ISIS: Do whatever you like to women and children, no matter age

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I disagree.

Post-WWI hardship left Germans disenfranchised with Europe and the western democracies. The hardship, to a large extent, can be attributed to the West and how they wanted "punish" Germany instead of rehabilitate like they did post WWII. Very similar to how the West is perceived in the middle east. Had the victorious powers in WWI chose to help Germany, some may argue WWII wouldn't have happened. The point here is that foreign influence directly led to Germany's circumstances. But Germany chose what path to take after that.

Germany rose up. Germany could have chose a peaceful path, but they chose war. That is on Germany. Not the powers who punished them after WWI, nor on the private enterprises that helped Germany pre WWII.

Similarly, the USA obviously had their nose in everyone's business in the middle east. It's what the USA does. But to attribute any of these crimes committed by ISIS to the USA or the West is folly. Yes, Western foreign policy may have contributed to a creation of extremist groups, or the climate of instability, but the USA did not create Isis directly, nor is it responsible for Isis' actions, just like no one other than Germany was responsible for Germany's actions in WWII.

How do you know for certain that's the point. How do you know for certain the US didn't create ISIS, that they aren't supplying arms and money right now? When the US was gearing up for Syria there was a lot of people inside Syria saying that it wreaked of US involvement, now obviously that's not proof of conspiracy but to say they definitely have no involvement seems premature.

10 years ago you would have called me crazy for saying the alphabet boys were smuggling heroin out of Afghanistan, now you'd have a hard time proving otherwise. With the US track record I don't trust them at all.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by AcGold

How do you know for certain that's the point. How do you know for certain the US didn't create ISIS, that they aren't supplying arms and money right now? When the US was gearing up for Syria there was a lot of people inside Syria saying that it wreaked of US involvement, now obviously that's not proof of conspiracy but to say they definitely have no involvement seems premature.

10 years ago you would have called me crazy for saying the alphabet boys were smuggling heroin out of Afghanistan, now you'd have a hard time proving otherwise. With the US track record I don't trust them at all.

Frankly, I guess I choose to believe the USA wouldn't create or support a group like Isis.

Despite their shortcomings, I think the FBI & CIA have one tiny shred of humanity in them.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Frankly, I guess I choose to believe the USA wouldn't create or support a group like Isis.

Despite their shortcomings, I think the FBI & CIA have one tiny shred of humanity in them.

Sure some of the CIA are decent humans. I've read and watched testimony from a lot of former employees that were outraged at what they took part in. The consensus is the higher ups are where the evil lies and the compartmentalization of agencies makes it possible to commit illegal behavior because most of the compartments are unaware of what they are taking part in.

The list of atrocities they've committed could fill several pages of this forum. Human experimentation, drug smuggling, arms trafficking, political manipulation in developing nations all over the world, wars started over nothing, mass killings. What reason is there to give them any benefit of the doubt? The leadership has proven themselves to be completely corrupt and I just can't ever give them credence after what they've done so far. Not that they are guilty until proven innocent but I sure as hell don't trust a single thing they say and the eagerness to absolve them seems foolhardy based on the past 67 years of corruption and lies.

[Locke]

This is one of those times where you just kind of think that Obama, on his very last day in office is going to think to himself:

"Drones go off the wire all the time. Sometimes all at the same time. In the same place. Its just happenstance that its where ISIS is. At that very specific time. These things happen all the time. Oh those wacky, random drone strikes..."

As he jauntily whistles a tune and signs the Presidential Order...

[troutman]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Does anyone really care what the UN says on any matter?

The UN family of agencies:

http://www.un.org/en/sections/about-...ers/index.html

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Locke

This is one of those times where you just kind of think that Obama, on his very last day in office is going to think to himself:

"Drones go off the wire all the time. Sometimes all at the same time. In the same place. Its just happenstance that its where ISIS is. At that very specific time. These things happen all the time. Oh those wacky, random drone strikes..."

As he jauntily whistles a tune and signs the Presidential Order...

This probably belongs in the politics thread, but I get annoyed when people call Harper a war monger or eager to go to war. I think Canada, as an advanced and wealthy nation should do what it can to stop Isis, which can (IMO) only be done by force.

A Croatian national was beheaded by Isis as well yesterday. It's frustrating to watch politicians squabble while the atrocities continue. I realize it's not an easy fight, since the enemy isn't exactly a nation-state, but SOMETHING must be done to help.

[AcGold]

I'd say divide and conquer would be a better way to stop ISIS. Infiltration and dissemination of anti ISIS propaganda would probably dissolve the ties of leadership a whole lot better than force seeing as perceived resistance will likely harden their resolve and increase the numbers.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

This probably belongs in the politics thread, but I get annoyed when people call Harper a war monger or eager to go to war. I think Canada, as an advanced and wealthy nation should do what it can to stop Isis, which can (IMO) only be done by force.

A Croatian national was beheaded by Isis as well yesterday. It's frustrating to watch politicians squabble while the atrocities continue. I realize it's not an easy fight, since the enemy isn't exactly a nation-state, but SOMETHING must be done to help.

Yes and no.

I inherently disagree with the concept of developed nations being the world's police because I dont think an external force can realistically impose and keep order.

For a number of reasons, but effectively because that order would be enforced by an effectively uninterested/non-invested party and that order would be imposed to the standards of that party (USA/CDN/whoever) which may not be of the same priorities of the people they're trying to help.

External influences are not always wise, their motives, despite likely having the best intentions may not coincide with the motives and values of the local populace and even if they do its not likely that externally enforced peace or values can be viably enforced over the long term.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by troutman

The UN family of agencies:

http://www.un.org/en/sections/about-...ers/index.html

I can concede they do some good work.

However, my first hand experience with the UN is that they are useless when involved in a fluid, multi-party conflict. They lack the ability to make quick decisions.

That lack to ability makes them, in my opinion, useless.

Look no further than the stupidity in the former Yugoslavia as an example.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Locke

Yes and no.

I inherently disagree with the concept of developed nations being the world's police because I dont think an external force can realistically impose and keep order.

For a number of reasons, but effectively because that order would be enforced by an effectively uninterested/non-invested party and that order would be imposed to the standards of that party (USA/CDN/whoever) which may not be of the same priorities of the people they're trying to help.

External influences are not always wise, their motives, despite likely having the best intentions may not coincide with the motives and values of the local populace and even if they do its not likely that externally enforced peace or values can be viably enforced over the long term.

True, it's an icky situation. You can't just roll in with airstrikes, then the artillery, then the infantry like the good ol days.

It's a tough, tough situation. But I just feel something needs to be done urgently. I admittedly don't know what though.

Maybe these Islamists just need Jesus.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

True, it's an icky situation. You can't just roll in with airstrikes, then the artillery, then the infantry like the good ol days.

It's a tough, tough situation. But I just feel something needs to be done urgently. I admittedly don't know what though.

Maybe these Islamists just need Jesus.

Black ops

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Black ops

You say that like that isn't already happening.


I would strongly suggest it is, to some degree.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Black ops

Get 17 year old professional gamers to control IronMan-like robotic soldiers remotely. Get in, get out, pack your bags fellas, war's over.

[AcGold]

Good plan until the robots start teabagging innocent civilians.

[peter12]

Man, the CIA should start reading this thread. You guys are too good.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Does anyone really care what the UN says on any matter?

I Think the UN wields a great deal of influence, especially at the technocratic level (as I presume troutman was suggesting with his post linking to a list of UN agencies.)

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by peter12

Man, the CIA should start reading this thread. You guys are too good.

Why is that? Do you have any disagreements? They've been caught breaking the law hundreds of times, is that on us or...

[Coach]

I like Joe Rogan's theory:

Carpet bomb them with weed smoke. After a few days they would all come out dazed. "Bro, why are we fighting?" Suicide bombers would cease to exist. "You want me to do what? Yeah I'm not doing that."

In all seriousness, reading through that article was pretty tough. The casual way they treat these atrocities against women, and the justification for it, really makes my blood boil. "This brings me closer to God." "Having sex with her pleases God." What in the f***?

[polak]

Weed wouldn't do that, but shrooms? Shrooms would 100% do that.

[CroFlames]

Often lost in the debate about how much of a threat ISIS is to the West, and the human suffering they inflict, is the destruction of non-muslim heritage and cultural sites in territory controlled by ISIS.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/isis-use...tery-1.2527268

The Islamic State group on Friday demolished a monastery founded more than 1,500 years ago in central Syria, near a town where the extremists abducted dozens of Christians earlier this month, activists and a Christian priest said.

Ancient artifacts, gone forever. Saddening, maddening.