Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 52

Thread: Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

  1. #41
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    That's the point, Ron Paul has offered constructive alternatives to destructive US policies in the ME since at least the CIA sponsored coup in Iran in 1953. STOP interfering in Middle Eastern countries internal affairs like this which create animosity toward the US. This has been RP's message as long as he was in congress. Decades of FAILED US policy in the ME has delivered us the wretched condition that exists at the present with sectarian violence spreading. One of the few voices that have perennially opposed US policies there shouldn't be the one criticised for not having the answer to reverse this damage.
    I've frequently noted that Ron Paul is far more a prophet than a leader. Leaders need to act based on the situation that confronts them. It is not enough to stick to advocacy of a vision regardless of the merits of such a vision.

    Whether it is President Obama today or a successor tomorrow, the President will need to make decisions based on the circumstances of his or her time. That such circumstances were shaped, in part, by decisions made in the past by the U.S., along with external forces many of which are beyond U.S. influence, matters little. They still need to make choices. Sometimes one has to make the least bad choice from among options that are all not very appealing.

    As one who falls in the Realist foreign policy camp, my focus would be on limiting American intervention to cases where critical American interests are involved. That would mean focusing on maintaining an open Persian Gulf, assuring that the regional balance of power does not shift in a position to threaten that vital interest, and safeguarding and supporting regional American allies (Israel, Jordan, Egypt), etc. I don't support using military force for democratization projects, as democracy depends far more on internal factors than who heads a country. I don't support military action where there is an absence of critical American interests i.e., I opposed recent U.S. military intervention in Libya and oppose U.S. intervention in Syria's sectarian conflict.

    My position differs from that of neoconservatives who believe force can be used to expand the sphere of democracy and liberal internationalists who believe that international law essentially supplants the balance of power/Realpolitik and can be used to liberalize countries. I also do not support to the evolution in liberal internationalist thought concerning the use of force under the notion of a "responsibility to protect." Genocide, consistent with the definition in the Convention on Genocide is a singular exception. Sudan, Syria, Nigeria, etc., do not fit that definition. My position also differs from the neo-isolationist/non-interventionist group, which is built on the assumption that the U.S. essentially has no critical overseas interests and, therefore, should not intervene in international developments.

    All of this does not mean that I'm right, nor that my positions should not be criticized, etc. However, that's the context in which I suggest that the U.S. airstrikes against the Islamic State on behalf of the Kurdish Regional government, arms provided to the Kurdish Regional Government are appropriate, and if that government declares sovereignty, the U.S. should support that outcome. The KRG is a friendly government to U.S. interests, has been a reliable partner, it is democratic in nature, though its democracy is not the key factor, and the Islamic State has threatened genocide against the Yazidis.

    At the same time, I don't support similar measures on behalf of Baghdad (something advocated by Senator McCain). The Iraqi government headed by Prime Minister Maliki has not been reliable with respect to U.S. interests, has been sectarian not inclusive in nature, which has played a large role in allowing the Islamic State to gain traction in Iraq, and the Prime Minister has called out armed forces to potentially hold onto power, bully Baghdad's other political actors, etc.

  2. #42
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    I've frequently noted that Ron Paul is far more a prophet than a leader. Leaders need to act based on the situation that confronts them. It is not enough to stick to advocacy of a vision regardless of the merits of such a vision.

    Whether it is President Obama today or a successor tomorrow, the President will need to make decisions based on the circumstances of his or her time. That such circumstances were shaped, in part, by decisions made in the past by the U.S., along with external forces many of which are beyond U.S. influence, matters little. They still need to make choices. Sometimes one has to make the least bad choice from among options that are all not very appealing.

    As one who falls in the Realist foreign policy camp, my focus would be on limiting American intervention to cases where critical American interests are involved. That would mean focusing on maintaining an open Persian Gulf, assuring that the regional balance of power does not shift in a position to threaten that vital interest, and safeguarding and supporting regional American allies (Israel, Jordan, Egypt), etc. I don't support using military force for democratization projects, as democracy depends far more on internal factors than who heads a country. I don't support military action where there is an absence of critical American interests i.e., I opposed recent U.S. military intervention in Libya and oppose U.S. intervention in Syria's sectarian conflict.

    My position differs from that of neoconservatives who believe force can be used to expand the sphere of democracy and liberal internationalists who believe that international law essentially supplants the balance of power/Realpolitik and can be used to liberalize countries. I also do not support to the evolution in liberal internationalist thought concerning the use of force under the notion of a "responsibility to protect." Genocide, consistent with the definition in the Convention on Genocide is a singular exception. Sudan, Syria, Nigeria, etc., do not fit that definition. My position also differs from the neo-isolationist/non-interventionist group, which is built on the assumption that the U.S. essentially has no critical overseas interests and, therefore, should not intervene in international developments.

    All of this does not mean that I'm right, nor that my positions should not be criticized, etc. However, that's the context in which I suggest that the U.S. airstrikes against the Islamic State on behalf of the Kurdish Regional government, arms provided to the Kurdish Regional Government are appropriate, and if that government declares sovereignty, the U.S. should support that outcome. The KRG is a friendly government to U.S. interests, has been a reliable partner, it is democratic in nature, though its democracy is not the key factor, and the Islamic State has threatened genocide against the Yazidis.

    At the same time, I don't support similar measures on behalf of Baghdad (something advocated by Senator McCain). The Iraqi government headed by Prime Minister Maliki has not been reliable with respect to U.S. interests, has been sectarian not inclusive in nature, which has played a large role in allowing the Islamic State to gain traction in Iraq, and the Prime Minister has called out armed forces to potentially hold onto power, bully Baghdad's other political actors, etc.
    Damn you're long winded don! I'll disagree on Ron Paul, and say we have some common ground on the rest of your post.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  3. #43
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,705

    Re: Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    I'm no liberal, and its apparent to me that removing Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi and now Assad is precisely what has emboldened militant Islamic jihadists. That can of worms has been opened, Russia was right that US interference would cause sectarian violence to spread throughout the region.
    Sure...endorsing extremist fundamentalists in their bid to overthrow governments will indeed tend to create instability. Thats been a cornerstone of the current administrations foreign policy. That doesnt mean there arent logical ways to deal with brutal dictators.

    Say...you know who was really great with controlling his population? That Hitler guy. Sorry...leaving Hussein in power would have made as much sense as just attempting to contain Hitler.

  4. #44
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 05:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,985

    Re: Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Actually, Ron Paul wouldn't prefer that, and I doubt you can quote him saying such. But if anything has pushed the ME towards an Islamic state, its US policy in the region for decades. And most recently, the breaking out of Syria by IS (ISIS), is just what Russia and China warned three years ago that US interference in Syria would produce.
    maybe isis would not have formed if we had interveaned in syria.
    "If you can't stand the way this place is, Take yourself to higher places!"
    Break, By Three days grace

    Hilliary Clinton/Tim Kaine 2016

  5. #45
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 05:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,985

    Re: Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    I'm no liberal, and its apparent to me that removing Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi and now Assad is precisely what has emboldened militant Islamic jihadists. That can of worms has been opened, Russia was right that US interference would cause sectarian violence to spread throughout the region.
    aren't you forgetting about Tunisia? you know? the country where the arab spring movement originally began, after a tunisian man set himself on fire to protest the government of tunisia? come to think of it i think tunisia is relatively stable compared to other countries. i may be wrong of course
    "If you can't stand the way this place is, Take yourself to higher places!"
    Break, By Three days grace

    Hilliary Clinton/Tim Kaine 2016

  6. #46
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,696

    Re: Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

    Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
    Alright!
    Our friends, the Peshmerga, have taken back two areas from ISIS.
    As always, the Kurds just need a little help to overcome. Overcome the heavy weaponry ISIS had taken from the Iraqi Army further South.
    Keep the strikes up, but none for Maliki's mini-Iran in the South unless Baghdad is truly endanger of falling.

    Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

    U.S. Warplanes Hit Targets for a Third Day
    By DION NISSENBAUM/MICHELLE HACKMAN
    WSJ - Updated Aug. 10, 2014 4:01 p.m. ET
    Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes in Iraq - WSJ
    I remain in favor of not just a Kurdish autonomus region but a Kurdish state. The latter, admittedly, a much more difficult proposition.

    The Yazidis and other minorities, incl Christians, remain in Deep trouble in the area, although the Sinjar Mountain seige has loosened somewhat.
    Also reports that Hundreds of Yazidi women have been taken as 'war wives'; an untold amount of casualties on that front.


    This is kind of how I hope this all ends:

    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  7. #47
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Sure...endorsing extremist fundamentalists in their bid to overthrow governments will indeed tend to create instability. Thats been a cornerstone of the current administrations foreign policy. That doesnt mean there arent logical ways to deal with brutal dictators.

    Say...you know who was really great with controlling his population? That Hitler guy. Sorry...leaving Hussein in power would have made as much sense as just attempting to contain Hitler.
    For Christ sakes, if you don't know the difference between Hitler and Hussein, I haven't anything further to say to you on this subject.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  8. #48
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    maybe isis would not have formed if we had interveaned in syria.
    Where have you been, we did and still are, this is one of the things that has strengthened IS. It was Russia that warned three years ago that US interference in Syria was going to cause the conflict to spill over into the rest of the region. And of course we're now seeing that.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  9. #49
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    aren't you forgetting about Tunisia? you know? the country where the arab spring movement originally began, after a tunisian man set himself on fire to protest the government of tunisia? come to think of it i think tunisia is relatively stable compared to other countries. i may be wrong of course
    Tunisia is doing good, and of the countries I mentioned, its the one that the US was involved in the least, feature that!!
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  10. #50
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,705

    Re: Kurdish Forces Reverse Militant Gains as U.S. Continues Airstrikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    For Christ sakes, if you don't know the difference between Hitler and Hussein, I haven't anything further to say to you on this subject.
    Hitler gassed millions. Hussein used human shredders on people. He used chemical weapons to destroy entire villages merely because they opposed him.

    Thats the guy you wish was still in power. I TRULY encourage you to Google the actual pictures and videos of some of his means of maintaining order in Iraq.

    Were they the same? No. But they were both hell on crowd control.
    Last edited by VanceMack; 08-11-14 at 11:50 PM.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •