-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AusPoliGAF |OT| Boats? What Boats?
- Thread starter Bernbaum
- Start date
- Status
Reddit has a good eye
That's gold, thanks for the laugh, would actually be funny if not true.
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
Tony Abbott said:
ASIO 2004-5 Report to Parliament said:
Sick of these so-called experts trying to undermine our PM. Like this one:ASIO 2012-13 Report to Parliament said:
I don't think we should contemplate "other contingencies" when even our Attorney General is acknowledging the fact that IS "represents, or seeks to be, an existential threat to us," Mr. Blaxland.
I aspire to be an existential threat to Brandis.
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
Totally. The only alternative to simplistic, warmongering rhetoric and potential over-committment is appeasement. You're either with us or you're against us. #TeamAustralia
If 600 troops is over commitment then we are pretty ducked.
And fighting Isis is simple. Theyre pretty much middle ages barbarians who probably got defrosted by a couple of teenage Arabs who got way more then they bargained for.
Collective punishment? Preemptive detention? Restraint on movement? Guilt by association? Ethnic cleansing?
What does this mean
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
It's not just sending 600 troops, it's 600 personnel, mostly air force, a lot of them specialised, to a foreign environment halfway across the world. As for simple, there are these quotes from the article I posted earlier:
Look I generally enjoy your posts but it feels like you're not really reading mine and are responding to a straw-man. One can support Australia's involvement in humanitarian and even military efforts against IS whilst also being wary/critical of the way the government has flipped the switch to khaki.
We can beat ISIS easily enough, but then what? We've just created another power vacuum in a zone carpet bombed by our planes. Is the new power structure going to have a positive agenda of rebuilding and empowering the people? Or are there going to be a lot of angry people with graves for families looking for retribution? Looking back a whole decade, it was the angry at the west mob who took hold of power in the last power vacuum we created. Thanks to our part in killing and destroying in a country we have no right to be in. Why will this war be different?
It's weird. By intervening we're putting our own people at home at risk to save the lives of innocent people in the Middle East. Why are the Australian government and the Australian people supportive of such things? I thought we were meant to sit on our little island and let people die...
Tough one.
On one hand, you can't let savages like ISIS run around decapitating hostages and kidnapping women for rape between bouts of ethnic cleansing, but at the same time the international community needs to be more mindful about how it is responsible for creating the conditions in which these organisations form and thrive.
I think it's safe to say if they didn't arm Iraq for the war against Iran in the 1980s, then claim Saddam still had the weapons in 2002-03 before deciding to invade on false pretences, none of this would have happened. Same goes for arming the Taliban and mujahadeen in Afghanistan to fight the proxy war against the USSR in the 70s/80s.
ISIS is just another chicken that has come home to roost, albeit one that needs to have the shit kicked out of it.
On one hand, you can't let savages like ISIS run around decapitating hostages and kidnapping women for rape between bouts of ethnic cleansing, but at the same time the international community needs to be more mindful about how it is responsible for creating the conditions in which these organisations form and thrive.
I think it's safe to say if they didn't arm Iraq for the war against Iran in the 1980s, then claim Saddam still had the weapons in 2002-03 before deciding to invade on false pretences, none of this would have happened. Same goes for arming the Taliban and mujahadeen in Afghanistan to fight the proxy war against the USSR in the 70s/80s.
ISIS is just another chicken that has come home to roost, albeit one that needs to have the shit kicked out of it.
First of alllllll the complications are far more complicated then compacted compunction.
You cant put all the blame of this onto the 'west'. Saddam made a living through killing and ethnically cleansing Iraq. He played tribes off each other, persecuted Shia, tried to wipe out the Kurds.... etc...
The problem was, and is, that somehow this was all expected to dissipate once he was gone. This was an error on all sides, those that wanted Saddam to remain in power would have just delayed the eventual blood letting that would have taken place. And those who wanted Saddam removed, but didn't want to actually do the hard work needed, and eventually just wanted to bail out on the 'too hard' problem they landed themselves in.
Its basically what we are seeing in Syria too, Assad made his living off trying to keep certain ethnic groups and religious groups down and out.
The problems are many fold.
Firstly there are very wealthy gulf states and oil sheikhs rocking the casbah and funding these islamist groups. Osama himself was from a very wealthy Wasabi dynasty, very spicy. These need to be fought, primarily by stopping the use of oil, and stopping the support of terrible regiemes like the Sauds, the Qataris, the Bahrainis... etc... you name it, all these groups are involved in, on the one hand fighting Isis and co to a degree, and either fighting or supporting groups like the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt, while on the other hand pretending there is this grand Iranian lead conspiracy, and that theyre behind shia protests and what nots.
Secondly there is the question of 'what country is a country'? Is Syria still a salvageable country? Is Iraq? I think Syria is, but the west was blinded by Anti Assadia that they have essentially turned it into a fight to the death between several groups there. Peace is no longer in the cards and its going to be winner takes all of whats left at this rate. Isis was born here really, as many gulf states wanted Assad gone, he is an Iranian ally, he is of a weird sect... etc... nothing to do with him being terrible, but all these other stupid little things. They spent lots of money, and probably did what they did in Afghanistan, and emptied their prisons of trouble makers and sent them first class to Syria in the hopes theyd die fighting Assad. They've been paying wages, sending arms... etc... you name it.
Thirdly. Iraqis goerment is shia mostly, as is the population. After decades of Saddams ethnic an sect based rule, many wanted revenge. You have the Kurds, who just want their own country after decades of being massacred by pretty much everyone in the region, and the sunnis, who went from being in power and the prime player in Iraq, to feeling essentially as the second class citizens the Shia were. Iraq is probably not going to be a country for much longer. The question is what happens. Kurds are essentially their own country already, and unlike the scots, deserve independence and our support. But its pretty clear that the divisions in Iraq between sunni and shia are too large for their petty politicans to mend.
Australia, the west, and pretty much anyone that isn't a fan of what is essentially middle aged thugs with middle age philosophies leading muddled morons into murder fests, has to stop them. They just need to be destroyed, and killed. It may be a chance for Syria and the Free Syria Army to join forces to a degree, perhaps lead to serious peace talks with some pressure from the west and co, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Isis and groups like it are cancers, as are the people who join and support groups like that. You don't negotiate with cancer, you don't try and make it see reason, you just wipe it out, sure its sad to kill people, and the chemo takes a lot out of the body, but in the long run you can be cancer free or deaf. Those are the only real options here too.
I know politicians always talk crap, and I hate it, but blame the fickle public and media that cant understand slogans that have more then 3 syllables anymore. However, there is a certain truth to the idea that they 'hate us' for what we are, cause they do. Theyre ethnically cleansing areas because they have them for what they are, not because of what they do. Convert or die isn't a measured political treatise. Its the literal choice you have before these sorts of people.
We know that the main reason Australia has been targeted in the past, such as in Bali, was due to our support for East Timor, ie Howards only decent thing he did ever, as I call it. Why would Osama or terrorist groups in the Middle east care about this? Well, because theyre at war with the modern world. These groups still talk about retaking Spain, being the heirs of the Roman empire because some Turk had himself declared Roman emporer when they took Constantinople,... etc... none of this has anything to do with things that we do, its got to do with themselves.
Extremist muslims, more so then most faiths, have hugeeeeee superiority complexes, Islam is the last faith, and they have gods last words to man in the Koran. The literal word of god. Now, when you believe that you literally, have gods words in your hands... then anything you do is justifiable, because gods above anything human. Its interesting to note that in Leviticus and I think within Islam, some mental muslim told me ages ago anyway, but the punishment for homosexuality is essentially the same, even down to the levitcine idea that 'their blood is on their hands'. Even though you are the one stoning them.
Get that idea? You are simply the will of god, and nature itself, punishing these people for things that they did. They tell you not to feel guilty or empathetic when you stone people. They tell you what sort of rocks to use.... etc... Essentially its all about not allowing human emotions to get in the way ot gods will. (All Abrahamic faiths at their extreme) of course brought to life in the most horrifying act in any faith when Abraham was willing to kill his son cause god told him to. Then he was all like PSYCHE! We cant separate these people from their faiths and pretend that it has nothing to do with whats happening, as everyone seems so sooooooo painstakingly careful to make sure to do repeatedly.
Um, so yeah. That's couple of tangents there, and its great to know I can spend 20 minutes typing this when I should be reading about admin law ohgodmybrainssoboreddddddddd.........
I also generally don't like the hippy dippy liberal types. So things like that Leak cartoon piss me off, I hate all religion, but theres a difference between a dealth cult and the kind of stuff Isis is doing and believes in and the stupid idea that Jesus sacrificed himself (Didn't kill other people) for our sins.
I also don't like the idea that 'we don't belong there'. Humans belong everywhere that there is human suffering ideally. Granted its an ideal that only exists when our economic or political ideals align with it, but still, ill take any military action over just standing back and watching people die by the thousands to people even the dark ages would be abit like 'eh srsly?' Im just sad it takes decapitation of westerners for us to get off our ass.
Also I may be in shock that Abbot has finally done something I agree with. So theres that.
Holy Live Journal Batman! Man, I go off on tangents like some kind of tangent guy.
You cant put all the blame of this onto the 'west'. Saddam made a living through killing and ethnically cleansing Iraq. He played tribes off each other, persecuted Shia, tried to wipe out the Kurds.... etc...
The problem was, and is, that somehow this was all expected to dissipate once he was gone. This was an error on all sides, those that wanted Saddam to remain in power would have just delayed the eventual blood letting that would have taken place. And those who wanted Saddam removed, but didn't want to actually do the hard work needed, and eventually just wanted to bail out on the 'too hard' problem they landed themselves in.
Its basically what we are seeing in Syria too, Assad made his living off trying to keep certain ethnic groups and religious groups down and out.
The problems are many fold.
Firstly there are very wealthy gulf states and oil sheikhs rocking the casbah and funding these islamist groups. Osama himself was from a very wealthy Wasabi dynasty, very spicy. These need to be fought, primarily by stopping the use of oil, and stopping the support of terrible regiemes like the Sauds, the Qataris, the Bahrainis... etc... you name it, all these groups are involved in, on the one hand fighting Isis and co to a degree, and either fighting or supporting groups like the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt, while on the other hand pretending there is this grand Iranian lead conspiracy, and that theyre behind shia protests and what nots.
Secondly there is the question of 'what country is a country'? Is Syria still a salvageable country? Is Iraq? I think Syria is, but the west was blinded by Anti Assadia that they have essentially turned it into a fight to the death between several groups there. Peace is no longer in the cards and its going to be winner takes all of whats left at this rate. Isis was born here really, as many gulf states wanted Assad gone, he is an Iranian ally, he is of a weird sect... etc... nothing to do with him being terrible, but all these other stupid little things. They spent lots of money, and probably did what they did in Afghanistan, and emptied their prisons of trouble makers and sent them first class to Syria in the hopes theyd die fighting Assad. They've been paying wages, sending arms... etc... you name it.
Thirdly. Iraqis goerment is shia mostly, as is the population. After decades of Saddams ethnic an sect based rule, many wanted revenge. You have the Kurds, who just want their own country after decades of being massacred by pretty much everyone in the region, and the sunnis, who went from being in power and the prime player in Iraq, to feeling essentially as the second class citizens the Shia were. Iraq is probably not going to be a country for much longer. The question is what happens. Kurds are essentially their own country already, and unlike the scots, deserve independence and our support. But its pretty clear that the divisions in Iraq between sunni and shia are too large for their petty politicans to mend.
Australia, the west, and pretty much anyone that isn't a fan of what is essentially middle aged thugs with middle age philosophies leading muddled morons into murder fests, has to stop them. They just need to be destroyed, and killed. It may be a chance for Syria and the Free Syria Army to join forces to a degree, perhaps lead to serious peace talks with some pressure from the west and co, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Isis and groups like it are cancers, as are the people who join and support groups like that. You don't negotiate with cancer, you don't try and make it see reason, you just wipe it out, sure its sad to kill people, and the chemo takes a lot out of the body, but in the long run you can be cancer free or deaf. Those are the only real options here too.
I know politicians always talk crap, and I hate it, but blame the fickle public and media that cant understand slogans that have more then 3 syllables anymore. However, there is a certain truth to the idea that they 'hate us' for what we are, cause they do. Theyre ethnically cleansing areas because they have them for what they are, not because of what they do. Convert or die isn't a measured political treatise. Its the literal choice you have before these sorts of people.
We know that the main reason Australia has been targeted in the past, such as in Bali, was due to our support for East Timor, ie Howards only decent thing he did ever, as I call it. Why would Osama or terrorist groups in the Middle east care about this? Well, because theyre at war with the modern world. These groups still talk about retaking Spain, being the heirs of the Roman empire because some Turk had himself declared Roman emporer when they took Constantinople,... etc... none of this has anything to do with things that we do, its got to do with themselves.
Extremist muslims, more so then most faiths, have hugeeeeee superiority complexes, Islam is the last faith, and they have gods last words to man in the Koran. The literal word of god. Now, when you believe that you literally, have gods words in your hands... then anything you do is justifiable, because gods above anything human. Its interesting to note that in Leviticus and I think within Islam, some mental muslim told me ages ago anyway, but the punishment for homosexuality is essentially the same, even down to the levitcine idea that 'their blood is on their hands'. Even though you are the one stoning them.
Get that idea? You are simply the will of god, and nature itself, punishing these people for things that they did. They tell you not to feel guilty or empathetic when you stone people. They tell you what sort of rocks to use.... etc... Essentially its all about not allowing human emotions to get in the way ot gods will. (All Abrahamic faiths at their extreme) of course brought to life in the most horrifying act in any faith when Abraham was willing to kill his son cause god told him to. Then he was all like PSYCHE! We cant separate these people from their faiths and pretend that it has nothing to do with whats happening, as everyone seems so sooooooo painstakingly careful to make sure to do repeatedly.
Um, so yeah. That's couple of tangents there, and its great to know I can spend 20 minutes typing this when I should be reading about admin law ohgodmybrainssoboreddddddddd.........
I also generally don't like the hippy dippy liberal types. So things like that Leak cartoon piss me off, I hate all religion, but theres a difference between a dealth cult and the kind of stuff Isis is doing and believes in and the stupid idea that Jesus sacrificed himself (Didn't kill other people) for our sins.
I also don't like the idea that 'we don't belong there'. Humans belong everywhere that there is human suffering ideally. Granted its an ideal that only exists when our economic or political ideals align with it, but still, ill take any military action over just standing back and watching people die by the thousands to people even the dark ages would be abit like 'eh srsly?' Im just sad it takes decapitation of westerners for us to get off our ass.
Also I may be in shock that Abbot has finally done something I agree with. So theres that.
Holy Live Journal Batman! Man, I go off on tangents like some kind of tangent guy.
I don't know....there are plenty of countries that are free and prosperous that don't meddle in Middle Eastern politics that seem to escape their ire...I don't hear of Muslim extremists targeting Norway, Sweden or the Netherlands. Maybe I'm wrong but I feel that our interventionist politics makes us a target..
That being said, what these people are doing is disgusting. Enslaving, raping, pillaging and destroying everything and everyone in their wake...I have no problem with Australia going to crush them.
That being said, what these people are doing is disgusting. Enslaving, raping, pillaging and destroying everything and everyone in their wake...I have no problem with Australia going to crush them.
Just Google those countries and terrorism.
Also the idea that we should stop acting and intervening to be safe is silly. Just look at Afghanistan. Soviets withdrew, Reagan was a super fan of the mujahedeen...etc... few years later, Afghanistan is a base for an evil form of Islam and a world wide terrorist groups.
Then we also have the fact that many Muslim countries are super interventionist in other Muslim countries. Pakistan tried to turn Afghanistan and the Taliban into puppets, Saudis send troops into Bahrain to stop Shia protests... etc...
Everything is connected to everything else, as a great man once said.
That's true, they are interventionist towards each other, and they have to deal with a lot more shit because of it...
Looking up terrorism in Norway, I find two particular events...the mass shooting by an anti-immigration campaigner...and the attack on a synagogue..which is basically immigrants importing their native grudges to the country.
To be fair Sweden was the target of an attack in 2010...but it seems to be a one man operation in which the bomber blew himself up...
I'm not going to sit here and say that intervention is the root cause of all evil but it's plain to see that if you go into a country, bomb it to shit, hit a shitload of civilians in the process...then their families, descendants and relatives might become resentful and even hateful.
That said, if we go into Iraq this time I'm sure there are a few minorities that will probably be singing our praises for generations to come.
Markot you haven't answered what happens after the bombs. It was the second step, the exit strategy that made Iraq and Afghanistan disasters. Are we going to allow Halliburton and friends to move in and exploit their natural oil reserves again? Once ISIS is dissolved we have a power vacuum. In the past what we have seen fill that void has been even worse than what we eradicated in the first place. By your own admission ISIS is worse than Saddam.
What you are proposing is step 1. What are the next 99 steps? Germany and Japan recovered post World War II thanks to programs like the Marshal Plan. Essentially huge investment programs designed to avoid the pitfalls of post World War I. Your plan thus far involves killing lots of people, good and bad, and destroying what little infrastructure exists. Then slapping ourselves on the back for a job well done.
That is only the beginning.
Do you really expect Australian's to be cool with investing huge amounts in the region to stabilise it economically? Do you really think that we are going to see a return on that investment?
Why put ourselves at risk for a cause with no reward only the potential for terrorist style retribution?
What you are proposing is step 1. What are the next 99 steps? Germany and Japan recovered post World War II thanks to programs like the Marshal Plan. Essentially huge investment programs designed to avoid the pitfalls of post World War I. Your plan thus far involves killing lots of people, good and bad, and destroying what little infrastructure exists. Then slapping ourselves on the back for a job well done.
That is only the beginning.
Do you really expect Australian's to be cool with investing huge amounts in the region to stabilise it economically? Do you really think that we are going to see a return on that investment?
Why put ourselves at risk for a cause with no reward only the potential for terrorist style retribution?
No. Germnay and japan recovered because they were unified nations with a strong... Well way to strong, national identity. Iraq has destabilised for decades. Saddam supporters were Iraqis. Everyone else was out. Saddam was Iraq.
It's going to take local leadership. Backed by western force. They need to utterly destroy all militias. They need a government that works for all Iraqis
Return on investment? This is a country full of people we are talking about. Not a llama farm an old friend wants you in on.
A tough ask given its multiple peoples forced into what amounts to artificial borders.
What about Weimer Republic Germany?
A strong national identity that gave birth to the Nazi party first time round. Second time round there was a common threat from those scary Communists in Russia. That was the motivator to help rebuild Europe and yes it most certainly did take Western financial help to do it. Read up on the Marshall Plan and the Cold War.
Nationalism in a country split in two by a wall. Those two sides should have been even if your theory was correct.
It will take local leadership and organisation. I agree with you there. Where I disagree is in the West being aggressive in it's military action. Originally it only helped to polarise the population against us. Unless we are prepared to invest to rebuild what we have destroyed than the action is negative. We need a stable power structure within the country that the people support and trust before we can deal with ISIS.
As for the investment, as I've just explained, you need that to repair the damage from any military intervention otherwise the fallout will be even worse than what we have now.
It's ironic you accuse me of psychopathy for arguing against action that will most certainly spill the blood of children and lead to what exactly? In typical conservative fashion by shifting the problem, you think you've solved it. Destroying ISIS will only drive the formation of a new and even more dangerous group. Remember Al Qaeda, they used to be the bad guys, remember Assad? He used to be the bad guy. Those people are still just as bad as they used to be.
ISIS baited you with the beheadings. A crude form of propaganda designed to draw us into an unwinnable war.
Realistically we're going to fuck this up, withdraw early because the public is fickle and dumb and then make things worse again. But I really can't condone the loss of thousands of innocent lives.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...059499308?nk=ced562efd9a254801a8c501b159f15b1
Wonder how long before its rolled out to all.
And of course for people seriously 'at risk', they'd just trade the card for cash or trade some goods bought with the card for cash.
I guess it will be a boom time for the likes of cash converters.
Wonder how long before its rolled out to all.
And of course for people seriously 'at risk', they'd just trade the card for cash or trade some goods bought with the card for cash.
I guess it will be a boom time for the likes of cash converters.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results except in quantum physics.
Anyone who thinks war with ISIS is good needs also to understand where things went wrong in Afghanistan against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. That way there is a chance of winning the peace afterwards and not leaving a failed state behind yet again.
Defeating Isis is a good goal, but if it's the only goal then dont fucking bother.
Anyone who thinks war with ISIS is good needs also to understand where things went wrong in Afghanistan against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. That way there is a chance of winning the peace afterwards and not leaving a failed state behind yet again.
Defeating Isis is a good goal, but if it's the only goal then dont fucking bother.
What a shitty idea.
I mean even if people don't trade in their cards for cash it's still a terrible idea. For starters I don't actually believe the government actually knows what's best for everyone. It is the pinnacle of irony that this idea is being proposed by people who believe the government should intervene less in the economy.
Not to mention the fact that eventually it will be rolled out to all dole recipients, knowing this shitty government.
Hell even Chris Berg thinks the whole idea is fucked up.
I know about the Marshall plan and the cold war. But Germany and Japan were advanced countries with strong central control based in a national identity. It's completely different in Afghanistan and Iraq where tribes and sects and what not are the main identifier for the populations.
I don't think you understand my theory... Both sides of Germany. And now even Korea consider themselves Korean first. When the north Korean regime falls. There won't be ethnic cleansing. There won't be sectarian violence. Yet unity will be possible and desired by both sides generally. That's not enetirely the case in Iraq.
Bringing dead babies into it? Seriously?
And what's your plan? Leave Isis alone? Cause o hate to tell you. If you don't want dead babies. Your going about it the right way.
No one wants military action. But it's needed sometimes.
Isis didn't bait me with beheadings. I honestly don't care that much. I want these groups destroyed for the things they are doing behind the camera. I wanted us to crush the Taliban and co long before 911.
There is right and wrong in the world. And if we do nothing the wrongs win.
I haven't shifted the problem. In not a conservative in the slightest. Trotskyist mostly.
I haven't written a plan that described every action that we should take.... Im not going to. I dont have a month to spare. That doesnt mean we do nothing.
You seem to want me to solve everything in one post.
Of course he thinks its ducked up. He is an uber libertard.
Although in this case he is right. But what a Berg. (Berg is an insult. Streets ahead!)
This is true but I would not be surprised if there were people who identified as libertarians who think income management is a good idea.
Yeah government managing our own personal finances is a great idea...... :S
Well they probably think bootstraps are enough for people, governments shouldn't be giving people free money.
That is true. Those same libertarians probably believe any assistance to the poor is a bad idea.
The same libertarians who believe that mandated government spending habits are a good idea also think that any assistance to the poor is a bad idea? I'm so lost.
I'm fairly certain most libertarians would actually object to government telling people how to live their lives...in fact...allowing people to peacefully manage their own lives free from outside coercion is basically the founding precept of liberalism.
bobnowhere
Member
I see it as just an extension of the whole lifter v leaners mantra coming out of the treasurer's office. You are on unemployment, you're a burden and not worthy of the same place as the employed. You go to the Doctor once or twice more than average, you're a burden. Dare aim for a university education, you're a burden on taxpayers who don't. You don't dig stuff up, cut stuff down, grow or fish stuff, you're a burden on those that do. You work in the public sector...
I don't know if there are too many genuine Libertarians in the Coalition, they all seem to to be blessed with that nasty authoritarian streak that has infected the Labor Party.
I don't know if there are too many genuine Libertarians in the Coalition, they all seem to to be blessed with that nasty authoritarian streak that has infected the Labor Party.
Are we talking about foodstamps or government financial plans? I'm confused now.
I wrote this whole big response about how power corrupts but I lost it and now I can't be arsed so I'm going to summarise.
1. Power corrupts everyone.
2. Western democracies have done a pretty awesome job at limiting power so we can't be screwed over by despots.
3. Power still corrupts and people tend to hang on to power if they can.
4. There aren't really any classical liberals in government in Australia...they're mostly conservatives.
What I meant to say was that some people may support this policy because they realize that dropping all Newstart payments would be politically impossible.
That was my bad.
Markot you keep quoting nationalism as this beautiful solution for internal conflict. Blowing up ISIS isn't going to solve the sectarian split happening in the Middle East. It will only push it to even greater extremes. Your singing for a war on a huge scale here. Look at what just happened in Gaza. That was just the IDF. We're talking about sending in the US military backed up by 32 other countries. That's a damn big hole and more dead babies than anyone will ever bother counting. What's solved? ISIS will temporarily shrink and in a year or two be back more spiteful than ever.
ISIS while bad, are contained. The only people really threatened by them are in the local area. The bombs from US war planes are far more destructive and are far more likely to kill the people in the area than ISIS. Think Hamas rockets vs the IDF. Unless you buy Abbott's reasoning that we kill by accident so that's ok, then the priority is harm minimisation.
The solution to the problem, as always, is diplomatic, plus as I keep mentioning there are major economic and financial problems. The key country to get on board is Russia. Followed by Syria, Iran, the Iraq government and the real thorn Saudi Arabia. ISIS aren't just a bunch of disgruntled Arabs.
They're a bunch of well funded disgruntled Arabs. Where that funding is coming from isn't clear, but the prevailing consensus is Saudi Arabia. There are plenty of people in the world who will profit from a US conflict.
ISIS are just the bait. It's like when a lizard throws its tail. We're chasing the tail and the lizard is eating our eggs.
The US and Russia are currently embroiled in a proxy Cold War through Ukraine. If we're smart the problems in the middle East could even be the gateway to improving relations between the two powers. Blowing up ISIS is not.
ISIS aren't even that scary, you want to know what's really scary? Ebola. The outbreak is growing faster than our response. MSF or Doctor's without borders are warning we could be looking at 250,000 dead by xmas. The current numbers are grossly under represented at around 2 to 3 thousand dead. The reality is closer to 10 or 15.
But our world leaders are throwing all our resources into fighting some thugs. ISIS will be dealt with, but as a priority they are well down the list.
ISIS while bad, are contained. The only people really threatened by them are in the local area. The bombs from US war planes are far more destructive and are far more likely to kill the people in the area than ISIS. Think Hamas rockets vs the IDF. Unless you buy Abbott's reasoning that we kill by accident so that's ok, then the priority is harm minimisation.
The solution to the problem, as always, is diplomatic, plus as I keep mentioning there are major economic and financial problems. The key country to get on board is Russia. Followed by Syria, Iran, the Iraq government and the real thorn Saudi Arabia. ISIS aren't just a bunch of disgruntled Arabs.
They're a bunch of well funded disgruntled Arabs. Where that funding is coming from isn't clear, but the prevailing consensus is Saudi Arabia. There are plenty of people in the world who will profit from a US conflict.
ISIS are just the bait. It's like when a lizard throws its tail. We're chasing the tail and the lizard is eating our eggs.
The US and Russia are currently embroiled in a proxy Cold War through Ukraine. If we're smart the problems in the middle East could even be the gateway to improving relations between the two powers. Blowing up ISIS is not.
ISIS aren't even that scary, you want to know what's really scary? Ebola. The outbreak is growing faster than our response. MSF or Doctor's without borders are warning we could be looking at 250,000 dead by xmas. The current numbers are grossly under represented at around 2 to 3 thousand dead. The reality is closer to 10 or 15.
But our world leaders are throwing all our resources into fighting some thugs. ISIS will be dealt with, but as a priority they are well down the list.
I'm sure none of them are too proud to accept tax offsets.
It's pretty hard to be against medical weed.
One day it will be legal for all to use for any reason.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked