The Briefing Room
General Category => National/Breaking News => Topic started by: mystery-ak on August 23, 2014, 08:07:35 pm
-
http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/kerry-isis-is-an-ugly-insult-to-the-peaceful-religion-of-islam (http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/kerry-isis-is-an-ugly-insult-to-the-peaceful-religion-of-islam)
(ZIP) -- The “religion of peace” myth continues.
John Kerry statement on death of James Foley:
James Foley went to the darkest of places to shine the light of truth. Nothing could stop him from sharing with the world the reality of what was happening on the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the struggle against a brutal dictator in Libya, and he was just as determined to do the same from Syria. He was brave and bold, and no masked coward can ever steal the legacy of this courageous American who lived out the meaning of the word journalism.
I was a Senator when James was first held in Libya, and we were first introduced to the Foley family. His family was as determined in working towards his release as James had been daring in covering those war zones himself. The sheer unfairness and unlikely odds that this young journalist would again find himself in captivity in another conflict was almost unimaginable. It is impossible to express how much we all wanted this latest horror to end with his family reunited, as it had been the first time.
Teresa and I, along with members of my family who got to know James’ mother Diane and his brother, are heartbroken for all of the Foleys. There are no words of condolence that can adequately convey our sorrow, our sympathy, or our anger for what has happened.
There is evil in this world, and we all have come face to face with it once again. Ugly, savage, inexplicable, nihilistic, and valueless evil. ISIL is the face of that evil, a threat to people who want to live in peace,and an ugly insult to the peaceful religion they violate every day with their barbarity.
-
Peaceful, my Aunt Fanny. :nometalk:
-
Ultimately, no "war on terror" is going to be successful until we fight the ideology. It's like trying to fight communists without noting their belief in collectivism and the absence of property rights. What is it specifically that our enemy stands for that we are against? Is the reason we can't mention these differences because many of our "allies" stand for the same things?
I use the term "allies" loosely because much of the funding for ISIS is coming from Arab countries allied with the USA.
-
John F. Kerry is an affront to every human being with a functioning brain!
-
I am not so sure. Saudi, Jordan, Egypt, and others are scared to death of ISIS. And Iran/Syria is actively at war with them.
Their primary supporter seems to be Turkey, which is indeed and ally of the U.S. Not sure where the U.A.E. is on this, but to be sure, ISIS has few actual supporters as far as I know.
My understanding is that this ISIS group is so crazy, so far out there, they are just as likely to attack and kill someone who supports them, as they would anyone else.
Most Muslim nations know this and consider them to be a threat in my understanding of the situation.
-
I am not so sure. Saudi, Jordan, Egypt, and others are scared to death of ISIS. And Iran/Syria is actively at war with them.
Their primary supporter seems to be Turkey, which is indeed and ally of the U.S. Not sure where the U.A.E. is on this, but to be sure, ISIS has few actual supporters as far as I know.
My understanding is that this ISIS group is so crazy, so far out there, they are just as likely to attack and kill someone who supports them, as they would anyone else.
Most Muslim nations know this and consider them to be a threat in my understanding of the situation.
Don't kid yourself. They are exceptionally well-funded. They may be making people like the Saudis nervous, but they are the fiercest and most effective anti-Shiite fighters in the Sunni tribe. That counts for a lot in war. And, make no mistake, all of the countries in the region consider themselves at war. Unlike us, they know who their enemies are.
-
I've read only bits and pieces of the Koran. Something must be wrong since nothing I've read has anything to do with a "peaceful religion." Has he forgotten what he learned, if he learned, being raised as a Catholic?
-
ISIS is al-Qaeda 3.0.
-
Like any infection, ignoring it and allowing it to fester and grow is the wrong answer.
Even two months ago, we could have blown away 70% of ISIS with a strong campaign. Now, because Obama is allowing them to refine their warfare, and is giving them classified American intelligence, they are a much more formitable force today than they were.
We could still take them now, with a real leader (i don't know with Obama in charge) but it would require a 'real' war with carpet bombings and all they rest. You cannot play patty-cake with ISIS and still expect to defeat them.
You either play to win, or you lose. Those are the only two possible outcomes.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPjVCwec6oQ&list
-
Like any infection, ignoring it and allowing it to fester and grow is the wrong answer.
Even two months ago, we could have blown away 70% of ISIS with a strong campaign. Now, because Obama is allowing them to refine their warfare, and is giving them classified American intelligence, they are a much more formitable force today than they were.
We could still take them now, with a real leader (i don't know with Obama in charge) but it would require a 'real' war with carpet bombings and all they rest. You cannot play patty-cake with ISIS and still expect to defeat them.
You either play to win, or you lose. Those are the only two possible outcomes.
In all likelihood our own CIA, along with most of the Arab world, funded them into existence because we wanted to fight Assad and Iran. Assad and Iran are still major threats to western civilization. Why not contain ISIS where we have an interest and let them continue to fight Assad and the Shiites in those places where we do not? Isn't this more in our interest than just "cutting out the cancer" and enabling Iran to go nuclear and Assad to be its client state?
Or is it better to ally ourselves with the Iranian caliphate, let it grow into a world power, and trust that the nukes will never be turned on us?
Obviously, there is a lot not to like about ISIS. But they are the fiercest, most effective fighters the Sunnis have against the Shiites. I don't see where it is in our interest to help one side by defeating the other.
-
There is little question of that. Your comments have given me something to think about. For that I thank you.
I am unprepared to answer you directly. I will think about what you have said.
-
Obviously, there is a lot not to like about ISIS. But they are the fiercest, most effective fighters the Sunnis have against the Shiites. I don't see where it is in our interest to help one side by defeating the other.
Ever heard of the Kilkenny cats? Round them up, stuff them all in a barrel and eventually you are left with one massive cat, battle scarred and experienced at killing. It would have been better to hit them two years ago, before they gained a lot of experience. While they were kittens, if you like.
I'll be very interested in 240's take when he has thought about it. He knows a lot of the players and is smart as hell, so bookmarked.
-
In all likelihood our own CIA, along with most of the Arab world, funded them into existence because we wanted to fight Assad and Iran. Assad and Iran are still major threats to western civilization. Why not contain ISIS where we have an interest and let them continue to fight Assad and the Shiites in those places where we do not? Isn't this more in our interest than just "cutting out the cancer" and enabling Iran to go nuclear and Assad to be its client state?
Or is it better to ally ourselves with the Iranian caliphate, let it grow into a world power, and trust that the nukes will never be turned on us?
Obviously, there is a lot not to like about ISIS. But they are the fiercest, most effective fighters the Sunnis have against the Shiites. I don't see where it is in our interest to help one side by defeating the other.
Obama started the fired in Libya. "Secret" bombings that were supposed to take a "couple of weeks" took months.
The American media ignored it. In the end, Gaddafi was sodomized, tortured and murdered in the streets.
Obama was instrumental in the removal of Mubarak in Egypt. And if the Egyptian military didn't intervene and removed Morsi...it would have been Libya redux.
Obama sold or gave away arms to rebels fighting Assad in Syria in order to once again, cause confusion and anarchy over there.
Obama purposely derailed the Iraqi strategy of leaving sufficient troops there in order to continue more fires and return the country back to tribal warfare.
Obama vs. Israel....enough said.
EVERYTHING Obama has done in the Middle East has the ultimate goal of creating a new Islamic State and to erase existing borders.
Now we're supposed to believe that Obama has 'found religion' and is ready to take on ISIS.
How stupid does he think we are? ISIS received arms from Benghazi.
And now we're supposed to believe that Obama is going to bomb ISIS troops in Syria, when in reality, he's going to bomb the crap out of Assad.
And yet we STILL hear talking heads on TV saying that Obama has a myopic view of the Middle East 'problem'.
It's ridiculous.