• 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!

Just days after seizing Palmyra, Isis massacres 400 people in the ancient city

I think that as we have defined "terrorism" today, the practice has existed for centuries, perhaps millennia. The point that some of us at least are trying to make, is that there is a startling difference today (which should be perceptible to all) in how terrorist organisations have found opportunity to operate. The attacks that yourself and others point to as some sort of evidence that US and other Western countries foreign policy haven't been an influence on are very different. For all their own brutalities, the hard line leaders in the Middle East that have been removed by our foreign policy decisions, CONTAINED the Islamic extremists, which is why they were only capable of pulling off occasional attacks. It certainly wasn't in their interests to allow Islamic extremists footholds and visible base of operation within their countries. Despite the Bush administrations claims to the contrary, no connection has ever been made between Saddam Hussein and OBL or al Qaeda. The rise in power and the widespread formidable presence of the Islamic State has a direct correlation to the absence of Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi and Assad (for all intents and purposes) and even the Bush era (2006) NIE, by consensus amongst the nations intelligence agencies, concluded that the invasion and occupation of Iraq had the direct result of increasing terrorism globally, and made America less safe!!! So, while the Islamic State is directly and personally responsible for each and every person they behead, burn alive, blow up or mutilate, the United States and other Western nations involved bear the responsibility of pursuing policies that have been favourable to and have been beneficial to the group, and has given opportunity for them to exploit/take advantage of the vacuums those policies have created. This is not the opinions merely of a few DP posters, educated and experienced individuals such as many at the BI, the CFR, international law scholars, former heads of AIEA, and heads of state, foreign affairs experts, etc., all to have acknowledged the same.

Again with the finger pointing where it doesn't belong. Why am I not surprised? Since when is any government or any person in a government able to tell the future? Do they have a crystal ball I don't know about? Or some machine that can look out into space JUUUUSSSTTT right and be able to see the curvature of space and right back to our planet in the future like in that one movie? (can't remember the name of it)

No? No. The kind of thinking of "Let's blame someone other than the TERRORISTS!" does nothing constructive.
 
Again with the finger pointing where it doesn't belong. Why am I not surprised? Since when is any government or any person in a government able to tell the future? Do they have a crystal ball I don't know about? Or some machine that can look out into space JUUUUSSSTTT right and be able to see the curvature of space and right back to our planet in the future like in that one movie? (can't remember the name of it)

No? No. The kind of thinking of "Let's blame someone other than the TERRORISTS!" does nothing constructive.

But I said that the terrorists are responsible for ever person that they kill. I just also pointed out that it's been very stupid of the US to pursue policies that the Islamic State he's been the beneficiary of, do you see how that works. I suppose you're accusing the nations intelligence services as well as the majority of Americans now for finger pointing too??!!!
 
Last edited:
This is an interesting analysis of Obama's foreign policy by some Egyptian broadcasters.

 
This is an interesting analysis of Obama's foreign policy by some Egyptian broadcasters.



Like you gave any credibility to Egyptian broadcasters when they were mocking Bush policies in the Middle East, lol.
 
Like you gave any credibility to Egyptian broadcasters when they were mocking Bush policies in the Middle East, lol.

You didn't have enough time to watch it prior to responding. I think that it's interesting to look at our country through the eyes of foreigners. These folks have credibility in Egypt and probably reflect popular opinion there.
 
You didn't have enough time to watch it prior to responding. I think that it's interesting to look at our country through the eyes of foreigners. These folks have credibility in Egypt and probably reflect popular opinion there.

I don't need Egyptians pointing out to me that Obama's Middle East policy sucks. And I didn't need them pointing out that Bush's Middle East policy sucked. Both are /were obvious to me. No I didn't watch the film.
 
I don't need Egyptians pointing out to me that Obama's Middle East policy sucks. And I didn't need them pointing out that Bush's Middle East policy sucked. Both are /were obvious to me. No I didn't watch the film.

I know. You shouldn't have commented.
 

Thanks buddy, I'm aware of that, have posted it in various threads myself. He wasn't working for the US government, and was popped under the trading with the enemies act. (He was rewarded in the end by having a son and grandson become presidents!!!) I believe the poster I was responding to was suggesting the US helped the rise of Hitler as I was suggesting the US helped the rise of the Islamic State. The "US" usually refers to the government, and not an individual American.
 
Only if you think it's intelligent to discuss something you are ignorant about.

That subject has been discussed here before, in both contexts!!
 
Why does this remind me of when Islam/Muslims conquered the middle east centuries ago?

The current slaugther, while barbaric and abhorrent, is actually pretty tame compared to what was normal during the Muslim invasion and destruction of the Near East and North Africa. That was on a different scale (and also of course in a different time).
 
That subject has been discussed here before, in both contexts!!

And what did the people who didn't watch the Egyptian video say about it in both contexts? If you hit the bottom of the hole, stop digging.
 
And what did the people who didn't watch the Egyptian video say about it in both contexts? If you hit the bottom of the hole, stop digging.

That our foreign policy agenda isn't based upon Egyptian media analysis. We don't care what they think.
 
That our foreign policy agenda isn't based upon Egyptian media analysis. We don't care what they think.

Well, that has nothing to do with the video but it was an interesting guess.
 
I know how to respond to this kind of barbarism... with extreme force and malice.

these aren't people that the civilized world can ever reason or negotiate with.

our President has already committed to a strategy of doing nothing of substance.... so our hands are pretty much tied.

I'll have to cheer on Iran as they go after ISIS, I guess.... no one else seems to have the will or the balls to thrown down with the ISIS boys <shrug>

Obama has said over and over that the US can not solve the problems in the ME. So this is the result of that thinking although he does have a point. The perception is that BO is a weak president like Carter was.
Much of Putin's policy in the Ukraine is a result of the so-called policy that this weak BO has.
 
OMG. What is with this mentality of pointing fingers at everyone but those responsible for this and other massacres? Are those Americans that just slaughtered 400 people? British? Irish? French? Chinese? No. They are not. The ONLY ones responsible for this and the other massacres that they have done are those that are in and support ISIS. They're the ones doing the killing. They're the ones that decided to take advantage of a weak government to commit these atrocities. They're the ones to blame. NO. ONE. ELSES.

I see this crap day in and day out. Blaming guns for PEOPLE that use them wrongly. Blaming drugs for PEOPLE actions. etc etc etc. If you want to blame someone then blame those PEOPLE that actually are doing this. Not people/things/ideologies/(insert non-person crap here).

All this "but Bush/Obama caused this vacuum!" (or insert some other stupid "reasoning") does not mean that those in ISIS couldn't have just sat down and did things peacefully instead of slaughtering everyone that they didn't like. Those in ISIS are the ones responsible for this. No one else.

So, if a bank were to leave stacks of cash lying on the counters, within easy reach of people coming to work with the tellers, instead of locked away in cash boxes inside the safe, and then the bank got robbed, it would not at all be the "fault" of the bank personnel and directors? There would be "no fault" on the part of the people who continued to deposit their money in such a poorly run bank?

How about the outside agency who was hired to provide security at the bank, or worse, an outside agency which forcibly assumed the responsibility of the bank's security, against the will and wishes of the bank staff, and then left the stacks of cash lying about?

When we invaded Iraq, we placed ourselves in a position of at least partial responsibility for the outcomes of its security for a period of time. You can argue that the valid period should have been just X years, and that time is past, but you cannot legitimately say we never had any responsibility!

Furthermore, over the Obama-Era, following Obama's direct orders, we went around the middle east destabilizing and giving arms and air-power support to one "Arab Spring" revolt/uprising after another in how many countries? Seven, ... Ten? I've lost count!

Where did the militants that made up the ISIS original forces come from? Wasn't it the same Syrian Rebels we armed, air-power backed, and inspired?

-
 
So, if a bank were to leave stacks of cash lying on the counters, within easy reach of people coming to work with the tellers, instead of locked away in cash boxes inside the safe, and then the bank got robbed, it would not at all be the "fault" of the bank personnel and directors? There would be "no fault" on the part of the people who continued to deposit their money in such a poorly run bank?

How about the outside agency who was hired to provide security at the bank, or worse, an outside agency which forcibly assumed the responsibility of the bank's security, against the will and wishes of the bank staff, and then left the stacks of cash lying about?

When we invaded Iraq, we placed ourselves in a position of at least partial responsibility for the outcomes of its security for a period of time. You can argue that the valid period should have been just X years, and that time is past, but you cannot legitimately say we never had any responsibility!

Furthermore, over the Obama-Era, following Obama's direct orders, we went around the middle east destabilizing and giving arms and air-power support to one "Arab Spring" revolt/uprising after another in how many countries? Seven, ... Ten? I've lost count!

Where did the militants that made up the ISIS original forces come from? Wasn't it the same Syrian Rebels we armed, air-power backed, and inspired?

-

Great analogy. Polling data shows most Americans now acknowledge that. Even the GOP congress now accepts that reality. Ha, Rand Paul told Morning Joe yesterday that the rise of the Islamic State is largely the fault of hawks in his party! Thankfully those that are unwilling to accept the US's responsibility for creating the conditions for the rise of the Islamic State are a small minority. I think half of them are participants at DP, lol.
 
Great analogy. Polling data shows most Americans now acknowledge that. Even the GOP congress now accepts that reality. Ha, Rand Paul told Morning Joe yesterday that the rise of the Islamic State is largely the fault of hawks in his party! Thankfully those that are unwilling to accept the US's responsibility for creating the conditions for the rise of the Islamic State are a small minority. I think half of them are participants at DP, lol.

When Bush went before Congress to ask for the authorization to use military force in Iraq, Roughly a third (82 of 297) of House Representatives votes cast in favor were from Democrats.

More than a third (29 of 77) of the Senate Votes cast in favor of the Authorization were from Democrats.

Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

H.J.Res._114_Iraq_Resolution_Votes_October_2002.jpg

The decision to go into Iraq was very bi-Partisan.

-
 
When Bush went before Congress to ask for the authorization to use military force in Iraq, Roughly a third (82 of 297) of House Representatives votes cast in favor were from Democrats.

More than a third (29 of 77) of the Senate Votes cast in favor of the Authorization were from Democrats.

Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

View attachment 67184955

The decision to go into Iraq was very bi-Partisan.

-

You won't get any disagreement from me on that. Then, Obama made matters worse by supporting the MB, to the ruin of Mubarak, al Qaeda, to the ruin of Gaddafi, and the rebels in Syria, which were infested with al Nusra, MB, AQ and the Islamic State in Iraq, which became the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, to the ruin of Assad, and just look about at the colossal mess we have!!!!
 
Back
Top Bottom