• 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!

Who's Responsible for ISIS?

Who's more at fault?

  • Total voters
    30
joG said:
Of course not.we can only try to figure out how they could have come so far so fast. And one thing to learn is that letting the civil war escalate in Syria was a bad idea. Our allies in the region failed miserably.
Click to expand...

True, but because regime change in Damascus has been a long term policy goal for the US, it was allowed to escalate, in fact the US/West and a few Arab States have fueled the conflict in their own varying ways, weakening Assad and creating just the atmosphere ISI needed to add their second "S". Someone suggested that the US cannot be accountable for what Islamic extremists due, but we should have preferred containment (Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi and Assad) to what we have now. Whether or not its by design, big business/defense contractors are the only ones with something to gain by perpetuating these conflicts in the ME, while Americans pay in blood and treasure, and the poor souls that inhabit the region, their plight is worst of all.
 
CanadaJohn said:
It's neither - if you want to lay blame, it rests solely on the backs of radical clerics within the Muslim faith and with leaders/rulers in the Middle East who foster such radical views by ignoring or encouraging radical clerics within their midsts. Such views predate both Bush and Obama and it appears, at least to me, that it was only a matter of time before circumstances, such as the unrest in Syria, provided an opportunity for ISIS/ISIL/IS or whatever other name they may call themselves to strengthen and secure a secondary cause to fight for that leads to their ultimate goal.

An IS type movement has been festering below the surface for decades in the Middle East.
Click to expand...

Yes it has, but it had also been contained!
 
Who's Responsible for ISIS? ISIS and the hatred they hold for anyone who isn't ISIS. Some ideologies don't need a reason for their hatred, they will always find an excuse for hating and have been in existence longer than those whom they want to blame.
 
grip said:
Is the rise of ISIS more of Bush's fault for invading Iraq, or more of Obama's for pulling out, then disregarding the countries direction?
Click to expand...

Depends on how far back you want to go. Culturally the Middle-East has a difficult time integrating with outsiders. Due to the monopoly petroleum has on personal transportation our Mid-East foreign policy has been designed to allow for the free flow of oil from the region, which necessitates our entanglement in the region. This is true whether we drill for our own oil, use theirs or a combination because as long as they are a significant player, what they do has a controlling impact on the global market. Enter the government funded madrasahs I think initially designed to create a humble population and then nationalist new media like Arab news channels that incorporate Pan-Arab pride and a portrayal of victimization by the west and it's now a breeding ground for extremism. The only way out of this mess is to convert to a transportation energy source that does not use petroleum or hope to kill our way out of it. My hope and prayer is the later would not be seriously considered however sadly it does seem to be our policy since 9/11, albeit lessened to a degree since 2008.
 
I voted both Obama and Bush. Bush mostly, but Obama didn't help the situation either.

Still, the real blame lies with that region and its' propensity for Islamic extremism. It's a cultural problem, they need some secularism among other things badly. US foreign policy may have laid the breeding ground for it to grow, but it was always there. It's like an endless cycle. What I'd do for us to pull out of that God forsaken region.

Grant said:
How can anyone else be held responsible for what Islamists do?
Click to expand...

By indirectly laying the breeding ground for such scourge to grow.
 
Last edited:
Montecresto said:
True, but because regime change in Damascus has been a long term policy goal for the US, it was allowed to escalate, in fact the US/West and a few Arab States have fueled the conflict in their own varying ways, weakening Assad and creating just the atmosphere ISI needed to add their second "S". Someone suggested that the US cannot be accountable for what Islamic extremists due, but we should have preferred containment (Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi and Assad) to what we have now. Whether or not its by design, big business/defense contractors are the only ones with something to gain by perpetuating these conflicts in the ME, while Americans pay in blood and treasure, and the poor souls that inhabit the region, their plight is worst of all.
Click to expand...

Greetings, Montecresto. :2wave:

Great summation, Sir! :thumbs: Both truly and compassionately stated. We voice our opinions here on things happenng around the world, but they're abstract since we're thousands of miles away from people whose lives are being directly impacted by this struggle for supremacy that is taking place. Those people, including children, are the ones that I feel the most pity for, and I can't begin to imagine what life must be like for them on a daily basis! Sad.....
 
grip said:
Is the rise of ISIS more of Bush's fault for invading Iraq, or more of Obama's for pulling out, then disregarding the countries direction?
Click to expand...

I suppose it would be fair to turn the question around and ask if ISIS / ISIL would have attacked and invaded Iraq and gained the ground that they have, had the previous US troop level been maintained?

It's been accurately observed that no one can really predict Islamic extremists actions, but to the above question, I'd have to answer "No, probably not".
 
polgara said:
Greetings, Montecresto. :2wave:

Great summation, Sir! :thumbs: Both truly and compassionately stated. We voice our opinions here on things happenng around the world, but they're abstract since we're thousands of miles away from people whose lives are being directly impacted by this struggle for supremacy that is taking place. Those people, including children, are the ones that I feel the most pity for, and I can't begin to imagine what life must be like for them on a daily basis! Sad.....
Click to expand...
You can actually see what these animals are doing to people if you want to investigate, but I don't want to provide links.

Barrack Obama has said it is up to Iraq to protect the Iraqi people which is akin to FDR saying that the Germans must protect the Jewish people during WWII. There is a genocide taking place in Iraq and not near enough is being done. Those who refuse to help these people are no better than those who would have helped the Gestapo in Germany against the Jews or Saddam Hussein's genocide against the Kurds. Those are the same Kurds, btw, we are now relying on for support in the region.
 
joG said:
Democracies have a lower propensity to go to war or even be very aggressive in the international sphere; they normally are more liable to have more reliable legal systems and have fewer blowouts like in Syria or Libya. That reduces the risks of doing business and the costs for international security. From both we profit very strongly.
Click to expand...

Two problems there, we're a democratic society that has been in lots of wars recently. Uhhh, we're also partially responsible for the blowouts in Syria and Libya. And our policies have exacerbated the problems with international security, not diminished, which has increased costs and lost us profit as a nation.

Theoretically, before the Iraq War, those ideas were true.
 
joG said:
Of course not.we can only try to figure out how they could have come so far so fast. And one thing to learn is that letting the civil war escalate in Syria was a bad idea. Our allies in the region failed miserably.
Click to expand...
The mistake is expecting anything from them that would coincide with the way the western democracies think.

What could have encouraged that idea? That's where the real failure was.
 
CanadaJohn said:
It's neither - if you want to lay blame, it rests solely on the backs of radical clerics within the Muslim faith and with leaders/rulers in the Middle East who foster such radical views by ignoring or encouraging radical clerics within their midsts. Such views predate both Bush and Obama and it appears, at least to me, that it was only a matter of time before circumstances, such as the unrest in Syria, provided an opportunity for ISIS/ISIL/IS or whatever other name they may call themselves to strengthen and secure a secondary cause to fight for that leads to their ultimate goal.

An IS type movement has been festering below the surface for decades in the Middle East.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's right, which is why they needed constant supervision into the foreseeable future. That's what happened in Europe and the troops, for some inexplicable reason, are still there. They should have been moved to where they were needed.
 
Grant said:
Yes, that's right, which is why they needed constant supervision into the foreseeable future. That's what happened in Europe and the troops, for some inexplicable reason, are still there. They should have been moved to where they were needed.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree - I think it was a mistake for Obama not to do everything possible to secure an agreement to leave US forces on the ground in Iraq but he seemed more interested in fulfilling a campaign promise than securing Iraq's fragile new democracy going forward. I notice Obama has secured such an agreement with Afghanistan where, arguably, it's far less needed.

In some respects, I don't blame Obama for abandoning the Middle East - he was basically doing what the American people seemed to want him to do - had they not, they wouldn't have reelected him in 2012.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I don't disagree - I think it was a mistake for Obama not to do everything possible to secure an agreement to leave US forces on the ground in Iraq but he seemed more interested in fulfilling a campaign promise than securing Iraq's fragile new democracy going forward. I notice Obama has secured such an agreement with Afghanistan where, arguably, it's far less needed.

In some respects, I don't blame Obama for abandoning the Middle East - he was basically doing what the American people seemed to want him to do - had they not, they wouldn't have reelected him in 2012.
Click to expand...
Well there was also 'the war on women', Bain Capital and 'gay marriage' to consider.
 
grip said:
Is the rise of ISIS more of Bush's fault for invading Iraq, or more of Obama's for pulling out, then disregarding the countries direction?
Click to expand...
The fault is on the over zealous chuckle heads who joined isis
 
grip said:
Is the rise of ISIS more of Bush's fault for invading Iraq, or more of Obama's for pulling out, then disregarding the countries direction?
Click to expand...

The entire debacle smells of CIA intrigue from Day One. Presidents come and go, but the Intelligence bureaucracy rolls along like a misguided bulldozer. The covert agendas of those that influence and perhaps control this Agency to suffer those huge Corporate profits that flow from wars, insurrections, instablities, coups, resource acquisitions, and controls to maintain their own continuity replace meaningful gov't agendas promoted by temporary presidents. Why else would the CIA build al Qeda and now ISIS and we find ourselves funding 10,000 "moderate" rebels in Syria. Covert agendas from Day One.
 
grip said:
Two problems there, we're a democratic society that has been in lots of wars recently. Uhhh, we're also partially responsible for the blowouts in Syria and Libya. And our policies have exacerbated the problems with international security, not diminished, which has increased costs and lost us profit as a nation.

Theoretically, before the Iraq War, those ideas were true.
Click to expand...

It was arguably the right thing to get rid of the dictator and help the demonstrators. The aftermath was poorly handled. Global society is still wrestling with what to do to uphold its r2p norm. That is not really surprising as the Norm is only about 7 years old.
 
polgara said:
Greetings, Montecresto. :2wave:

Great summation, Sir! :thumbs: Both truly and compassionately stated. We voice our opinions here on things happenng around the world, but they're abstract since we're thousands of miles away from people whose lives are being directly impacted by this struggle for supremacy that is taking place. Those people, including children, are the ones that I feel the most pity for, and I can't begin to imagine what life must be like for them on a daily basis! Sad.....
Click to expand...

Howdy Polgara, yeah, the plight of the innocence is the casualty often overlooked, sad enough as you stated!
 
The American voters are responsible for the rise of ISIS. As I have said over and over, America has been the new France since the Vietnam war. Invading countries, doing a piss poor job of fighting the war even when we have had an overwhelming advantage in weaponry and technology, then retreated behind our boarders to leave the populace to the people we were fighting. ISIS is a creation of the American Publics flakiness when it comes to fighting a war.
 
joG said:
It was arguably the right thing to get rid of the dictator and help the demonstrators. The aftermath was poorly handled. Global society is still wrestling with what to do to uphold its r2p norm. That is not really surprising as the Norm is only about 7 years old.
Click to expand...

A brutal dictator seems to be the only thing that kept those vicious fanatics under control. All we've done is remove any semblance of peace, infrastructure and success the Iraqi people once had.
 
grip said:
A brutal dictator seems to be the only thing that kept those vicious fanatics under control. All we've done is remove any semblance of peace, infrastructure and success the Iraqi people once had.
Click to expand...

Life is not easy and making it better is hard work. That does not mean it can't be made better. People said similar things about South America and Asia or Africa or even large tracts of cotinental Europe. But demicracy has taken hold and has become more widely successful than many thought possible only 100 years ago. Nope. I don't think your generalization is right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom