Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Reputation does not mean nearly as much as some would like to imagine. That's especially true when the opponents are non-state actors with little to lose. ISIS would eventually collapse under the assault of Assad, Russia, Iran, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Turkey. There is no need for American troops there. ISIS is already shedding territory rapidly.
There has never been a period of time when trouble did not appear in every corner of the planet. Imperial efforts accelerate trouble.
Sykes-Picot was never implemented. The Peace Conference in Paris after WWI substantially deviated from Sykes-Picot for reasons both obvious (e.g., the Bolshevik Revolution) and less obvious (e.g., the discovery of oil near Kirkuk and British anticipation of the strategic importance of oil).
The people of the Middle East were not tribes during WWI. The Arabs were a settled people long before the Ottoman Turks came to rule them. The same is true of the Persians.
The Sunni-Shia split was old when the former Ottoman Empire was divided by the imperial powers into mandates. Yet it was routinely managed under singular empires for centuries. Today's Sunni-Shi'a clashes are primarily about Iraq, which was cobbled together after WWI out of historically Persian, Arab, and Kurdish territories. It is also about Yemen, which is in essence a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
The disputes to which Israel is a party stem from events after WWI, including Zionist violence in the British Mandate and the Holocaust.
Terrorism is a tactic. It is used by weak actors to bend strong ones. Al Qaeda has more in common with the IRA during the Troubles than it does with any of the nations of the Middle East.
Terrorism is a tactic. But it used by nation-states as well. Such as Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And Al Qaida is an NGO like the former IRA. But the former IRA would call in its bombings so non-combatants could flee a building before they blew it up. At least as I remember it. That is akin to the US notifying a city in advance that non-combatants should flee because in x number of hours or days the US will be bombing the city.
Anybody can say it on the internet. You all know this is not going to happen because it is the American politicis and politicians we are dealing with here.
Who seems to be the lesser of two evils?
The one who wants a SINGLE war that is short and quick, destroy ISIS and be done with.
The one who wants a political correct war that is never ending.
I agree with having a quick and short war of anihilated ISIS, depriving them of territory.
To clarify things, you are proposing to annihilate ISIS. To do that you'd have to kill every Muslim man, woman and child in this world, plus destroy every shred of their "civilization". Otherwise, another ISIS can pop up in Malaysia, etc. Do you concur?
WHY would you do it? At what cost in American blood and taxpayer $$$? Why not lleave the killing to those most threatened?
The why is in large part for moral duty.
America spends enough money and lives on stupid stuff. Might as well expend money and lives on a worthy cause. The soldiers can feel afterwards they sacrificed for a call on par with confronting Nazi Germany.
Quote:
Fighting ISIS or fighting the forces of those who oppose him under the guise of fighting ISIS?
ISIS already controls a significant geographical portion of Syria, and they want to rest of the territory of Syria. So, what do you think?
I think it might be the same reason why Osama bin Laden must be destroyed.
Don't get me wrong, I don't believe Americans should be responsible for destroying Isis. I think it is up to the Muslims to make a decision.
But, One thing we should not underestimate: the power of reputation. If the American President has the reputation of being strong, decisive and swift, this reputation will act as a deterrent. But gain a reputation of being weak, indecisive and slow, and trouble will appear in every corner of the earth.
So this might be the reason why ISIS must be destroyed.
At what cost? How many Americans have to come home in boxes? Look, I don't like ISIS anymore than you do but the American public stopped having the stomach for serious wars sometime in the 1950s. I will venture a guess that the only reason we had the stomach to fight WW2 to the end was because the media was censored: casualty counts were hidden, clusterbeeps like Exercise Tiger and the Hurtgen Forest were not reported on. They Navy didn't even release the complete ship losses from Pearl Harbor until 1944 when it was obvious we would win.
What do you think would have happened if the media reported that two entire US Army infantry divisions were literally wiped out in the Hurtgen Forest in the fall of 1944? The same thing we saw in Vietnam.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.