The ISIS mess...let's review the players...

[Bugsy McGurk]

Let's start with Syria....

We (the USA) have supported the notion that Assad must step aside. And ISIS grabbed a chunk of Syrian territory. But we hate ISIS too. And where do things stand now?

We oppose ISIS, but also oppose the enemy of ISIS - the Assad regime. We can bomb ISIS, but whenever we do, we are by definition aiding Assad - our other enemy in Syria. We could arm the "good rebels" if they could be identified, but it's chaos there. That's impractical - no one can even say who they are. We could also arm the Kurds in Syria, but when we do that we are pissing off the governments of Turkey and Iraq, who want to suppress a Kurdish rebellion and the movement to create a separate Kurdistan. What a mess.

Let's move onto Iraq. The Iraqi "army" we spent hundreds of billions to create is obviously worthless. Saddam's generals were banned from the new army GWB created, so they moved on, and are now working for ISIS, running its campaigns. The Iraq army is "led" by Maliki's inept cronies. ISIS crossed the border into Iraq, and the Iraq army troops ran away like scalded dogs. They had no supplies, due to the inept generals, and they don't give a shit about northern Iraq anyway. That area is Sunni, and the army is largely Shiites, controlled by Shiites. How about the Kurds in Iraq? Well, they will fight to defend Kurdish territory in Iraq, but they don't give a shit about the rest of Iraq. And, as noted above, the Iraq government does not want to strengthen the Kurds, so they don't help them, and will stand in the way of any other efforts to help them.

How about the Turkish government? Well, they don't care about ISIS unless ISIS tries crossing into Turkey. And, since they don't want to strengthen the Kurds, they offer no help to the Kurds fighting in Kobani, Syria. They won't even allow Kurds to cross from Turkey into Syria to fight ISIS. The Turks sit at the border with their tanks, watching the carnage unfold in Kobani.

And how about the fringe players, like Saudi Arabia? Well, they send a plane up now and then to drop a bomb, and then their pilots fly back home for a spot of tea. They don't really give a shit either - not enough to make a difference.

And the USA? Well, watching ISIS commit genocide against the Azidis was too much to handle, so we started our own bombings against ISIS. The beheadings enraged us into turning it up a notch. But Americans have no stomach for sending US combat troops back into the Iraq meat grinder, so the bottom line is that no one is willing to actually do what is necessary to truly wipe out ISIS.

So, it sounds pretty bleak, no? Yup. Bleak indeed. A complex problem with no solution. As Colin Powell said when counseling against a conquest of Iraq, the Pottery Barn rule applies - "You break it, you bought it." Well, we broke it, and we bought it. And it just can't be fixed.

Unless someone has some other ideas?

 

[Zoar]

Peace Talks.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Peace Talks.

I don't think there's any peace to be had with the various players.

It's an intractable mess.

 

[Zoar]

Just before the US invaded Iraq in 2003 I happened to be living in a very right wing town. Obligated to a dinner commitment, I went out with some acquaintances to a popular local restaurant of their choosing; one that I had never been to before (or since). It was a true red white and blue Americana, but slightly expensive restaurant. And it was packed! Nearly uncomfortably so, requiring you to leave your name at the hostess stand then you would step away and wait in a very long, extremely crowded hall or out on the covered porch area, also densely filled with patrons. Then they would call your name out loud when your table was ready. I made up a name.

About 30-35 minutes later----mind you this was a day or two before the Bush / Cheney administration was going to start bombing Iraq and everyone knew it---the hostess starts yelling out, "Peace! ...Peace!.. Peace! ...Peace!" I sat there calmly, smiling but not moving another muscle letting this hostess call out the name I had left as my name in their crowded restaurant. You could sense the palpable astonishment and consternation it was causing among the patrons. Silence fell. How dare anyone call out "Peace!" in a crowded restaurant when WAR was viewed as the only inevitable option by so many... I let the woman yell out "Peace" again and again until I knew if I didn't stand up and walk toward her she would start yelling the next name on the list... But I can tell you that hearing someone yell out "Peace!" was an uncomfortable and intense shock to many of those patrons who had accepted the war mongering as readily as they were about to accept their dinners that evening. Indeed, some people were looking around with a visible mixture of bewilderment, confusion and even anger at this woman preposterously calling out for "Peace! Peace! Peace!" when everyone was so prepared and expectant for its opposite!

It felt good to bring out the message of "Peace" despite the fact that so many in America had accepted War and killing as the only option. And if I made any of the people in that filled to overflowing restaurant nod in acknowledgment or for an instant even question the infallibility of the military option as the only course of action, then I did my job, and did it well.

Again, I say "Peace." ...Especially now.

Hopefully some people who may read this will pause and consider it as the better alternative than all the killing proposed for Iraq and Syria because at some point peace will return to that region and people will shake their heads and cry, "Why did it take so long for sanity and sense and peace to return?"

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Just before the US invaded Iraq I went with some friends to a popular restaurant. It was packed, requiring you to leave your name at the hostess stand then you would step away and wait in a very packed long hall or out on the covered porch area, then they would call your name out loud when your table was ready. I made up a name.

About 20 minutes later----mind you this was a day or two before the Bush / Cheney administration was going to start bombing Iraq and everyone knew it---The hostess starts yelling out, "Peace! Peace!..... Peace! ...Peace!" I sat there calmly, smiling but not moving another muscle letting this hostess call out the name I has left as my name in a very crowded restaurant. You could sense the astonishment and consternation it was causing among the patrons. How dare anyone call out "Peace!" in a crowded restaurant when War was viewed as the only inevitable option by so many... I let the woman yell out "Peace", until I knew if I didn't stand up and walk toward her she would start yelling the next name on the list. But I can tell you that hearing someone yell out "Peace!" was an uncomfortable and intense shock to many of those patrons who had accepted the war mongering as readily as they were about to accept their dinners that evening. Some people were looking around with a mixture of bewilderment and anger at this woman calling out "Peace! Peace! Peace!"

It felt good to bring out the call for Peace despite the fact that so many in America had accepted War and killing ss the only option. And if I made any of the people in that crowded restaurant nod in acknowledgment or for an instant even question the infallibility of the military option as the only course of action, then I did my job well.

Again, I say "Peace." Especially now.

Hopefully some in PJ will pause and consider it as the better alternative than all the killing because at some point peace will return to that region and people will shake their heads and cry, "Why did it take so long for sanity and sense and peace to return?"

I love the sentiment - I just think it's not a sentiment that will bring about anything positive in Iraq and Syria.

Before GWB invaded Iraq, there was a relative state of peace there (at least by Middle East standards). Those of us who opposed his war knew what would result - sectarian chaos. And that's what we have had in the 11 years since. The tragedy is that the Pugs just can't admit the error of their ways. They just blame Obama.

And on it goes.

 

[afella]

Let's start with Syria....

We (the USA) have supported the notion that Assad must step aside. And ISIS grabbed a chunk of Syrian territory. But we hate ISIS too. And where do things stand now?

We oppose ISIS, but also oppose the enemy of ISIS - the Assad regime. We can bomb ISIS, but whenever we do, we are by definition aiding Assad - our other enemy in Syria. We could arm the "good rebels" if they could be identified, but it's chaos there. That's impractical - no one can even say who they are. We could also arm the Kurds in Syria, but when we do that we are pissing off the governments of Turkey and Iraq, who want to suppress a Kurdish rebellion and the movement to create a separate Kurdistan. What a mess.

Let's move onto Iraq. The Iraqi "army" we spent hundreds of billions to create is obviously worthless. Saddam's generals were banned from the new army GWB created, so they moved on, and are now working for ISIS, running its campaigns. The Iraq army is "led" by Maliki's inept cronies. ISIS crossed the border into Iraq, and the Iraq army troops ran away like scalded dogs. They had no supplies, due to the inept generals, and they don't give a shit about northern Iraq anyway. That area is Sunni, and the army is largely Shiites, controlled by Shiites. How about the Kurds in Iraq? Well, they will fight to defend Kurdish territory in Iraq, but they don't give a shit about the rest of Iraq. And, as noted above, the Iraq government does not want to strengthen the Kurds, so they don't help them, and will stand in the way of any other efforts to help them.

How about the Turkish government? Well, they don't care about ISIS unless ISIS tries crossing into Turkey. And, since they don't want to strengthen the Kurds, they offer no help to the Kurds fighting in Kobani, Syria. They won't even allow Kurds to cross from Turkey into Syria to fight ISIS. The Turks sit at the border with their tanks, watching the carnage unfold in Kobani.

And how about the fringe players, like Saudi Arabia? Well, they send a plane up now and then to drop a bomb, and then their pilots fly back home for a spot of tea. They don't really give a shit either - not enough to make a difference.

And the USA? Well, watching ISIS commit genocide against the Azidis was too much to handle, so we started our own bombings against ISIS. The beheadings enraged us into turning it up a notch. But Americans have no stomach for sending US combat troops back into the Iraq meat grinder, so the bottom line is that no one is willing to actually do what is necessary to truly wipe out ISIS.

So, it sounds pretty bleak, no? Yup. Bleak indeed. A complex problem with no solution. As Colin Powell said when counseling against a conquest of Iraq, the Pottery Barn rule applies - "You break it, you bought it." Well, we broke it, and we bought it. And it just can't be fixed.

Unless someone has some other ideas?

Supporting Assad, with a deal to be made with the moderate FSA, and throwing the Iranians into the mix, hell they are already all over Iraq as advisors anyway, plus they have a vested interest in disposing of a group like ISIL. Those are, perhaps, the most feasible options we have aside from our troops on the ground.

 

[Tameamea]

The problem here is that we did everything wrong from the very beginning.
No matter how evil Saddam was, he understood the specific conditions of his country.
Iraq is 60% Shia, and Sunnis were oppressed, until Saddam, being a Sunni himself, came into power. Under his rule, lots of Sunnis got governmental posts (one of him ministers was even Kurdish) which balanced the system a lot.
When US overtook Iraq, the Sunni officials were repressed. There were a lot of politicians and officers among them, so taking them out of the system destabilized this system. A year later our consultants in Iraq tried to get those people back, but it was too late.
As a result, the structure was destroyed, but nothing worthy was created instead. Plus a religious minority of Sunnis felt deprived of everything, justice in the first place.
That resulted in ISIS.
How to solve this? Well, I don't know, this is a total mess now, much worse than in the very beginning...

 

[SW48]

Let's start with Syria....

We (the USA) have supported the notion that Assad must step aside. And ISIS grabbed a chunk of Syrian territory. But we hate ISIS too. And where do things stand now?

We oppose ISIS, but also oppose the enemy of ISIS - the Assad regime. We can bomb ISIS, but whenever we do, we are by definition aiding Assad - our other enemy in Syria. We could arm the "good rebels" if they could be identified, but it's chaos there. That's impractical - no one can even say who they are. We could also arm the Kurds in Syria, but when we do that we are pissing off the governments of Turkey and Iraq, who want to suppress a Kurdish rebellion and the movement to create a separate Kurdistan. What a mess.

Let's move onto Iraq. The Iraqi "army" we spent hundreds of billions to create is obviously worthless. Saddam's generals were banned from the new army GWB created, so they moved on, and are now working for ISIS, running its campaigns. The Iraq army is "led" by Maliki's inept cronies. ISIS crossed the border into Iraq, and the Iraq army troops ran away like scalded dogs. They had no supplies, due to the inept generals, and they don't give a shit about northern Iraq anyway. That area is Sunni, and the army is largely Shiites, controlled by Shiites. How about the Kurds in Iraq? Well, they will fight to defend Kurdish territory in Iraq, but they don't give a shit about the rest of Iraq. And, as noted above, the Iraq government does not want to strengthen the Kurds, so they don't help them, and will stand in the way of any other efforts to help them.

How about the Turkish government? Well, they don't care about ISIS unless ISIS tries crossing into Turkey. And, since they don't want to strengthen the Kurds, they offer no help to the Kurds fighting in Kobani, Syria. They won't even allow Kurds to cross from Turkey into Syria to fight ISIS. The Turks sit at the border with their tanks, watching the carnage unfold in Kobani.

And how about the fringe players, like Saudi Arabia? Well, they send a plane up now and then to drop a bomb, and then their pilots fly back home for a spot of tea. They don't really give a shit either - not enough to make a difference.

And the USA? Well, watching ISIS commit genocide against the Azidis was too much to handle, so we started our own bombings against ISIS. The beheadings enraged us into turning it up a notch. But Americans have no stomach for sending US combat troops back into the Iraq meat grinder, so the bottom line is that no one is willing to actually do what is necessary to truly wipe out ISIS.

So, it sounds pretty bleak, no? Yup. Bleak indeed. A complex problem with no solution. As Colin Powell said when counseling against a conquest of Iraq, the Pottery Barn rule applies - "You break it, you bought it." Well, we broke it, and we bought it. And it just can't be fixed.

Unless someone has some other ideas?

As far as the Iraqi army, all the money in the world won't give those soldiers a heart. If they don't want to fight for their country then thats on those individual soldiers.

 

[Queen Titania]

Let's start with Syria....

We (the USA) have supported the notion that Assad must step aside. And ISIS grabbed a chunk of Syrian territory. But we hate ISIS too. And where do things stand now?

We oppose ISIS, but also oppose the enemy of ISIS - the Assad regime. We can bomb ISIS, but whenever we do, we are by definition aiding Assad - our other enemy in Syria. We could arm the "good rebels" if they could be identified, but it's chaos there. That's impractical - no one can even say who they are. We could also arm the Kurds in Syria, but when we do that we are pissing off the governments of Turkey and Iraq, who want to suppress a Kurdish rebellion and the movement to create a separate Kurdistan. What a mess.

Let's move onto Iraq. The Iraqi "army" we spent hundreds of billions to create is obviously worthless. Saddam's generals were banned from the new army GWB created, so they moved on, and are now working for ISIS, running its campaigns. The Iraq army is "led" by Maliki's inept cronies. ISIS crossed the border into Iraq, and the Iraq army troops ran away like scalded dogs. They had no supplies, due to the inept generals, and they don't give a shit about northern Iraq anyway. That area is Sunni, and the army is largely Shiites, controlled by Shiites. How about the Kurds in Iraq? Well, they will fight to defend Kurdish territory in Iraq, but they don't give a shit about the rest of Iraq. And, as noted above, the Iraq government does not want to strengthen the Kurds, so they don't help them, and will stand in the way of any other efforts to help them.

How about the Turkish government? Well, they don't care about ISIS unless ISIS tries crossing into Turkey. And, since they don't want to strengthen the Kurds, they offer no help to the Kurds fighting in Kobani, Syria. They won't even allow Kurds to cross from Turkey into Syria to fight ISIS. The Turks sit at the border with their tanks, watching the carnage unfold in Kobani.

And how about the fringe players, like Saudi Arabia? Well, they send a plane up now and then to drop a bomb, and then their pilots fly back home for a spot of tea. They don't really give a shit either - not enough to make a difference.

And the USA? Well, watching ISIS commit genocide against the Azidis was too much to handle, so we started our own bombings against ISIS. The beheadings enraged us into turning it up a notch. But Americans have no stomach for sending US combat troops back into the Iraq meat grinder, so the bottom line is that no one is willing to actually do what is necessary to truly wipe out ISIS.

So, it sounds pretty bleak, no? Yup. Bleak indeed. A complex problem with no solution. As Colin Powell said when counseling against a conquest of Iraq, the Pottery Barn rule applies - "You break it, you bought it." Well, we broke it, and we bought it. And it just can't be fixed.

Unless someone has some other ideas?

The Wahhabis ( ISIS) do not have an Army but are being funded and armed and backed by the US and co and now aided by Turkey too.

The Kurds do not have an Army and are not liked by any of the other players - second class citizens -

So that is uneven gorilla war - uneven in that the US and Turkey are bombing the Kurds -

Who are the Wahhabis? - Ask the The House of Saud who are very close to Israel and the USofA and cohorts -

Iraq and Libya have been knocked out of the game -

But the real Armies? If they get involved? Count your friends - India isn't one of them btw they love Putin -

Turkey is going to be used for pipe lines running oil to Europe, cutting out Russia, but - Turkey wants Syria too - will Iran just stand by? Will Russia?

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Supporting Assad, with a deal to be made with the moderate FSA, and throwing the Iranians into the mix, hell they are already all over Iraq as advisors anyway, plus they have a vested interest in disposing of a group like ISIL. Those are, perhaps, the most feasible options we have aside from our troops on the ground.

Throwing support behind the odious Assad is not very appealing, and he would likely reject our direct aid in any event for political reasons. After all, Russia is their close ally and supporter. We are indirectly aiding him by bombing ISIS, but that's about as far as that can go.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

As far as the Iraqi army, all the money in the world won't give those soldiers a heart. If they don't want to fight for their country then thats on those individual soldiers.

I don't think it's a money issue with them - that could be fixed if it was the problem, but I don't think it is.

The Iraq army has been shown to be weak for two reasons. First, the army generals and other officers are inept political hacks. By all accounts, the actual soldiers hung in there pretty well in their Anbar battles with ISIS until they ran out of ammo, food, water, etc., and they did not get resupplied. When that happened, they fled. Replacing the leaders of the Iraq army is a long term proposition at best. We should try, but it will likely never really succeed given the politics of Iraq and, if it can be done, it's well into the future.

The second major problem with the Iraq army is the sectarian divides. Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds all tend to care about only their own areas, an it's not even clear that many Iraq Sunnis oppose ISIS. The Shiites in the army and Shiite militias are likely to have their heart in a battle with ISIS to defend Baghdad and the south, but that's about it. It is pretty much an intractable problem.

I do think the Iraq that has been broken cannot be fixed. The sectarian chaos is likely to continue for a very long time.

 

[afella]

Throwing support behind the odious Assad is not very appealing, and he would likely reject our direct aid in any event for political reasons. After all, Russia is their close ally and supporter. We are indirectly aiding him by bombing ISIS, but that's about as far as that can go.

That is the issue with the only feasible options on the table, not that I support any involvement anyway. Iran isn't a pretty option either, though given their tradition of isolationist mentality I don't see them as a threat to anyone anyway, but it would be the one I would prefer over the two.

Then again ISIL isn't really all that much of a threat to begin with, so why fret?

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

That is the issue with the only feasible options on the table, not that I support any involvement anyway. Iran isn't a pretty option either, though given their tradition of isolationist mentality I don't see them as a threat to anyone anyway, but it would be the one I would prefer over the two.

Then again ISIL isn't really all that much of a threat to begin with, so why fret?

True, but their genocide is hard to take. That footage of the Azidis tugged at my heartstrings and I wanted to bomb the fuckers. And after that they started beheading our people, and the die was cast as to the bombings.

But it is a royal mess, no doubt. The most profound conundrum of the modern era.

 

[Queen Titania]

True, but their genocide is hard to take. That footage of the Azidis tugged at my heartstrings and I wanted to bomb the fuckers. And after that they started beheading our people, and the die was cast as to the bombings.

But it is a royal mess, no doubt. The most profound conundrum of the modern era.

It reminds me of WWII -Vietnam - Afghanistan - Pakistan - Libya and others - same old same old - Fighting the Monster -

 

[afella]

True, but their genocide is hard to take. That footage of the Azidis tugged at my heartstrings and I wanted to bomb the fuckers. And after that they started beheading our people, and the die was cast as to the bombings.

But it is a royal mess, no doubt. The most profound conundrum of the modern era.

True, I don't like genocide either, but that is an issue for the UN, not the US. In regards to our people being beheaded, I'm indifferent. If you are insane, I feel mentally deficient, enough to travel to Syria where groups like this operate, welllll...... It really is kind of your fault, regardless of what humane activity you were trying to carry out. I don't like seeing US citizens killed, but don't expect me to bail you our when you deliberately walk into a burning fire.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

True, I don't like genocide either, but that is an issue for the UN, not the US. In regards to our people being beheaded, I'm indifferent. If you are insane, I feel mentally deficient, enough to travel to Syria where groups like this operate, welllll...... It really is kind of your fault, regardless of what humane activity you were trying to carry out. I don't like seeing US citizens killed, but don't expect me to bail you our when you deliberately walk into a burning fire.

In defense of those who had their heads sawed off, the beheadings were not underway when they went to Syria.

And let's not count on the UN to stop genocide - they have no such military force, although it would be a good idea to form one going forward.

 

[afella]

In defense of those who had their heads sawed off, the beheadings were not underway when they went to Syria.

And let's not count on the UN to stop genocide - they have no such military force, although it would be a good idea to form one going forward.

It is suddenly a new thing for AQ or AQ splinter groups, or any radical Islamic fundamentalist group to behead westerners, or captives? AQ has been present in Syria since 2003 at the latest, and their off shoots had sprung up all over. It would be an implied risk that group with similar ties would commit similar acts, such as beheadings. It doesn't take a genius to figure that out. If an aid worker or journalist can't figure that out I would chalk it up to an instance of darwins theory.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

It is suddenly a new thing for AQ or AQ splinter groups, or any radical Islamic fundamentalist group to behead westerners, or captives? AQ has been present in Syria since 2003 at the latest, and their off shoots had sprung up all over. It would be an implied risk that group with similar ties would commit similar acts, such as beheadings. It doesn't take a genius to figure that out. If an aid worker or journalist can't figure that out I would chalk it up to an instance of darwins theory.

For all you know, every beheaded westerner has 50 IQ points on you. After the fact, you claim it was rather obvious that ISIS would start cutting westerners' heads off, although they had not done so to that point. It was clearly not obvious.

But that really has nothing to do with the question before us.

Do you think we should keep bombing them, or halt the bombings?

 

[Fast Eddy]

History is so clear, Bush had it right, basically had the war won, then Obama comes along with his apology tour and his inept reactions to what he Obama started. We have gone from a won war to the Obama quagmire.
The BP incident made worse by Obama inaction.
Fast and Furious, IRS, AP and Benghazi scandals all on Obama.
Middle east quagmire - Obama
Ebola spread - Obama
Border problems = Obama obama obama
False climate war - Obama
No Jobs = that would be Obama
Just a small list but we all know the list

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

History is so clear, Bush had it right, basically had the war won, then Obama comes along with his apology tour and his inept reactions to what he Obama started. We have gone from a won war to the Obama quagmire.
The BP incident made worse by Obama inaction.
Fast and Furious, IRS, AP and Benghazi scandals all on Obama.
Middle east quagmire - Obama
Ebola spread - Obama
Border problems = Obama obama obama
False climate war - Obama
No Jobs = that would be Obama
Just a small list but we all know the list

A veritable smorgasborg of GOP Big Lies and talking points.

;-)