• 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!

U.S. airstrike kills leader of Islamic State in Afghanistan

Fenton said:
:lamo:lamo:lamo

What origination ???? According too the NYT's, Obama's fight against ISIS has been more about manipulating intelligence reports and perpetuating Obama administration talking points

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/22/us/politics/military-reviews-us-response-to-isis-rise.html

" In July, a group of intelligence analysts at the U.S. military’s Central Command accused their bosses of distorting and selectively editing intelligence reports about the fight against ISIS in order to portray that campaign as more successful than it really was. As a result of those complaints, the Pentagon’s inspector general opened an investigation. Now, the allegations of misconduct have extended to a possible cover-up, with some analysts accusing the senior intelligence officials at Centcom, Maj. Gen. Steven Grove and his civilian deputy, Gregory Ryckman, of deleting emails and files from computer systems before the inspector general could examine them, three individuals familiar with the investigation told The Daily Beast...At the heart of the analysts’ allegations is what they describe as a persistent effort by Grove and his team to downplay or even change reports that that questioned how much progress a U.S.-led coalition is making in the Obama administration’s stated goal to degrade, destroy, and defeat ISIS. Draft reports that contained a more pessimistic view, or that questioned the efficacy of hitting certain targets, were sent back to the analysts for more extensive rewriting. ".

Lol.....so instead of actually fighting ISIS, the Obama administration pressured CENTCOM to manipulate assessments to fit some bull **** narrative.

" Two defense officials said that some felt the commander for intelligence at CENTCOM failed to keep political pressures from Washington from bearing on lower-level analysts at command headquarters in Tampa, Florida. That pressure, while described as subtle and not overt, is nevertheless clear, the analysts said: Assessments on ISIS should comport with “the leadership consensus,” that is, top policymakers’ view, that the U.S.-led campaign against the group is paying dividends. "


It explains how Obama could claim that ISIS was " contained " a day before the Paris Terrorist attacks.
Obama declared ISIS 'contained' day before Paris attack - CNNPolitics.com
Click to expand...

Well, what do you expect from the guy who co-founded ISIS with Hillary?:lamo:lamo

You guys on the Far Right are precious! I love when you quote the New York Times! It's so cute!
 
Ahlevah said:
Negotiating with ISIS isn't an option. They can be defeated. It would require time and the commitment of an effective strategy and force. Short of that, taking out their leadership is better than letting them live.
Click to expand...

Um, I never said we should negotiate with them either. :neutral:

Our presence there is what ISIS wants, it helps their recruitment and alienates people in our local population who become sympathetic to their cause.
 
Ahlevah said:
Okay, I'll say it: You can defeat a major terrorist group by trying to kill them all. It took twenty-five years, but they did it in Sri Lanka.

How Sri Lanka Won the War | The Diplomat
Click to expand...

A) I said especially in another country (which you left out obviously to strengthen your case).

And B) that was a totally different situation. The Tamil Tigers wanted self rule for part of the territory. ISIL is not trying to take over any part of America. They are totally unrelated.
The Tamil Tiger war was purely a civil war that some in the west (late in the day) decide to call a terrorist war.
They surrendered when they finally realized they could not achieve their goal.

Hard core terrorists never give up...they keep fighting even if their numbers are down to just a few dozen. As long as ISIS believe strongly in what they do - they will always exist.
Now, you could destroy the nation of ISIL...but you can never destroy the movement unless you kill every single ISIS member worldwide who strongly believes what they do...which is impossible.
 
Last edited:
DA60 said:
A) I said especially in another country (which you left out obviously to strengthen your case).
Click to expand...

You want the quote again? No? Here it is:

Anyone who says you can beat major terrorist groups by trying to kill them all has no idea what they are talking about.
Click to expand...

So now you want to qualify it. :roll: Okay. Terrorist groups can and do end, even if they're not always militarily defeated. But, in the meantime, I'm all in favor of taking out as many of these assholes as we can.

How Terrorist Groups End: Lessons for Countering al Qa'ida | RAND
 
DA60 said:
And B) that was a totally different situation. The Tamil Tigers wanted self rule for part of the territory. ISIL is not trying to take over any part of America. They are totally unrelated.
Click to expand...

ISIL wants self rule for much of the Middle East, Central Asia, and North Africa. I'm not worried about them invading the U.S. But they've shown themselves to be a threat to U.S. citizens and infrastructure as well as our allies. They're evil. These is no middle ground with them. As long as they exist, we should strive to destroy them, even if that's forever.
 
Ahlevah said:
ISIL wants self rule for much of the Middle East, Central Asia, and North Africa. I'm not worried about them invading the U.S. But they've shown themselves to be a threat to U.S. citizens and infrastructure as well as our allies. They're evil. These is no middle ground with them. As long as they exist, we should strive to destroy them, even if that's forever.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they're evil. But ISIL can't be destroyed by military means alone. Yeah, we gotta make sure that they lose all their territory, but as long as there's one idiot with a computer hooked up to the internet, ISIL will exist. ISIL will probably never be 'destroyed' in the classic sense, but if we get enough of the Islamic world to work together to deglamorize ISIL, to make ISIL uncool in the eyes of the people, that will go a long, long way towards destroying ISIL - or at least making it much less of a threat.
 
Ahlevah said:
ISIL wants self rule for much of the Middle East, Central Asia, and North Africa. I'm not worried about them invading the U.S. But they've shown themselves to be a threat to U.S. citizens and infrastructure as well as our allies. They're evil. These is no middle ground with them. As long as they exist, we should strive to destroy them, even if that's forever.
Click to expand...

ISIL is not 'evil'. Most of their fighters are mercenaries - stop paying them and they stop fighting. They are their primarily for the pay check. They might agree with the cause - but money is their prime motivation to fight.
Sure, the hardcore group is 'evil' (I suppose), but most of them are guns for hire. And their leadership are little more 'evil' then those that rule Saudi Arabia (which beheads hundreds for almost no reason and treats women horribly) or those that rule North Korea. You are all for destroying ISIL but do not mention eradicating all the horrible regimes around the world that are treating their citizens almost as badly. You are simply pandering to the neocons - they want you to want to destroy ISIL and leave the other horrible regimes alone - and you do.
In Africa alone, there are lots of horrible situations that few in the West mention. Why? Because Neocons want you and the media to do just that.
ISIL is no threat to America and America should not be spending money she does not have fighting them. Leave it to the locals.

Period.

You don't understand that, that is not my concern.


We are done here.

Good day.
 
DA60 said:
ISIL is not 'evil'. Most of their fighters are mercenaries - stop paying them and they stop fighting. They are their primarily for the pay check. They might agree with the cause - but money is their prime motivation to fight.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not done, and you're wrong. Money is NOT their main motivation. What has been their weapon of choice of late? So-called "martyrdom operations," as in militants wearing suicide belts or driving armored trucks mounted with explosives. You can't collect a paycheck if you're dead. I'm not saying all of them do this, but a sizable minority do to call into question your thesis that most of these guys are just mercenaries.

DA60 said:
ISIL is no threat to America and America should not be spending money she does not have fighting them. Leave it to the locals.
Click to expand...

They've already proved themselves to be a threat. Look what they've done in Europe. You think they can't do that here? How many American citizens have to be beheaded or shot before you consider them a threat?
 
Ahlevah said:
Well, I'm not done, and you're wrong. Money is NOT their main motivation. What has been their weapon of choice of late? So-called "martyrdom operations," as in militants wearing suicide belts or driving armored trucks mounted with explosives. You can't collect a paycheck if you're dead. I'm not saying all of them do this, but a sizable minority do to call into question your thesis that most of these guys are just mercenaries.



They've already proved themselves to be a threat. Look what they've done in Europe. You think they can't do that here? How many American citizens have to be beheaded or shot before you consider them a threat?
Click to expand...

Do you understand the meaning of the word 'mercenary'?
 
We should do what we should've long been doing. The whole middle east is a one trick pony with regards to money. Get off oil as much and as fast as we can and let them go back to being able to barely afford to throw sand and sticks at each other.
 
DA60 said:
So what?

Like there isn't ten thousand idiots/sickos ready to take his place.

Anyone who says you can beat major terrorist groups by trying to kill them all has no idea what they are talking about.


America should pull all her troops/forces home and let the locals deal with their own mess.

Anyone who disagrees with me on this is wrong...full stop.


Oh...and to any neocons that maybe reading this? Up yours - you people are far more destructive to America then ISIS could ever dream of being.
Click to expand...

Except it isn't a local mess.
Where do you want the fighting to happen, over there or at home?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom