against ISIL of some 65 nations,” he said several days later.

 

“The United States, France and our coalition of some 65 nations have been united in one mission — to destroy these ISIL terrorists,” he added a few days after that.

[Shelagh]

I didn't blame the President; I said that he isn't doing enough. You might not agree with me, but what we think is of no consequence because we are powerless to bring about a peaceful solution. As for being unaware of the facts, maybe this BBC summing up of the complex situation is insuffucient information to really understand the problem:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-26116868

[iNow]

What specifically within that article do you find relevant to our exchange? We likely agree on many fronts so its important to me to be clear on specifically what position you're putting forth to ensure we remain focused on genuine fact-based points of disagreement and seek consensus from there.

 

On a related note, however, the UN Security Council just yesterday unanimously (and with direct leadership from and coordination by the US) adopted a resolution outlining a peace process in Syria.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35138011

UN Security Council Resolution on Syria (No. 2254)

 

• Calls for ceasefire and formal talks on a political transition to start in early January
• Groups seen as "terrorist", including Islamic State and al-Nusra Front, are excluded
• "Offensive and defensive actions" against such groups - a reference to air strikes by US-led coalition and Russia - to continue
• UN chief Ban Ki-moon to report by 18 January on how to monitor ceasefire
• "Credible, inclusive and non-sectarian governance" to be established within six months
• "Free and fair elections" under UN supervision to be held within 18 months
• Political transition should be Syrian-led

Edited December 20, 2015 by iNow

[Shelagh]

My view of the present situation is irrelevant, I am powerless to affect the plight of the Syrian people, who feel that western powers are not doing enough, including the peace talks:

 

As IS-induced pain affects more and more western countries, greater interest and more focus is turned to Syria.

 

Yet, unless this translates into concrete steps against the regime and with an aim of removing it from power completely - with Syrians themselves leading these steps - then no amount of airstrikes will help the Syrian people in their quest for peace and freedom. - See more at: http://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/comment/2015/12/18/selling-out-the-revolution-wont-bring-peace-to-syria#sthash.GSpDnXei.dpuf