Jordan hangs 2 in response for pilot's burning

12467…20

Comments

  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    badbrains wrote: »
    Let Assad take care of them as drowned out and I have been saying

    True that would work. But who would do it if the prisoner was American?
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    Imagine if Assad rescued said American hostage. Then what would the west say?
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    Assad has proven to be good at slaughtering people but partnering with him should be unacceptable to any rational thinking person. While the invasion of Iraq is considered a mistake the 2006/7 surge was considered by those even against the Iraq war to be a success. The Americans over time corrected course and were able to partner with the local population to defeat the Zarqawi-led pre-cursor to ISIS while at the same time fighting off the shia extremists in the south. Since the Obama pullout a vacuum was left behind and the extremists flooded the zone as predicted. As many have said "The US got out of Iraq as hastily as they got into Iraq". Regardless the surge strategy was correct and should be duplicated. 300,000 coalition troops into Iraq tomorrow using the infrastructure that is already in place. Go block by block using the surge manual pushing out all the way into Syria if necessary. There will be casualties in both military and civilian lives but that is how you win wars. Airstrikes or the dropping of ISIS members from planes will have zero effect. If victory over ISIS is what people on here want then that is the path. There is no middle ground.
  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    badbrains wrote: »
    Imagine if Assad rescued said American hostage. Then what would the west say?

    Not sure what would happen with a rescue.
    I was asking who would carry out these acts that you and others want done to the ispiss if it was an American soldier that this happened to. And if this did happen to an American soldier instead, what do you think should/would happen.
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    Are you saying an Americans life is worth more then another humans life? I'm trying to figure out a response for you. See I, personally, don't hold any one human over another. Doesn't it say in the Declaration of Independence that "ALL MEN/WOMEN ARE CREATED EQUAL." Or is that like the constitution now, doesn't mean shit?
  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    edited February 2015
    badbrains wrote: »
    Are you saying an Americans life is worth more then another humans life? I'm trying to figure out a response for you. See I, personally, don't hold any one human over another. Doesn't it say in the Declaration of Independence that "ALL MEN/WOMEN ARE CREATED EQUAL." Or is that like the constitution now, doesn't mean shit?

    No all life is equal. Everyone is alive and we all deal with that.
    You don't have to figure out a response. I just wonder what would happen if it was an American soldier that this happened to. What do you think the response would be?

    My edit - I am not singling you out and just asking you. I am asking everyone who reads this thread.
    Post edited by PJfanwillneverleave1 on
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    PJFan...an american reporter Steven Sotoloff was beheaded in September. I can't be positive but I don't believe there was a thread.
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056
    edited February 2015
    BS44325 wrote: »
    Assad has proven to be good at slaughtering people but partnering with him should be unacceptable to any rational thinking person. While the invasion of Iraq is considered a mistake the 2006/7 surge was considered by those even against the Iraq war to be a success. The Americans over time corrected course and were able to partner with the local population to defeat the Zarqawi-led pre-cursor to ISIS while at the same time fighting off the shia extremists in the south. Since the Obama pullout a vacuum was left behind and the extremists flooded the zone as predicted. As many have said "The US got out of Iraq as hastily as they got into Iraq". Regardless the surge strategy was correct and should be duplicated. 300,000 coalition troops into Iraq tomorrow using the infrastructure that is already in place. Go block by block using the surge manual pushing out all the way into Syria if necessary. There will be casualties in both military and civilian lives but that is how you win wars. Airstrikes or the dropping of ISIS members from planes will have zero effect. If victory over ISIS is what people on here want then that is the path. There is no middle ground.
    YOu completely ignored my entire post, and another (IMO more) valid path. So I guess you aren't interested in any path except one that costs lives on both sides.
    What do you have to say about allegations of western involvement with ISIS? Addressing this is apparently not worth your time.
    The Saudis have proven good at slaughtering people and we're partnered with them....despite the fact they are also partnered with the IS. There are more examples of this hypocrisy if you'd like them. And no one suggested partnering with Assad anyway. Tell Turkey to close their border with Syria and see what happens. Maybe we'd see ISIS entering Syria thru the Golan, instead of just letting Bibi have photo ops with them as Israeli doctors treat their wounds. Or maybe Assad would just take care of business in his own country and ISIS would be left to fight over portions of Iraq.
    Your 'Obama pullout' comment tells me you are learning about this from right-wing mainstream sources only. The vacuum problem was known well BEFORE the initial invasion. Remember all the hoopla about exit strategies? the power vacuum was part of the plan.
    Post edited by Drowned Out on
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    edited February 2015
    I was told to hit the ignore button
    Post edited by BS44325 on
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    Oh ok, I get it now. Well, let me flip the question for you and state it like this. What was the American response when some of our own citizens were murdered in other countries? What did we do when Rachel corrie was murdered? Or how about this major one, the USS Liberty? PjFan, I'm not directing my response directly at you, was just trying to make a point. It's sad that a lot of people in the world have selective memory.
  • rr165892
    rr165892 Posts: 5,697
    edited February 2015
    After Bs post I could feel Drowned was ready to pounce.Well either him or Fuck.But I new the rebuttal was coming.
    BB,Drowned, So if Assad takes that path then who reigns him in after?
    Post edited by rr165892 on
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    Who, this Steven sotloff? Article I found online, don't know if it's 100% legit or not but interesting nonetheless.

    http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-09-08/murdered-journalist-steven-sotloff-was-jewish-and-israeli-and-heres-why-no-one
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    I think it was me who told u to hit the "ignore" button.
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056
    edited February 2015
    .
    rr165892 wrote: »
    After Bs post I could feel Drowned was ready to pounce.Well either him or Fuck.But I new the rebuttal was coming.
    BB,Drowned, So if Assad takes that path then who reigns him in after?
    Glad my convictions are predictable lol
    Reigns him in? You make it sound as if he has imperialist aspirations.
    If you're talking about brutality toward his own people....you better start a laundry list of countries to 'reign in'

    Post edited by Drowned Out on
  • rr165892
    rr165892 Posts: 5,697
    Drowned Out wrote: »
    BS44325 wrote: »
    So now that everyone seems to agree isis needs to be wiped out in any way shape or form can we put 100,000 - 300,000 coalition troops back into Iraq to support the small american and canadian contingent? We can start there and then work our way through Syria, Libya etc. as necessary. I have been arguing for this for a little while and I'm glad most of you no longer see the defeat of isis as a big lie on the path to western imperialism.
    Sorry to disappoint, but I'm still here, and this is not unanimous.

    I guess maybe Jordan shouldn't have been providing bases for US soldiers (mercenaries?) to train ISIS militants for the last few years? Or should we call it the FSA since they're fighting Assad? As bb has pointed out - Assad knows his army could destroy the IS if it's supply routes were cut off.
    The uprising there has gone on for years now - it is obvious to anyone with a brain that the IS have received a shitload of reinforcements and additional arms from outside the country. It's been claimed since the beginning that Jordan, Turkey, Qatar, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia are ALL involved in arming, training, and funding ISIS. Joe Biden openly stated this recently - specifically fingering Turkey.
    These countries are allies of the US. So....why do we not see some kind of trade leverage (or at least threats of trade leverage) used to tell them to stop funding/training the IS? What is the impetus behind mere words against these allies, and NO action? Could it be that the IS is in some way achieving goals that the US does not want publicized? Finding conclusive proof of this may not be possible, but former intelligence officers, journalists (both domestic and international), foreign politicians, even IS members themselves have gone on record saying they have knowledge of the US / NATO manipulating both sides of the IS conflict. "accidental" supply/arms drops to the IS in Iraq. "mistakenly" arming groups who almost immediately defected to the IS. Photographic proof of IS reinforcements crossing the Turkey/Syria border in 'aid' trucks. Some of this may be wild-eyed theory, but where there is smoke, there's fire.
    I have spoken about western / allied involvement with the IS on this board many times, with little feedback one way or the other...what do you say to these claims, BS? Talk to me about the contradiction of not allowing Assad a fair chance against them, when Syria is the country most able and likely to 'wipe them out', as everyone seems to think is the west's intent? Why is there no talk of 'the lesser of two evils' when it comes to Assad and the IS?

    What remains to be seen is what Jordan's role in all of this will be moving forward. Such a fucking mess trying to decipher who is allied with who here, as it seems to change depending on which country we are talking about fighting ISIS in. One thing I do know is that Jordan is a middle eastern US client state.. So ya....not going to back your suggestion of NATO troops on the ground when we can't even figure out who the fucking enemy is, and have done nothing to solve the problem economically nor diplomatically.

    This is why Jordan's involvement and anger is a possible turning point,IMO.You have a Muslim based country getting busy.I think this at least adds to the thought that the USA/West isn't just nation building or bombing for oil as many here think.
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    The timing of the video release is a bit strange. 1 month after he was murdered and while Abdullah was in the states.
  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    badbrains wrote: »
    What was the American response when some of our own citizens were murdered in other countries? What did we do when Rachel corrie was murdered? Or how about this major one, the USS Liberty? PjFan, I'm not directing my response directly at you, was just trying to make a point. It's sad that a lot of people in the world have selective memory.

    I don't know what the response of your country was in those examples to give an accurate reply. we have issues in our country to deal with that sometimes things happening elsewhere get overlooked.

    So I guess with all those examples you listed would the response to those be the same as what would happen if it was an American soldier that got immolated? If you don't think so then what do you think the response would be instead?

    As far as dropping people from the sky on these ispiss guys - Who would you want to do this for you? Military or some guys rounded up picked by you?
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056
    edited February 2015
    rr165892 wrote: »
    Drowned Out wrote: »
    BS44325 wrote: »
    So now that everyone seems to agree isis needs to be wiped out in any way shape or form can we put 100,000 - 300,000 coalition troops back into Iraq to support the small american and canadian contingent? We can start there and then work our way through Syria, Libya etc. as necessary. I have been arguing for this for a little while and I'm glad most of you no longer see the defeat of isis as a big lie on the path to western imperialism.
    Sorry to disappoint, but I'm still here, and this is not unanimous.

    I guess maybe Jordan shouldn't have been providing bases for US soldiers (mercenaries?) to train ISIS militants for the last few years? Or should we call it the FSA since they're fighting Assad? As bb has pointed out - Assad knows his army could destroy the IS if it's supply routes were cut off.
    The uprising there has gone on for years now - it is obvious to anyone with a brain that the IS have received a shitload of reinforcements and additional arms from outside the country. It's been claimed since the beginning that Jordan, Turkey, Qatar, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia are ALL involved in arming, training, and funding ISIS. Joe Biden openly stated this recently - specifically fingering Turkey.
    These countries are allies of the US. So....why do we not see some kind of trade leverage (or at least threats of trade leverage) used to tell them to stop funding/training the IS? What is the impetus behind mere words against these allies, and NO action? Could it be that the IS is in some way achieving goals that the US does not want publicized? Finding conclusive proof of this may not be possible, but former intelligence officers, journalists (both domestic and international), foreign politicians, even IS members themselves have gone on record saying they have knowledge of the US / NATO manipulating both sides of the IS conflict. "accidental" supply/arms drops to the IS in Iraq. "mistakenly" arming groups who almost immediately defected to the IS. Photographic proof of IS reinforcements crossing the Turkey/Syria border in 'aid' trucks. Some of this may be wild-eyed theory, but where there is smoke, there's fire.
    I have spoken about western / allied involvement with the IS on this board many times, with little feedback one way or the other...what do you say to these claims, BS? Talk to me about the contradiction of not allowing Assad a fair chance against them, when Syria is the country most able and likely to 'wipe them out', as everyone seems to think is the west's intent? Why is there no talk of 'the lesser of two evils' when it comes to Assad and the IS?

    What remains to be seen is what Jordan's role in all of this will be moving forward. Such a fucking mess trying to decipher who is allied with who here, as it seems to change depending on which country we are talking about fighting ISIS in. One thing I do know is that Jordan is a middle eastern US client state.. So ya....not going to back your suggestion of NATO troops on the ground when we can't even figure out who the fucking enemy is, and have done nothing to solve the problem economically nor diplomatically.

    This is why Jordan's involvement and anger is a possible turning point,IMO.You have a Muslim based country getting busy.I think this at least adds to the thought that the USA/West isn't just nation building or bombing for oil as many here think.

    oooorrrrrr maybe that perception is the whole point to them getting involved. I did mention that they're a US client state, right? I've seen a ton of 'muslim nations furious' headlines in western media today.....would western support for further troop build ups in the middle east not rise if it was believed (whether true or not) that middle eastern countries were looking for help? Has this not been part of the war drum rhythm from the start - Iraq asked for our help against the IS, so by god, we will do our part to help Iraq....it's the least we can do. Right? No question of ulterior motive - its a humanitarian war.

    All I know is that people are way too reactionary when it comes to supporting war. Every incident has a bunch of people calling for violent reprisal. We think we have all the facts a day later, and most of the people calling for war have never looked at a perspective outside their fav news channel.
    Post edited by Drowned Out on
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    It was you BB but I should probably apply it to Drowned as well. We're just not on the same page when it comes to his thoughts on "evils of western society". Of course the US has partnered with horrible regimes over the years and the fact that he thinks I would deny that is silly and completely misses the point. Regardless of our actions of the past there is no reason why we can't take positive action today. A 300,000 troop coalition of like minded nations is far superior to a genocidal Assad who not only wants to destroy Isis but also wants to slaughter the freedom sheep of his country. It is absolutely no contest.
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    This is a war whether we want it or not. We either win it or lose it. Everything else is just talk.

Categories