A plan to defeat ISIS

Toontown said:
Not much. The advance of Empire of the Rising Sun was headed in your direction. It was stopped and turned back at Guadalcanal.

NZ would have been a juicy morsel.
Click to expand...

Hmm....I wonder where the Japanese ever got the idea that a country either colonized and became an empire, or died?
 
Toontown said:
Hmm...I wonder why you're changing the subject?
Click to expand...

I'm not. Point is...if a country wants to help stop the creation of empires, then they stop being empire builders. Britain, Netherlands, France and the US all squealed about Japanese Empire building - yet each of them was in the process of empire building - especially in Asia.

Likewise, if a country wants to help put a stop to terrorism, then stop participating in terror.
 
Last edited:
Jules Galen said:
I'm not. Point is...if a country wants to help stop the creation of empires, then they stop being empire builders. Likewise, if a country wants to help put a stop to terrorism, then stop participating in terror.
Click to expand...

You're preaching to the choir. The US became pragmatically opposed to empire building long before WWII started, and remains so.

If not, NZ would probably be a US colony today.

BTW, Kiwis, meet your savior - the USS Enterprise.


 
Toontown said:
Not much. The advance of Empire of the Rising Sun was headed in your direction. It was stopped and turned back at Guadalcanal, and eventually driven off it's stepping stone at Truk.

NZ would have been a juicy morsel.
Click to expand...
Mate.

We would have Haka'd them to death.

[emoji41]

Sent from my SM-J500Y using Tapatalk
 
Jrrarglblarg said:
Every bit as sensible as de-Ba'athification in Iraq by sending the entire military home with weapons and no paycheck.

Just as workable a plan as sending a few hundred "trainers" into a war zone to end a three-cornered civil war.

As morally sound as sending a general to march troops back and forth across the border with Mexico to try tricking them into starting the expansionist war you want to fight.

As intellectually rigorous as flying planes into skyscrapers to utterly demoralize a nation.
Click to expand...
That last one seems to be working out pretty well so far. Half the US is afraid to get out of bed in case they might become a target of Muslim terrorism.

Now, does ISIS have any skyscrapers we can fly into?
 
MaGZ said:
A plan to defeat ISIS

There is a way to defeat ISIS without using ground forces. First bomb Raqqa knocking out their electrical grid. After a few weeks, begin 463L master pallet airdrops containing food supplies, weapons and ammunition. A civil war will follow. Promise the Sunni rebels that a new Sunnistan will be created out of western Iraq and northeast Syria. ISIS will be defeated and a new era of peace in the Middle East will be established.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't work. There is no easy solution to ISIL or the Islamic terrorism targeting the U.S., the West in general or Israel. This is going to be a long-term struggle.
 
Just a thought to throw into the mix.
How about backing an Islamic Reformation? It took a while, but seems to have worked for the Christians.
There actually are groups of Muslims who are claiming it is time to reform Islam, which is the last of the major RSM religions that have not undergone a reformation.
This requires money and effort, but no military forces, and attacks the base of the Islamist philosophy.
Just putting it out there, but it seems like a good idea to me.
 
Chuck Guiteau said:
Just a thought to throw into the mix.
How about backing an Islamic Reformation? It took a while, but seems to have worked for the Christians.
There actually are groups of Muslims who are claiming it is time to reform Islam, which is the last of the major RSM religions that have not undergone a reformation.
This requires money and effort, but no military forces, and attacks the base of the Islamist philosophy.
Just putting it out there, but it seems like a good idea to me.
Click to expand...

A deradicalization program would work best if done internally by Muslims themselves and externally by avoiding civilian causalities as much as possible while also improving economic opportunities. Restless and unemployed people who see their loved ones, friends or compatriots be killed because of proximity or other indiscriminate means is a recipe for radicalization.
 
Chuck Guiteau said:
Just a thought to throw into the mix.
How about backing an Islamic Reformation? It took a while, but seems to have worked for the Christians.
There actually are groups of Muslims who are claiming it is time to reform Islam, which is the last of the major RSM religions that have not undergone a reformation.
This requires money and effort, but no military forces, and attacks the base of the Islamist philosophy.
Just putting it out there, but it seems like a good idea to me.
Click to expand...


You're obviously not aware that Islam has no central authority, no pope, nothing even close to it. A lot of the "fun" in the history of the religion has been for scholars to figure out what in hell "God" meant with his revelations, and the reason you can come up with such a "good idea" is that both Wahhabi and Zionist people with vast amounts of money and access to media have agreed in recent times, for different reasons, on what you should think "it is".
 
Craig B said:
I suspect MaGZ is being jocularly provocative, the naughty person, and what he really thinks is that the entire region should be rendered permanently uninhabitable and all its residents should be vapourised.
Click to expand...

Maybe not all of its residents.
 
ponderingturtle said:
The only solution is to cleanse all the groups out of the area and start over, they are all horrible so none of them can be given power.
Click to expand...

Not at all, I was just pointing out the problem with doing what we always seem to do - identify one group as the good guys, give them support for them to achieve their political and/or territorial objectives - and then a decade or two later have to deal with the consequences.

Supporting the Kurds and establishing a Kurdish state may be a significant positive step but if we help them then we also need to stick around to help in the medium to long term.
 
portlandatheist said:
like the planned parenthood attack?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think that it's more to do with Western support for certain "rebel" (or terrorist if you're an Assad loyalist) factions in Syria. Heck, it may be exactly the right thing to do but we need to be careful that there aren't unintended consequences as and when the rebels seize power (like some or all of Syria remaining an extremist Islamist state) and that other powers don't take our actions in the region to be tacit approval for them supporting extremists in our country (whichever it is) as a means to achieve regime change.
 
Henri McPhee said:
Alex Salmond MP of the Scottish Nationalists has just made the sensible comment that we should support the Peshmerga Kurds with heavy weapons, and kit and equipment but we don't in case it offends the Turks. The Turks are not reliable allies. Turkey is out of control, a bit like the CIA.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but are the Kurds more reliable than them as allies?
 
Jules Galen said:
Yes it does. There's no real philosophical difference between ISIS and states like Saudi and Qatar. The only reason we leave the likes of Saudi and Qatar alone is because they've got oil, and for this reason not a peep is being raised over the atrocities those basterds are committing on the Yemeni this very moment.
Click to expand...

There are practical differences. They are not violently expansionist unlike ISIS, who for example is also blowing up village elders in Afghanistan. The Saudi's are not in so direct a fashion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom