• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Arizona professor claims U.S. military 'greater threat' to peace than ISIS

Where do these nuts come from? And to think they are the ones educating our children......Scary.



Arizona professor claims U.S. military 'greater threat' to peace than ISIS | Fox News



“It would not be a stretch to say that the United States is actually a greater threat to peace and stability in the region than ISIS — not least because U.S. policies in Iraq, Libya and Syria have largely paved the way for ISIS’ emergence as a major regional actor,” al-Gharbi wrote in the article titled, “How Much Moral High Ground Does the U.S. Have Over ISIS?”


He is absolutely, 100% correct.

The US invaded Iraq. The left. Just like every other invasion only this one turned around and bit you in the ass. The only problem is the rest of them world will now have to pay for it.
 
It is difficult to imagine that any serious academic would suggest that the U.S. military is a bigger threat to peace than an extremist movement that has carried out genocidal activity, enslaved women, etc. This kind of false equivocation serves no constructive purpose. It does, however, divert attention from the very real atrocities ISIS is carrying out on an almost daily basis.
 
America is FAR AND AWAY more of a threat to peace in the Middle East then ISIS...it's not even remotely close.

Who has killed more innocent civilians by about 100 to 1? Who has caused more destruction and made more people homeless (both directly and indirectly) by about 10000 to 1? Who has propped up more horrific regimes that have treated their citizens horribly?

America and her military.
 
Last edited:
He is absolutely, 100% correct.

The US invaded Iraq. The left. Just like every other invasion only this one turned around and bit you in the ass. The only problem is the rest of them world will now have to pay for it.

Don't be silly. It is true that the US military is a greater danger to enemies of the US and its allies that ISIS is to its. But the way you speak makes it sound as though you have adapted rather well done propaganda that you never checked out seriously and never analyzed rigorously yourself. That is a pity, because the topic is important. But it would take some effort, of course, especially now that you have seemingly aquired conditioned reflexes that are tough to recondition.
 
The problem with having a huge military on hand is that it's too easy to use it. If instead the US had to mobilize every time it wanted to play policeman, including a draft and increase in taxes, the US would get involved in far fewer pointless squabbles.
 
It is difficult to imagine that any serious academic would suggest that the U.S. military is a bigger threat to peace than an extremist movement that has carried out genocidal activity, enslaved women, etc. This kind of false equivocation serves no constructive purpose. It does, however, divert attention from the very real atrocities ISIS is carrying out on an almost daily basis.


I suggest you need to look at what the serious academic is looking at and that is who CAUSED "an extremist movement that has carried on genocidal activity...".

If there was such a group around when the US invaded then you have an argument. What transpired since, the 'regime change" in Libya, the on going arming of these "extremist groups" etc. If the US military would stop invading maybe there would be a chance for peace, but since you simply had to get kill Saddam, well there's been anything but peace......

Maybe it's time you started minding your own business
 
The problem with having a huge military on hand is that it's too easy to use it. If instead the US had to mobilize every time it wanted to play policeman, including a draft and increase in taxes, the US would get involved in far fewer pointless squabbles.



That was the precise warning given by America's last great general, Dwight D. Eisenhower who warned about the industrial Military Complex and the need to keep it fed. Hew has been 100% correct. When your most important tool is a hammer, then every solution results in pounding something.
 
Where do these nuts come from? And to think they are the ones educating our children......Scary.

Arizona professor claims U.S. military 'greater threat' to peace than ISIS | Fox News

He's just one guy, Navy.

And I don't think he's an actual professor. Al Jazeera lists him as an instructor and states that he holds a Master's in Philosophy from Arizona.

Musa al-Gharbi | University of Arizona - Academia.edu

The School of Government and Public Policy Faculty, Staff, & Students | School of Government & Public Policy
 
The problem with having a huge military on hand is that it's too easy to use it. If instead the US had to mobilize every time it wanted to play policeman, including a draft and increase in taxes, the US would get involved in far fewer pointless squabbles.

That was not a big problem. Just put a gutless ***** named Obama in charge and it will not only NOT be used for much, it will deteriorate at an alarming rate due to lack of training and infighting for funding.

Fighting evil and socialism is never a "pointless" struggle except to cowards and brain dead ****s who think we should spend money to provide luxuries to lazy dumbasses and that we should turn our back on human suffering that is not caused by the people suffering being lazy dumbasses.
 
This is an excerpt from what he actually wrote

"How Much Moral High Ground Does the US Have Over ISIS?

Without question, ISIS is an abomination. However, it is unclear whether America is the right agent to see this through. Part of the trouble relates to the Obama administration's strategy, which seems likely to empower ISIS even as it undermines the security and interests of the Unted States and its allies - but there is an ethical dimension as well.

While ISIS poses a serious (although likely overstated) threat to the governments of Iraq and Syria, over the last two administrations, the United States has itself forcibly overthrown the governments of Iraq and Libya - each time in defiance of international law. And along with ISIS, the United States has spent the last three years seeking to undermine the Syrian government. Additionally, it has sheltered Israel from meaningful accountability to the international community, allowing the crisis in Palestine to fester.

It would not be a stretch to say that the United States is actually a greater threat to peace and stability in the region than ISIS - not least because US policies in Iraq, Libya and Syria have largely paved the way for ISIS's emergence as a major regional actor.

But perhaps more disturbingly, many of the same behaviors condemned by the Obama administration and used to justify its most recent campaign into Iraq and Syria are commonly perpetrated by US troops and are ubiquitous in the broader American society. Until these problems are better addressed, United States' efforts to undermine ISIS will be akin to using a dirty rag to clean an infected wound.

Sexual Violence

The initial driver of US involvement was the outrage over ISIS' capture of thousands of Yazidi women and the sexual violence subsequently exercised against them - horrors which provided moral credence to the war against ISIS in much the same way that the 2001 US war against the Taliban was justified in part by highlighting the plight of Afghan women living under their rule.

However, over the course of that war, and the subsequent 2003 war in Iraq, US soldiers and contractors repeatedly used rape as a weapon of war, both against prisoners and the local civilian population. But perhaps more disturbing than the crimes committed by US personnel against Iraqis and Afghans were the atrocities committed by servicemen against their fellow soldiers.

As many as one out of three female soldiers are raped over the course of their military careers. Up to 80 percent of these assaults go unreported, in large part because reported cases rarely result in convictions or proportional punishment. In fact, the victims are frequently punished socially and professionally for reporting abuse, and they are barred from suing the government for reparations even when wrongdoing is proven.

The stats are not much better in the broader population. As many as one in five women who attend college in America are sexually assaulted over the course of their academic career, often with no justice even when the crimes are reported. This is commensurate with the broader trend in America - according to White House estimates, roughly a fifth of all American women are raped at some point in their lives.

As in the military, most of these crimes are not reported to the police, and most reported rapes are never prosecuted - let alone result in convictions for the perpetrators.

If the crimes against thousands of women in Iraq and Syria justify a US mobilization that costs nearly $10 million per day, how much more militant should Americans be about resolving the tens of thousands of cases of sexual violence that go unpunished and largely unnoticed in the United States each year?

Astonishing Cruelty

In addition to sexual violence, there was widespread outrage over ISIS's uncompromising brutality and the pornographic way they record and broadcast these acts - which include beheadings, crucifixions, and occasional incidences of cannibalism.

Of course, US soldiers and contractors have and continue to torture their enemies, often taking obscene photos to brag about and reminisce upon their acts. The contractors who were implicated in these abuses have never been prosecuted. Instead, one whistleblower who initially exposed these crimes, Chelsea Manning, has been sentenced to 35 years in prison.

There are further reports of US servicemen committing massacres, desecrating the corpses of their enemies, or even hunting the locals for sport while collecting photos, and even body parts, as trophies......"
How Much Moral High Ground Does the US Have Over ISIS?
 
America is FAR AND AWAY more of a threat to peace in the Middle East then ISIS...it's not even remotely close.

Who has killed more innocent civilians by about 100 to 1? Who has caused more destruction and made more people homeless (both directly and indirectly) by about 10000 to 1? Who has propped up more horrific regimes that have treated their citizens horribly?

America and her military.

Yeah, and the peace loving people of Japan were just minding their own business in 1941, when we declared war upon them.
 
Yeah, and the peace loving people of Japan were just minding their own business in 1941, when we declared war upon them.

I don't necessarily agree with DA60, but, hmm...not sure if non-sequitur, dumb argument, false analogy or all three.
 
I don't necessarily agree with DA60, but, hmm...not sure if non-sequitur, dumb argument, false analogy or all three.

Explain how it's a false analogy.

Word to the wise: don't get pissy when I smoke you like a cheap cigar.
 
America is FAR AND AWAY more of a threat to peace in the Middle East then ISIS...it's not even remotely close.

Who has killed more innocent civilians by about 100 to 1? Who has caused more destruction and made more people homeless (both directly and indirectly) by about 10000 to 1? Who has propped up more horrific regimes that have treated their citizens horribly?

America and her military.
Lets see some numbers backing these bogus claims. You have no idea the level of caution taken to spare civilian lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sometimes, these levels of caution have led to the death and dismemberment of US servicemen and women. Further, let's not forget that if Afghanis had not housed OBL we never would've gone there. Let's not forget that if we hadn't gone in to Iraq, ISIS would have control of sarin, vx, and mustard gas stockpiles. And yes, ISIS would exist regardless of whether we were in the ME or not. ISIS, as I've pointed out to other members of this board, is a group dissident of a long line of Islamic extremism that predates the US.
 
That was not a big problem. Just put a gutless ***** named Obama in charge and it will not only NOT be used for much, it will deteriorate at an alarming rate due to lack of training and infighting for funding.

Fighting evil and socialism is never a "pointless" struggle except to cowards and brain dead ****s who think we should spend money to provide luxuries to lazy dumbasses and that we should turn our back on human suffering that is not caused by the people suffering being lazy dumbasses.

Every aspect of the USFG budget is wildly, laughably, out of control. That includes the military which is no longer tasked with responding to threats to the actual US, rather potential threats to allies. That is a very poor use of federal dollars, but is par for the course for statist who want the USFG to be involved in every aspect of life.
 
Lets see some numbers backing these bogus claims. You have no idea the level of caution taken to spare civilian lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sometimes, these levels of caution have led to the death and dismemberment of US servicemen and women. Further, let's not forget that if Afghanis had not housed OBL we never would've gone there. Let's not forget that if we hadn't gone in to Iraq, ISIS would have control of sarin, vx, and mustard gas stockpiles. And yes, ISIS would exist regardless of whether we were in the ME or not. ISIS, as I've pointed out to other members of this board, is a group dissident of a long line of Islamic extremism that predates the US.

Recent stats show that only 20% of the people killed by drones were the intended target. The Afghan government was willing to turn over OBL to an international body, just not the USA directly, which made that war unnecessary. Iraq had no usable WMDs, those Bush II administration claims were bogus and wildly exaggerated. If we hadn't installed an Iraqi government that favored Shiites and discriminated against Sunnis there would be few, if any, ISIS supporters in Iraq. If we hadn't attacked Iraq and stayed out of Syria, the situation would be much different and it wouldn't be our "responsibility" to fix the mess we made. (which we are incapable of doing)
 
Lets see some numbers backing these bogus claims. You have no idea the level of caution taken to spare civilian lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sometimes, these levels of caution have led to the death and dismemberment of US servicemen and women. Further, let's not forget that if Afghanis had not housed OBL we never would've gone there. Let's not forget that if we hadn't gone in to Iraq, ISIS would have control of sarin, vx, and mustard gas stockpiles. And yes, ISIS would exist regardless of whether we were in the ME or not. ISIS, as I've pointed out to other members of this board, is a group dissident of a long line of Islamic extremism that predates the US.

You do know that the Taliban offered to give up bin Laden to a third party country if the US gave evidence that bin Laden was behind the attack, correct?

"Let's not forget that if we hadn't gone in to Iraq, ISIS would have control of sarin, vx, and mustard gas stockpiles."

That assumes that everything would have transpired exactly the same if the US hadn't invaded Iraq in 2003. This should not be assumed.
 
Looks like yet another Navy Pride drive-by then disappear thread start where he only read the headline. Just another normal day here at DP.
 
Back
Top Bottom