A plan to defeat ISIS

[Loss Leader]

That's nice, but in many parts of the world there are groups in the same patch of land who have diametrically opposed views about how that patch of land should be governed.

Yes, I believe I mentioned that would be a major difficulty.

Even if that's the will of the majority of the people living there ? On one hand we're all about letting groups define their own borders but we're not going to let them have the system of government that they want ?

I meant nations that harbor and support those who would terrorize other nations, not labels thrown around in a civil war.

 

[The Don]

I meant nations that harbor and support those who would terrorize other nations, not labels thrown around in a civil war.

There are those on the other side of the line who would insist that the Western Crusaders do exactly this and worse, for us Western Crusaders it's a matter of government policy to deploy our terror tactics to crush Islam (or however the loopy message is pitched).

I'm sure that ISIS see their actions in France as part of a civil war between the government oppression and the "brave jihadis" trying to establish the proper rule of law.

 

[tuco]

Former Isis hostage says airstrikes on Syria are a trap - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/02/nicolas-henin-video-isis-syria-strikes

This is the third person this week I hear saying .. gotta have the people to like you. Mr Henin, Mr Assad and Mr from local institute of Islamic studies.

Whats up with that? Are we, the West, not cool enough to be likeable? I dont believe that. We are very cool and Islam is very not cool *coughs* aliright

 

[Craig B]

Former Isis hostage says airstrikes on Syria are a trap - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/02/nicolas-henin-video-isis-syria-strikes

This is the third person this week I hear saying .. gotta have the people to like you. Mr Henin, Mr Assad and Mr from local institute of Islamic studies.

Whats up with that? Are we, the West, not cool enough to be likeable? I dont believe that. We are very cool and Islam is very not cool *coughs* aliright

Can you clarify that a bit?

 

[tuco]

Can you clarify that a bit?

What do you mean? The notion that ISIS cannot operate without local support or why we do not seem cool enough to the locals?

I believe you have read through these threads. Seen any Syrians or Muslims posting? Hard to tell .. or not. As I noted before, we have these plans for everyone but dont seem to include anyone's but own interests in such plans. And without including interests there cannot be support. Oh but we know what is in their best interest eh? Yup, that is the problem.

 

[trustbutverify]

I'm sure that ISIS see their actions in France as part of a civil war between the government oppression and the "brave jihadis" trying to establish the proper rule of law.

In France?

 

[Mycroft]

Is that why we're going to bomb them? Because of the Yezidis? Is that what we do in such cases, when peoples are subjected to genocide? Recall Blair and his WMD reason for going to war. Saddam had massacred various populations without incurring a Western invasion, and we were told it was on account of Saddam's WMD that we were invading. Explicitly we were told it was not to effect regime change, even though his regime was cruel and violent in the highest degree.

There are various places where local indigenes are being wiped out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples Are you suggesting that we go to war with the states, or bomb the areas occupied by the armed groups involved? Is that what you're saying? If it is, very good. I might agree. See what support you get from Cameron. If not, your argument falls. It reveals itself as special pleading to justify an attack conducted for other reasons, such as was resorted to by Blair after the failure to find any WMD.

ETA I've just seen this. We can expect more of the same. You accuse opponents of the bombing of being indifferent to the fate of the Yezidis. Cameron is smart enough not to use that argument; I think for the reasons I give above. So he's using the same tactic, but a different atrocity. Not the Yezidis. This is from the Guardian website.

Cameron accuses Corbyn of being 'terrorist sympathiser'
Prime minister urges Tory MPs not to vote with Labour leader and ‘a bunch of terrorist sympathisers’ against Syria airstrikes.​

So, doesn't care about the Yezidis - sympathises with the Paris murderers - and there's more to come, folks. When things get serious the propaganda machines start churning out their usual stuff.

ETA 2 Here's more terrorist sympathisers and rape enablers.

David Cameron’s plans to launch airstrikes in Syria are already facing a rebellion of around 20% of his party membership, but now the powerful Foreign Affairs Select Committee has voted against the proposed airstrikes.

The Foreign Affairs Select Committee is chaired by Conservative MP Crispin Blunt, and has a majority of Conservative members – yet this evening, the powerful committee has defied the government and expressed their opposition to the planned strikes. A Conservative member of the committee, John Baron MP, has written a piece for The Guardian outlining the reasons for the no vote.​

It's not special pleading. It's an additional reason.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

 

[Darth Rotor]

It would mean that guerrilla warfare and terrorism would be the only outlet left for those who want an orthodox Islamic state.

I think we've seen that movie before. Care to refresh my memory on the ending?

ISIS is not a legitimate nation, nor is it conducting itself as a legitimate political movement. I think the world has a humanitarian duty to confront them.

When I hear the leaders of China, India, Indonesia, and Brazil get up in the UN and jointly make that declaration, and be prepared to back it up, I'll consider taking such a declaration seriously. As it stands, that position seems to not have broad support outside certain groups. However, a variety of folks have an interest in doing something about ISIS ...

Now, does ISIS have any skyscrapers we can fly into?

The clever folks in the West use a bomb or ten, that way they get to use the airplane again.

The difference between taqlid and ijtihad is that one means to reason independently, and one means to follow. --snip--
However, even if the likes of Taha took root in the Muslim wolrd and became the norm, there would be nothing preventing future abrogations which allowed a reverting back to more literal interpretations.

A good post that put a little E into JREF for me, as well as putting some F into ISF. Thanks.

 

[Tero]

No interest in Isis and Mosul? The Isis fighters are now shaving their beards. Some will escape.

(I've never started a thread here as I never know where they go or are moved to)

 

[Darth Rotor]

I'm amazed not to disagree entirely with some of the foundational thoughts expressed in the OP. I believe in an independent Kurdistan and redrawing the Iraq/Iram/Syrian borders to accommodate their ethnic populations.

You and me both, if we add a bit of Turkey to the mix.

That religious war is going to happen, and is happening, whether anyone "allows it" or not. It's their century in the sun.

 

[Emily's Cat]

The most effective way to get rid of ISIS? Take over. Put together a coalition of first-world countries, and divvy up the middle east. We have all the guns, all the money, all the power. Just go in and set up shop. There's enough room that we can share all of the middle east between the US, the European Union (I'll let you guys decide how to share it out among member countries), Russia, and *maybe* China if we're feeling magnanimous. The divisions become subject to the laws and regulations of the ruling country/union. Easy peasy.

Not, however, particularly ethical. But probably pretty darned effective

 

[Giz]

The most effective way to get rid of ISIS? Take over. Put together a coalition of first-world countries, and divvy up the middle east. We have all the guns, all the money, all the power. Just go in and set up shop. There's enough room that we can share all of the middle east between the US, the European Union (I'll let you guys decide how to share it out among member countries), Russia, and *maybe* China if we're feeling magnanimous. The divisions become subject to the laws and regulations of the ruling country/union. Easy peasy.

Not, however, particularly ethical. But probably pretty darned effective

I'd not been able to imagine anything that could make the Middle East any more dysfunctional. But now, visualizing a checkerboard of neo-colonial Russian, Euro, Chinese, American satrapies, I think I have managed to visualize things getting even worse!

 

[Emily's Cat]

I'd not been able to imagine anything that could make the Middle East any more dysfunctional. But now, visualizing a checkerboard of neo-colonial Russian, Euro, Chinese, American satrapies, I think I have managed to visualize things getting even worse!

Worse for us? Or worse for them? All depends on your perspective


Let me be clear that I DO NOT actually support the inane suggestion that I made, not in any fashion. It was absurd, for the sake of absurdity. Nothing more. I feel obligated to make this statement, because I suspect that someone, somewhere will take me seriously for some reason.

 

[Mark6]

A college friend of mine was once given an essay assignment: "How to solve Middle East problem?" (That was back in 1983 or '84).

He handed in a one-sentence essay: "Fifty megatons will do the job".

If I remember correctly, professor gave him a "C".

 

[imodium]

without knowing the long term and realistic goal of isis, daesh or whatever they're called today, how can they win?

a global caliphate is never gonna happen, they can't even base a caliphate in the middle east without sunnis and shias itching to knock seven shades out of the wahhabis, who, like sonny and cher have been kicking lumps out of each other for years.

so for the time being just expect random, infrequent terrorist attacks while, the west throws darts at a map of the middle east deciding where to bomb in revenge.

 

[Hans]

without knowing the long term and realistic goal of isis, daesh or whatever they're called today, how can they win?

a global caliphate is never gonna happen, they can't even base a caliphate in the middle east without sunnis and shias itching to knock seven shades out of the wahhabis, who, like sonny and cher have been kicking lumps out of each other for years.

so for the time being just expect random, infrequent terrorist attacks while, the west throws darts at a map of the middle east deciding where to bomb in revenge.

Like many zealots in the past they though God would make it happen but he gave them the finger instead.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

who, like sonny and cher have been kicking lumps out of each other for years.

Um. They broke up in 77

and sonny died in 98.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

 

[trustbutverify]

A college friend of mine was once given an essay assignment: "How to solve Middle East problem?" (That was back in 1983 or '84).

He handed in a one-sentence essay: "Fifty megatons will do the job".

If I remember correctly, professor gave him a "C".

I assume that solution includes your friend and his professor being tied down at ground zero.

 

[Mark6]

I assume that solution includes your friend and his professor being tied down at ground zero.

The professor was being a jerk. He gave his class an assignment which he knew is unsolvable, just to see in how many knots they will tie themselves. Ben (my friend) recognized this fact, and refused to play the game. I never spoke to the professor in question, but my guess is, he respected Ben's audacity enough to not fail him.

I wonder if anyone in the class got "A". I suspect nobody did.

 

[CapelDodger]

without knowing the long term and realistic goal of isis, daesh or whatever they're called today, how can they win?

It's an apocalyptic cult : it doesn't think there'll be a long-term.

a global caliphate is never gonna happen ...

That's not their goal. A Caliphate, true to Islam's founding principles, will get them into Paradise. "True Muslims" will move to the Caliphate and everybody else can - and will - go to Hell.

they can't even base a caliphate in the middle east without sunnis and shias itching to knock seven shades out of the wahhabis, who, like sonny and cher have been kicking lumps out of each other for years.

Religion was kept very much in its place by Ba'athists and the militaries of Egypt and Turkey until recently. Before that the Ottomans kept a lid on it, so you have to go back a fair way to find anything similar to today.