PDA

View Full Version : Objective ISIS dismantlement



Rum_Pirate
09-05-2014, 07:30 PM
The plan is now to dismantle ISIS (excellent), without (great) boots on the ground.

I commend Mr Obama for taking this direction and hope that it actually can be achieved and sooner than later to stop the wanton bloodshed.

hanleyclifford
09-05-2014, 08:17 PM
Mr Obama said he intends to destroy ISIS, not just neutralize it. I like the talk....

ljb5
09-05-2014, 08:17 PM
I don't think there has ever been any doubt that the goal is to dismantle ISIS. The question are 'How?' and 'At what cost?'

And don't act like you have an easy answer to those questions, for there are none.

Gerarddm
09-05-2014, 08:17 PM
Unlike the warhawks, he is trying to do this not just militarily but economically as well.

changeng
09-05-2014, 08:21 PM
I wonder if some good may come of this evil.
ISIS has been soundly condemned by even the more fundamentalist Muslim countries.
Wouldn't it be good if this horror actually did some healing of relations between the west and Islam?
Suppose I'm just dreaming again. :)

S.V. Airlie
09-05-2014, 08:28 PM
If he can't follow the money trail words mean nothing.

McMike
09-05-2014, 08:37 PM
Mr Obama said he intends to destroy ISIS, not just neutralize it. I like the talk....

How many innocent people are you willing to kill to do it?

John Smith
09-05-2014, 08:42 PM
I've declined to make this comment before, but it is President Obama, not Mr. Obama. In spite of the many problems I had with G.W., I never called him Mr. Bush.

Lew Barrett
09-05-2014, 08:47 PM
I wonder if some good may come of this evil.
ISIS has been soundly condemned by even the more fundamentalist Muslim countries.
Wouldn't it be good if this horror actually did some healing of relations between the west and Islam?
Suppose I'm just dreaming again. :)

Wishful thinking, but it would be a most welcome benefit. It's hard to see any end to the Mahdi wars and really, they've just started again.

changeng
09-05-2014, 08:50 PM
I'll remain a hopeless optimist :) Where would we be without dreamers?
Stranger things have happened.

CWSmith
09-05-2014, 08:53 PM
I think he's right and some of the conservatives in the bilge seem to think he's right.

Will this translate into the vote next election? I don't think the Republican Party will continue this policy. I'd like to be wrong, but McCain's opinion is clear. I worry that approval does not translate into action by the voters where it is at least equally important.

John Smith
09-05-2014, 08:54 PM
Let us hope wise minds have come up with that much wanted strategy and it works.

Assuming Obama has put together a strong coalition, much as the first President Bush got high praise (from Republicans) for doing, will Obama get similar praise?

Rum_Pirate
09-05-2014, 09:15 PM
Let us hope wise minds have come up with that much wanted strategy and it works.

Assuming Obama has put together a strong coalition, much as the first President Bush got high praise (from Republicans) for doing, will Obama get similar praise?


I respectfully refer you back to post #8, namely


I've declined to make this comment before, but it is President Obama, not Mr. Obama. In spite of the many problems I had with G.W., I never called him Mr. Bush.

purri
09-05-2014, 09:24 PM
and that heads straight to the House of Saud.


If he can't follow the money trail words mean nothing.

hanleyclifford
09-05-2014, 09:27 PM
I respectfully refer you back to post #8, namely:D:D:D

LeeG
09-06-2014, 06:39 AM
Ready, fire, aim!

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/06/william-r-polk-on-grand-strategy-iraq-and-syria/373221/

Starting in the west and moving east: in Libya, having destroyed the Qaddafi regime, we unleashed forces that have virtually torn Libya apart and have spilled over into Central Africa, opening a new area of instability. In Egypt, the "non-coup-coup" of General Sisi has produced no ideas on what to do to help the Egyptian people except to execute large numbers of their religious leaders; he has also made clear his suspicion of and opposition to us. In occupied Palestine, the Israeli state is reducing the population to misery and driving it to rage while, in Washington, its extreme right-wing government is thumbing its nose at its benefactor, America. Our relations have never been worse. In Syria, we are engaged in arming, training and funding essentially the same people whom the new Egyptian regime is about to hang and whom we are considering bombing in Iraq. In Iraq, we are about to become engaged in supporting the regime we installed and which is the close ally of the Syrian and Iranian regimes that we have been trying for years to destroy; yet in Iran, we appear to be on the point of reversing our policy of destroying its government and seeking its help to defeat the insurgents in Iraq. And on and on.

skuthorp
09-06-2014, 06:52 AM
Several administrations worth of erratic short term foreign policy gymnastics seem to have come home to roost.
I remember all that triumphant stuff when the Taliban used US weaponry to eject the Soviets, Putin must be grinning about that now.

S.V. Airlie
09-06-2014, 07:04 AM
I wonder if Pres. Obama called al Qaeda? Apparently both have mutual interests.!:)

John Smith
09-06-2014, 07:11 AM
I respectfully refer you back to post #8, namely

It is, IMO, okay to refer to Bush or Obama or Clinton by last names only. the "Mr." is, I think an insult. If one is going to go there, "President" is proper. If you can find those who write "Mr. Obama" posting where they said "Mr. Bush" I will see that I'm wrong and apologize.

I just don't think you'll find any.

John Smith
09-06-2014, 07:13 AM
Can we rid the world of terrorists? Is it possible?

S.V. Airlie
09-06-2014, 07:14 AM
No!

John Smith
09-06-2014, 07:17 AM
That should figure into our strategy, no?

There are limits to what we can do.

S.V. Airlie
09-06-2014, 07:35 AM
With any strategy anyone comes up with, There always appears to be a "What if"!Turns into, no strategy implemented will work unless we stop looking at the "what ifs"!

Rum_Pirate
09-06-2014, 07:38 AM
It is, IMO, okay to refer to Bush or Obama or Clinton by last names only. the "Mr." is, I think an insult. If one is going to go there, "President" is proper. If you can find those who write "Mr. Obama" posting where they said "Mr. Bush" I will see that I'm wrong and apologize.

I just don't think you'll find any.


I consider that prefacing somebody's name with 'Mr' his a sign of respect. If it is not than there would be no point in the term 'Mr'.

Not using 'Mr' IMHO is a sign of disrespect. It sounds like what I would expect to hear on the street.

Do you introduce people as "I'd like to introduce to the CEO, Mr Smith" or "I'd like to introduce to the CEO, Smith"

If you go back through my posts I refer to the current POTUS as 'Mr Obama' or 'President Obama' I also endeavor to do the same for other (EX) Presidents.

LeeG
09-06-2014, 08:10 AM
More c&p

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/Opinion/Columnist/2014/Sep-06/269713-avoid-a-rerun-of-the-war-on-terror.ashx#axzz3CUSWBkn1

Military action certainly has some role in a wider political, economic and social assault on freak extremists and terrorists like Al-Qaeda and their derivatives such as ISIS. Yet if military strikes after three decades have only expanded the reach and territorial control of these movements, isn’t it about time that we all resort to rational analysis to address the root causes of this threat that haunts us, instead of falling back on the failed legacy of George W. Bush – vintage sophomoric emotional jingoism and flag-waving militarism that only demean the otherwise fine values of the American flag? When does logic play a role in this process? When does adult intellectual and analytical maturity trump the destructive consequences of the childlike impulsiveness of perplexed politicians who need to show their manhood on the global stage?

Keith Wilson
09-06-2014, 08:51 AM
ISIS has been soundly condemned by even the more fundamentalist Muslim countries.It's a hopeful development when the Saudis and the Iranians and the Turks and the Kurds and the Israelis and maybe even the Muslim Brotherhood can agree on something. The idea that there is some Islamic organization that's too extreme for just about everybody is useful; this has rarely been the case up until now. In the best case, those in power in the Middle East will realize that stirring up religiously-inspired hatreds can be a very dangerous strategy for themselves. Rational analysis of the root causes shows that the US can do much less than we might think to affect them.

To stop ISIS, I would be willing to go pretty far - although minimum violence is always a good policy. This is one of the rare cases where the nastiest historical comparisons have some validity. I am extremely glad that Mr. Obama has another two years in office, and that we have a president who thinks before acting, not a hothead who relies on his gut feelings.

Oh FWIW, I tend to refer to all public figures as Mr. and Ms. This is to give them the respect due all human beings, and to put them on an equal footing with everyone else. I do not have much respect for titles. Mr. Obama or Mr. Bush is fine. "Berry" or "The Chimp" is stupid and childish.

peb
09-06-2014, 09:20 AM
I don't think there has ever been any doubt that the goal is to dismantle ISIS. The question are 'How?' and 'At what cost?'

And don't act like you have an easy answer to those questions, for there are none.

There has been a great deal of doubt. The administration has not been clear, and the left on this very forum did not agree with me at all just one week ago when I said that ISIS had to be destroyed.

S.V. Airlie
09-06-2014, 09:28 AM
Can you id. the ISIS member! Didn't think so! That's one of the problems!

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=HN.607986521201577628&w=207&h=207&c=8&pid=3.1&qlt=90&rm=2PS, in this pic, I sincerely doubt there is one but....

John Smith
09-06-2014, 09:58 AM
I consider that prefacing somebody's name with 'Mr' his a sign of respect. If it is not than there would be no point in the term 'Mr'.

Not using 'Mr' IMHO is a sign of disrespect. It sounds like what I would expect to hear on the street.

Do you introduce people as "I'd like to introduce to the CEO, Mr Smith" or "I'd like to introduce to the CEO, Smith"

If you go back through my posts I refer to the current POTUS as 'Mr Obama' or 'President Obama' I also endeavor to do the same for other (EX) Presidents.
I don't believe you.

LeeG
09-06-2014, 09:59 AM
There has been a great deal of doubt. The administration has not been clear, and the left on this very forum did not agree with me at all just one week ago when I said that ISIS had to be destroyed.

The ideology and forces the led to IS will not be destroyed with US weaponry, pursuing that path through IS will keep us on the one that got us here.

ljb5
09-06-2014, 11:59 AM
There has been a great deal of doubt. The administration has not been clear, and the left on this very forum did not agree with me at all just one week ago when I said that ISIS had to be destroyed.

Perhaps I didn't see what you saw, or perhaps you're blurring the distinction between goals and strategies.

No one knows how to destroy ISIS and some people may interpret that uncertainty as lack of desire.

Depending on how much they hate the president, they might even try to spin that as support for ISIS.

Tom Montgomery
09-06-2014, 12:19 PM
I trust that the Obama administration and our allies will deal with Isis in a considered manner.

Canoeyawl
09-06-2014, 12:23 PM
With any strategy anyone comes up with, There always appears to be a "What if"!Turns into, no strategy implemented will work unless we stop looking at the "what ifs"!

Well let's see, What if invading Iraq is not a "Slam Dunk"?

Anyone that does not consider the "what if's" is a fool and destined to lose, usually at great expense.
A colloquialism is - "Stupid".

hanleyclifford
09-06-2014, 12:30 PM
I trust that the Obama administration and our allies will deal with Isis in a considered manner. A treasure to be preserved.

S.V. Airlie
09-06-2014, 01:11 PM
Well let's see, What if invading Iraq is not a "Slam Dunk"?

Anyone that does not consider the "what if's" is a fool and destined to lose, usually at great expense.
A colloquialism is - "Stupid".Yup And produces no strategy of any kind Someone will certainly someone will object to any one of the scenerios!

Rum_Pirate
09-06-2014, 01:26 PM
http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Rum_Piratehttp://forum.woodenboat.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?p=4281931#post4281931)I consider that prefacing somebody's name with 'Mr' his a sign of respect. If it is not than there would be no point in the term 'Mr'.

Not using 'Mr' IMHO is a sign of disrespect. It sounds like what I would expect to hear on the street.

Do you introduce people as "I'd like to introduce to the CEO, Mr Smith" or "I'd like to introduce to the CEO, Smith"


If you go back through my posts I refer to the current POTUS as 'Mr Obama' or 'President Obama' I also endeavor to do the same for other (EX) Presidents.I don't believe you.


Don't' believe what?

Look through my posts (click on my name and then click on 'View Forum posts') regarding my use of 'Mr' for Mr Obama.

The proof is in the pudding.

Then again one is entitled to one's own opinion, whether it is right or wrong. :ycool:

John Smith
09-06-2014, 01:33 PM
Don't' believe what?

Look through my posts (click on my name and then click on 'View Forum posts') regarding my use of 'Mr' for Mr Obama.

The proof is in the pudding.

Then again one is entitled to one's own opinion, whether it is right or wrong. :ycool:

That is true. My opinion is you use "Mr." Obama in a demeaning way. I believe that because your track record is one of hating the man, and through your hate, I believe, you demean/insult him frequently. I might be wrong, but given your track record, I'll be hard to convince.

S.V. Airlie
09-06-2014, 01:36 PM
John, RP I'm sure doesn't Hate President Obama. Probably just doesn't TRUST him. Big difference. I too, don't TRUST him either! Hate is a bit harsh!

Too Little Time
09-06-2014, 01:44 PM
The plan is now to dismantle ISIS (excellent), without (great) boots on the ground.

I commend Mr Obama for taking this direction and hope that it actually can be achieved and sooner than later to stop the wanton bloodshed.

There are wishful thinkers. The President seems to be one.

The narrative will continue. So will the bloodshed. For generations.

Rum_Pirate
09-06-2014, 02:09 PM
That is true. My opinion is you use "Mr." Obama in a demeaning way. I believe that because your track record is one of hating the man, and through your hate, I believe, you demean/insult him frequently. I might be wrong, but given your track record, I'll be hard to convince.


I am reminded of a saying that goes along the lines of:


Try to convince a man

against his will,

convince that man

you never will !

S.V. Airlie
09-07-2014, 08:11 AM
From Reuters!

PESHAWAR/DERA ISMAIL KHAN Pakistan - Islamic State pamphlets and flags have appeared in parts of Pakistan and India, alongside signs that the ultra-radical group is inspiring militants even in the strongholds of the Taliban and al Qaeda.
A splinter group of Pakistan's Taliban insurgents, Jamat-ul Ahrar, has already declared its support for the well-funded and ruthless Islamic State fighters, who have captured large swathes of territory in Iraq and Syria in a drive to set up a self-declared caliphate.
"IS (Islamic State) is an Islamic Jihadi organization working for the implementation of the Islamic system and creation of the Caliphate," Jamat-ul Ahrar's leader and a prominent Taliban figure, Ehsanullah Ehsan, told Reuters by telephone. "We respect them. If they ask us for help, we will look into it and decide."
Islamist militants of various hues already hold sway across restive and impoverished areas of South Asia, but Islamic State, with its rapid capture of territory, beheadings and mass executions, is starting to draw a measure of support among younger fighters in the region.
Al Qaeda's ageing leaders, mostly holed up in the lawless region along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, are increasingly seen as stale, tired and ineffectual on hardcore jihadi social media forums and Twitter accounts that incubate potential militant recruits. [ID:nL6N0PU0EA]

CWSmith
09-07-2014, 10:18 AM
The Republican talking heads this AM are calling for war to start yesterday. They have learned nothing from the past decade. They just want to be president. When will the voters demand more from them? You can debate the president and his policies, but do it with some brains!