Page 27 of 38 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 374

Thread: ISIS reportedly burns 45 people alive

  1. #261
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: ISIS reportedly burns 45 people alive

    Quote Originally Posted by Higgins86 View Post
    Well this is a debate forum so hopefully you understand that what we are talking about has no bearing on actual events. I would honestly love to hear your strategy for ISIS though? Dem Socialist isn't someone I agree with a whole lot but he knows what he's talking about. With you however I am not so sure.

    So go on how do you want the world to handle ISIS?
    The Islamic state was unheard of a dozen years ago when Blair and Bush decided to attack, invade and occupy a country that had done neither of our countries any harm. Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi nor Assad gave any quarters to Islamic extremists. It's a dozen years of failed US/UK policy in the Middle East that has given rise to these miscreants that are now plaguing the region. Those that caused the problem should not be the ones deciding how to deal with it. Time for the US/UK to sit down and shut up.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  2. #262
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: ISIS reportedly burns 45 people alive

    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    My view isn't based in fear, its based in logic.
    Sure, I've heard that before.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  3. #263
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: ISIS reportedly burns 45 people alive

    Quote Originally Posted by Higgins86 View Post
    Helping the Kurds is key I agree my only worry is with Turkey and how they will react to a potential free Kurdish state which could potentially happen especially if we arm them/ fund them. Another worry with that is that if were to support the Kurds we could potentially see Iraq break up as each region looks to defend its borders and its own cultural identity.
    I agree. I came from a realist view on that post. In my opinion I think we should also remove the PKK from terrorist list, but that is outside a realists view of foreign policy. I see where you are coming from with the Turks. Erdogan has generally been a neusis with ISIS, allowing essentially open access to borders along Turkey, and turining a blind eye to financies to them. He clearly has a vested interest in keeping what is known as Kurdistan in a constant conflict with ISIS. I think if the US works a deal out with Iraq (which they might be willing to, espcially since the nothern region of Iraq is semi-autonomisou) and agree to move towards a free and independent Kurdistan over a certain time frame, that not only can the US but Iraq can pressure to move the Turksih region to do the same. I believe this will also mainly depend on the PKK. I think the PKK has shown a willingness to move towards a peaceful solution in the last few years to move away from armed struggle in Turkey. This can be seen through multiple cease fires. I believe once this is shown we can really make headway in that region.

    I also think the Kurdish region and point play a lot into the Syrian-Kurdish region. The PYD (a stong Kuridsh group has in many cases been willing to work with the Assad government on terms of soverignty and secularism. These talks have not moved forward mainly because of ISIS controlled regions) has open dialogue and connections within the Assad government. And have on several cases fought with the Assad regime and their National Defense Force (NDF). I think this can lead to inroads with a Kurdish state on the Syrian front.

    I like most of your points except negotiation with the Assad government, Don't you think that given the weapons he has used and the brutal tactics he has been implementing that the West could possibly discredit itself by entering talks with them?
    Especially given the relationship they have with Russia?
    With all since of morality, I think it little matters now. What we have is a war of attrition. I just want to make several points clear before I go on with my answer. I am not a Ba'athist. I am not a fan of the Assad government. During the original revolution, and protests I was 1.)for the protests. 2.) I was for the original FSA uprising and taking up arms once the Assad gov become incredibly brutal and inhuman. Essentially what became of the original Syrian Revolution (in my book) was a hijacking by jihadists, and criminals. Once this became more and more clear ( moved away from it and more towards a position of: what the region needs now is stability. In 2012 I even wrote a paper on how I thought that the FSA was being hijacked and openly working with Al-Nusra and many in the FSA ranks were moving towards a openly jihadist and radical islamic position. What I believe we have is essentially a proxy war, with a rogue terrorist insurgency, and coupled with unknown groups fighting eachother. What I think needs to be done is some sort of political deal between Assad, the moderates, and Russians. This is only going to come through a political and peaceful deal. There needs to be some sort of military approach by the Syrian government and political approach by the Syrian government. This will only happen once the FSA (and their representatives) decide that their uprising has essentially failed and been hijacked. I honestly dont believe the US will be much influence. I think that Russia will have to lead the roll. I believe that the US has sidelined itslef too much on Syrian and that Assad does not trust the US. Russia has called for multiple talks within the Syrian gov and the Syrian opposition and that Russia will be leading these talks. Does this have to do with the US position on Syria? Yes. Was it exclusive to Obama? No. I think it was the nature of the conflict and about who is currently coming out on top (Assad). If that happens, then I think Syria can, and will defeat ISIS.


  4. #264
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: ISIS reportedly burns 45 people alive

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Sure, I've heard that before.
    Imagine for a moment that its true.

  5. #265
    Sage
    Higgins86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,252

    Re: ISIS reportedly burns 45 people alive

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    The Islamic state was unheard of a dozen years ago when Blair and Bush decided to attack, invade and occupy a country that had done neither of our countries any harm. Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi nor Assad gave any quarters to Islamic extremists. It's a dozen years of failed US/UK policy in the Middle East that has given rise to these miscreants that are now plaguing the region. Those that caused the problem should not be the ones deciding how to deal with it. Time for the US/UK to sit down and shut up.
    It was unheard of but it existed during the Iraq war however it dwindled in numbers and was all but pushed out of Iraq. They gained a significant presence in Al Anbar, Nineveh, Kirkuk and other areas, but around 2008, its violent methods, including suicide attacks on civilian targets and the widespread killing of prisoners, led to a backlash from Sunni Iraqis and other insurgent groups which eventually led to it being almost non existent.
    ISIS profited from the West's inaction in Syria where they have gone from strength to strength praying on the desperate and the needy. As they say if you don't treat a wound the infection spreads which is exactly what happened in Syria. Anyone that's thinks that the Iraq war made ISIS what it is today as a very basic knowledge on the group and the impact that the Syrian Civil war has had on the region.
    ‘This is not peace, it is an armistice for 20 years.’ (Ferdinand Foch. After the Treaty of Versailles, 1919).

  6. #266
    Sage
    Higgins86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,252

    Re: ISIS reportedly burns 45 people alive

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    I agree. I came from a realist view on that post. In my opinion I think we should also remove the PKK from terrorist list, but that is outside a realists view of foreign policy. I see where you are coming from with the Turks. Erdogan has generally been a neusis with ISIS, allowing essentially open access to borders along Turkey, and turining a blind eye to financies to them. He clearly has a vested interest in keeping what is known as Kurdistan in a constant conflict with ISIS. I think if the US works a deal out with Iraq (which they might be willing to, espcially since the nothern region of Iraq is semi-autonomisou) and agree to move towards a free and independent Kurdistan over a certain time frame, that not only can the US but Iraq can pressure to move the Turksih region to do the same. I believe this will also mainly depend on the PKK. I think the PKK has shown a willingness to move towards a peaceful solution in the last few years to move away from armed struggle in Turkey. This can be seen through multiple cease fires. I believe once this is shown we can really make headway in that region.

    I also think the Kurdish region and point play a lot into the Syrian-Kurdish region. The PYD (a stong Kuridsh group has in many cases been willing to work with the Assad government on terms of soverignty and secularism. These talks have not moved forward mainly because of ISIS controlled regions) has open dialogue and connections within the Assad government. And have on several cases fought with the Assad regime and their National Defense Force (NDF). I think this can lead to inroads with a Kurdish state on the Syrian front.




    With all since of morality, I think it little matters now. What we have is a war of attrition. I just want to make several points clear before I go on with my answer. I am not a Ba'athist. I am not a fan of the Assad government. During the original revolution, and protests I was 1.)for the protests. 2.) I was for the original FSA uprising and taking up arms once the Assad gov become incredibly brutal and inhuman. Essentially what became of the original Syrian Revolution (in my book) was a hijacking by jihadists, and criminals. Once this became more and more clear ( moved away from it and more towards a position of: what the region needs now is stability. In 2012 I even wrote a paper on how I thought that the FSA was being hijacked and openly working with Al-Nusra and many in the FSA ranks were moving towards a openly jihadist and radical islamic position. What I believe we have is essentially a proxy war, with a rogue terrorist insurgency, and coupled with unknown groups fighting eachother. What I think needs to be done is some sort of political deal between Assad, the moderates, and Russians. This is only going to come through a political and peaceful deal. There needs to be some sort of military approach by the Syrian government and political approach by the Syrian government. This will only happen once the FSA (and their representatives) decide that their uprising has essentially failed and been hijacked. I honestly dont believe the US will be much influence. I think that Russia will have to lead the roll. I believe that the US has sidelined itslef too much on Syrian and that Assad does not trust the US. Russia has called for multiple talks within the Syrian gov and the Syrian opposition and that Russia will be leading these talks. Does this have to do with the US position on Syria? Yes. Was it exclusive to Obama? No. I think it was the nature of the conflict and about who is currently coming out on top (Assad). If that happens, then I think Syria can, and will defeat ISIS.

    Just a great post in general mate which on here sometimes is hard to come by. Love your points about PKK who in my book are a bunch of bloody heroes however I have noticed that Western media has distanced themselves from the PKK and instead of reported it as mainly civilian fighters ( another story and yes I work for the bbc lol). Would also love to get into your points about Russia and what that could do to Americas global standing.
    Honestly I have to go to work but I will come back to this and I would love to see that paper you wrote if you would be so kind to message me a link.
    ‘This is not peace, it is an armistice for 20 years.’ (Ferdinand Foch. After the Treaty of Versailles, 1919).

  7. #267
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: ISIS reportedly burns 45 people alive

    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    Actually, your dismissal of the facts betrays your own partisanship.

    BBC News - Iraq's annual death toll highest in five years - UN
    1.)No this doenst confrim anything when it comes to my "own partisanship.". If you would of read your article it actually backs up my points I made earlier, especially relating to the failure of the Iraqi gov; "Announcing the 2013 death toll, the UN head of mission in Iraq, Nickolay Mladenov, said: "This is a sad and terrible record which confirms once again the urgent need for the Iraqi authorities to address the roots of violence to curb this infernal circle.".

    Also with the graph you posted, how does it back up your point? I know you want to pin this all on Obama, but Obama was president since 2008... Attacks went down for 3 year straight....... But then... God damnit, I know what you are going to blame this one,..... "If only we left troops behind... It was Obamas fault we puled out"... Right? Is this the argument you are goin to state.. If so please do...

    Oh wow! I mean I wonder why troop casualties decreased!? Its not like President Bush declared a draw down, then a deal coundlnt be made between the US gov and Iraqi gov to decrease troops even more until US troops were gone...

    A good question is why you are against a proven strategy that has already worked in Iraq.

    Worked?!?!? Iraq was apart of the global war on terror. Iraq had basically no terrorist attacks in the country, no presence of terrorist groups, what happened once we invaded!? It became the jiahdi playground. If you think this strategy has worked, you are crazy.

    #of terrorist attacks in Iraq
    Looks like a real winner!

    After 13 years, 2 wars and trillions in military spending, terrorist attacks are rising sharply - The Washington Post
    Have fun with the giant money suck and the war between eastaisia and eurasia. Just remember, it never ends.


  8. #268
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: ISIS reportedly burns 45 people alive

    Quote Originally Posted by Higgins86 View Post
    It was unheard of but it existed during the Iraq war however it dwindled in numbers and was all but pushed out of Iraq. They gained a significant presence in Al Anbar, Nineveh, Kirkuk and other areas, but around 2008, its violent methods, including suicide attacks on civilian targets and the widespread killing of prisoners, led to a backlash from Sunni Iraqis and other insurgent groups which eventually led to it being almost non existent.
    ISIS profited from the West's inaction in Syria where they have gone from strength to strength praying on the desperate and the needy. As they say if you don't treat a wound the infection spreads which is exactly what happened in Syria. Anyone that's thinks that the Iraq war made ISIS what it is today as a very basic knowledge on the group and the impact that the Syrian Civil war has had on the region.
    I'm sorry. Once again, coming from the biggest imperialistic, warmongering nation in modern history, I give the UK's opinion on foreign policy, no credibility.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  9. #269
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: ISIS reportedly burns 45 people alive

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    This is not a conventional force. This is a force that uses bombing, and invasions to their advantage. We have been in a War on Terror for the past 14+ years. The only thing we have seen during this "war on terror" is a drastic increase in terror. Terror groups have seen their ranks increase, they have seen their funds increase, they are now even taking over states. The only thing this war on terror has done is increase terror. If you think we can realistically kill our way out of this war, the recent history proves that wrong. We cannot win a war on a tactic.
    Recall that the US military had control over Iraq, elections were held and even BHO declared it 'stable'. When Obama removed the troops those who were doing the killing earlier now have control over a very large area and are establishing a Caliphate. They can be defeated in a number of ways but the first is militarily.
    How so?
    The Democracies are not acting sufficiently or in unison. They need a leader and they have none. What we are doing, as mentioned earlier, is acting as befuddled bystanders and watching the carnage on the internet. This sins of omissions are dishonorable, cowardly and inhumane.

  10. #270
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: ISIS reportedly burns 45 people alive

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    I'm sorry. Once again, coming from the biggest imperialistic, warmongering nation in modern history, I give the UK's opinion on foreign policy, no credibility.
    Whose foreign policies would you prefer?

Page 27 of 38 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... 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
  •