• 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!

Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS[W:452]

Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

So how do we pick and choose who to help? I think Saudi Arabia is awful and treat women like animals...in public. Where are the troops to assist them? Saddam, gassed his people, but Saudi Arabia tortures people daily with the lashings, stonings, etc...while the Saudi's cheer it on like barbarians. The warlords in Africa kill and maim everyday...and zero intervention from any countries. The ME is on the other side of the globe and the chances of them rolling up on American shores is zero to none. They would not get within a 100 miles before they were intercepted. The ME knows nothing but corruption, violence and extreme religion and that will never change. If we wipe out ISIS another will take its place and we will be in a constant war. The US needs to concentrate their efforts closer to home...such as the Mexican border. The Cartel proposes more of a threat to our way of life than any other evil element out there and we do nothing about it. The Cartel is alive and well in the US...drugs that are poisoning our neighborhoods pours across the border every day as well has human trafficking. Why don't we liberate, Mexico, our neighbor from the Cartel?

Other countries in the ME have funded terrorism for years...just to keep them out of their backyards. They fund terrorism while we use tax dollars to fight terrorism. It doesn't make sense any more to help them. It also doesn't help the perception of Americans when other ME countries sit back and watch ISIS slaughter thousands of people. This is their war, not ours.

You make some good points. I think we chose Iraq not only because of Saddam's crimes against humanity but also their failure to comply with regulations set forth by the UN. Of course, the White House and Congress believed there were WMD's, and since Saddam already used gas, why wouldn't he have used those.

As far as Saudi Arabia, at the very least we shouldn't be trading with them because of their treatment of women. But of course we do need oil to keep our economy and military going.

Btw, does it bother you that people volunteer in our country to fight evildoers like Saddam, and if so why? I mean, Iraq so far has been far from a success, although I don't believe a total failure yet, but they have taken out Saddam and his family and have killed tons of terrorists.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Mm-hmm. Y'know, you're a wonderful example of just what I was talking about: the "do what we say or we bomb you" mindset that seems to be the only tool in the conservative diplomatic toolbox.

I want to ask you two questions:

(1) If a much stronger nation told a much weaker America that if we didn't scrap our entire bomb-making infrastructure, they'd bomb us and maybe even invade us, what do you think we'd do. Do you think we'd knuckle under, or would we redouble our efforts to build bombs?

(2) Considering your answer to the previous question, what the hell makes you think that the Iranians would react any differently?

This is why we do things like use REAL diplomacy - which, if you knew half as much as you think you do about diplomacy, is not the panty-waisted appeasement process you seem to think. There's a reason why diplomacy is often called "the velvet glove that covers the mail'd fist". Think about it.

Glen, I'm confused.

I never said anything about bombing Iran to stop their nuclear weapons program. All I was saying was not to ease the economic sanctions. Are you equating economic sanctions to bombing now?

I don't think the two things are the same.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Imposing democracy on nations that have never had it is fraught with unintended consequences. The desire for democracy must come from within as must the defense of a nation.

Like Japan?
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

To the bolded. No, that was BushCo that was massaging the intell, and there's plenty of corroboration on that. What's with you guys anyway, what's in it for you to defend that bastard administration to the death, hmm. Wtf is it???

Bolded says a lot already. No need to discuss this any further with you, your are just fine not hearing or thinking beyond to Dem talking points on this.

The fact of the matter is as I've said, that multiple nation's intelligence services corroborated the same intel. Is the Bush administration now being blamed by you for skewing all those nation's intel as well? That too is telling.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Bolded says a lot already. No need to discuss this any further with you, your are just fine not hearing or thinking beyond to Dem talking points on this.

The fact of the matter is as I've said, that multiple nation's intelligence services corroborated the same intel. Is the Bush administration now being blamed by you for skewing all those nation's intel as well? That too is telling.

George Bush was fantasising about war with Iraq while he was yet governor of Texas. His first foreign policy meeting was on.......Iraq. After failing to convince his war ambitions with Iraq on the unsubstantiated claims that Saddam Hussein was affiliated with OBL and al Qaeda, or could produce mushroom clouds over US cities, he moved onto humanitarian concerns. Plenty of people knew that Bush was fixing the intelligence around a forgone conclusion to go to war with Iraq. At any rate the GOP congress as well as a majority of Americans regret the day we engaged Iraq. Catch up to speed and stop defending that colossal failure!
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

George Bush was fantasising about war with Iraq while he was yet governor of Texas. His first foreign policy meeting was on.......Iraq. After failing to convince his war ambitions with Iraq on the unsubstantiated claims that Saddam Hussein was affiliated with OBL and al Qaeda, or could produce mushroom clouds over US cities, he moved onto humanitarian concerns. Plenty of people knew that Bush was fixing the intelligence around a forgone conclusion to go to war with Iraq. At any rate the GOP congress as well as a majority of Americans regret the day we engaged Iraq. Catch up to speed and stop defending that colossal failure!

And all these assertions and projections without a single citation from a reliable source.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Glen, I'm confused.

I never said anything about bombing Iran to stop their nuclear weapons program. All I was saying was not to ease the economic sanctions. Are you equating economic sanctions to bombing now?

I don't think the two things are the same.

I guess I'm confused, too, cause when you said:

"After leading in the region for so many years, sure a stumble to allow ISIS to raise, wouldn't it be the height of irresponsibility to now just walk away?"

that last phrase does indeed sound like you were advocating "not easing economic sanctions", BUT the first part sure sounds a heck of a lot more like "why the heck didn't we keep our troops in Iraq?"
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

And all these assertions and projections without a single citation from a reliable source.

The only reliable sources are the once posted up by the right wing neocons.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

One WANTS to die and the other doesn't. Do we need to start again? My point that you decided to challenge was that M.A.D. deterrent is not effective when one side wants to die. Your argument was that "no side wants to die" ... and you are proving that by saying the only difference between a bomber crew and a suicide bomber in that the bomber crew doesn't want to die? You are thrusting a dagger into the heart of your argument and declaring success.

No one wants to die - unless for desperation. There are no humans that are eager to die. Even the suicide bombers must have qualms about dying. Most of them do it not out of envy, but out of need.

Ah, so some people are so bereft of luxuries that the only way they can conduct a war is by blowing up discos? :roll:

Yes - absolutely. What, you prefer the guy with a stick versus a tank? Probably, if you're the one in the tank. IMO it's worse when the party blowing up schools, water treatment plants, hospitals etc is the one party with the means to do otherwise.

Yes, so dying trying to save others is noble. Blowing yourself up on purpose is meant to save nobody.

Dying as a soldier in any war is seen as noble by a majority of people. Wouldn't yourself find it noble if one german officer killed himself while trying to kill Hitler? When your ideals are firm, you are ready to suffer and die for them. It's that simple.


So... Arlington cemetery, and all these ceremonies in the memory of the dead at war... is the evidence that the USA are a death cult too? Why do you want to die?

No, wrong. They don't see their deaths as sacrifice, they see their deaths as personal gain. Again, they WANT to die. A simple fact that you have now agreed with on your quest to prove otherwise.

Personal gain... after they died. Ha ha ha funny guy.

Back to my original point: people who WANT to die are not governed by the central tenets of the M.A.D. deterrent.

There are no sides that wants to die. Period.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

You make some good points. I think we chose Iraq not only because of Saddam's crimes against humanity but also their failure to comply with regulations set forth by the UN. Of course, the White House and Congress believed there were WMD's, and since Saddam already used gas, why wouldn't he have used those.

As far as Saudi Arabia, at the very least we shouldn't be trading with them because of their treatment of women. But of course we do need oil to keep our economy and military going.

Btw, does it bother you that people volunteer in our country to fight evildoers like Saddam, and if so why? I mean, Iraq so far has been far from a success, although I don't believe a total failure yet, but they have taken out Saddam and his family and have killed tons of terrorists.

I am VERY pro-Soldier and very proud of our Military. It bothers me to see the condition that some of our Solider's are returning..fighting a war that will never be won. Even tho a Soldier makes the sacrifice to protect his or her country does not mean that we as a Nation should be reckless where we send them. The region is not worth the casualties or the resources. They will never separate religion from government and this is a must for peace. I do not think WE failed, I think the Iraqi people and government failed. We gave them a chance and they blew it. There isn't anything left to do, except maybe built a base there for stability, or stake an American flag there...since we have spent so much $$$, we practically own Iraq. :) j/k
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Carter saying Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' sparks more criticism, concern about Obama plan | Fox News

Here we go again with our desperate attempts to train those who will shoot at our backs once they will be left alone.

They say you can take a horse to the water, but you cannot make him drink. Bush Jr. invaded the wrong country (as if he could invade the right one). Iraqis understand they will die from ISIS attacks, but many of them got addicted to ISIS propaganda. So both facts are against US there - the fact Iraqis are muslims makes them sympathize isis and they never stopped treating us as invaders so I'm not surprised they don't want to fight.

It seems Pentagon's idea was to create non-US troops to fight ISIS and to oppose terrorists without getting involved to a direct confrontation.

So, does it mean we spend money on training future terrorists?

The Iraqi army is just as cowardly as the South Vietnamese army, and we get the same result.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Really ? I've got two words for you then.

Tonkin Gulf

The Tonkin affair exemplifies why that type of thing happens relrelatively infrequently as does Watergate. The mechanisms the society has developed since the ascension to global power to prevent the misuse of so much power are relatively strong and intrusive. It is also the reason not to let up and I think doubt commendable. That is also why I resaresearched it as well as possible reading literally thousands of pages of description and analysis and checking the primary documents, where possible. And in this case, I think that you are very probably wrong. But should you have primary information that is stronger than the two snippets above, I will certainly read it and think about it.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

JFC are you ever naive. Yes Lilly White US would never do such a thing. :roll:

Just because it is not the way the country works does not mean what happens cannot be horrendous. We both know that. But when the information is consistent with normal and desirable behavior? And it is quite possible that the Administration did construct a conspiracy and publish lies and was able to hide it from the public. And maybe the large number of people that had to be party to the information. ....
But as I pointed out, the information I have seen was before the invasion and in its aftermath relatively massive. This type of analysis is always statistical and one can always miss the important bits. But in this case,I will be surprised if it turns out that Obama has been sitting on tapes that provide proof that Bush lied.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Just because it is not the way the country works does not mean what happens cannot be horrendous. We both know that. But when the information is consistent with normal and desirable behavior? And it is quite possible that the Administration did construct a conspiracy and publish lies and was able to hide it from the public. And maybe the large number of people that had to be party to the information. ....
But as I pointed out, the information I have seen was before the invasion and in its aftermath relatively massive. This type of analysis is always statistical and one can always miss the important bits. But in this case,I will be surprised if it turns out that Obama has been sitting on tapes that provide proof that Bush lied.

Yes it is hard to prove that a mistake was intentional and not just plain stupidity. That has always been a plus for Bush as he does stupid so well. Bu there are clues like the pet name of their #1 informer, "curveball". I wonder if you know what throwing someone a curveball means?
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Yes it is hard to prove that a mistake was intentional and not just plain stupidity. That has always been a plus for Bush as he does stupid so well. Bu there are clues like the pet name of their #1 informer, "curveball". I wonder if you know what throwing someone a curveball means?

There can be no doubt that Putin played the game running up to Iraq 2 much better than the US Administration with the winners being Putin and Schröder. Everyone else lost. But the decision was not stupid in the usual sense.

PS: I do not think that Curveball was a number 1 informer. If one was following the situation there were doubts about the provenance of that information even, when Powell was using it. But Powell was never very good and in this case he was an idiot. Luckily the episode stopped talk about his being presidential material dead.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

The Tonkin affair exemplifies why that type of thing happens relrelatively infrequently as does Watergate. The mechanisms the society has developed since the ascension to global power to prevent the misuse of so much power are relatively strong and intrusive. It is also the reason not to let up and I think doubt commendable. That is also why I resaresearched it as well as possible reading literally thousands of pages of description and analysis and checking the primary documents, where possible. And in this case, I think that you are very probably wrong. But should you have primary information that is stronger than the two snippets above, I will certainly read it and think about it.

So you really think after 12 years Iraq just suddenly became much more dangerous post 9/11 ? So much so that they required an immediate and massive military response ? Do you have any evidence for this because as illustrated both Powell and Rice didn't seem to think so just beforehand ?

The Lie That Got Us In: The Bush Administration Knew There Were No WMDs in Iraq « Antiwar.com Blog

The Bush administration exerted significant pressure on the intelligence community to provide justification for the Iraq War. According to John Brennan, who was Deputy Director of the CIA at the time, “we were being asked to do things and to make sure that that justification was out there.” “At the time there were a lot of concerns that it was being politicized by certain individuals within the administration that wanted to get that intelligence base that would justify going forward with the war,” Brennan told PBS. When asked who was exerting this pressure, Brennan said “Some of the neocons” in the administration “were determined to make sure that the intelligence was going to support the ultimate decision.” As CBS News reported in 2009, “barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq.”
 
Last edited:
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

So you really think after 12 years Iraq just suddenly became much more dangerous post 9/11 ? So much so that they required an immediate and massive military response ? Do you have any evidence for this because as illustrated both Powell and Rice didn't seem to think so just beforehand ?

The Lie That Got Us In: The Bush Administration Knew There Were No WMDs in Iraq « Antiwar.com Blog

The Bush administration exerted significant pressure on the intelligence community to provide justification for the Iraq War. According to John Brennan, who was Deputy Director of the CIA at the time, “we were being asked to do things and to make sure that that justification was out there.” “At the time there were a lot of concerns that it was being politicized by certain individuals within the administration that wanted to get that intelligence base that would justify going forward with the war,” Brennan told PBS. When asked who was exerting this pressure, Brennan said “Some of the neocons” in the administration “were determined to make sure that the intelligence was going to support the ultimate decision.” As CBS News reported in 2009, “barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq.”

I do not think I said, what you insinuate. Of course there were consequences of removing a harsh dictator. And we did not do a sufficient job of making peace and stability. And yes, the snippets sound like there had been grounds to want to be easy on the dictator at the time of the statements. And? So what? That has nothing to do with it.
Does that mean that the decision to enforce the Resolution was wrong?
Does it mean that Saddam was not acting against the Security Council demands?
Does it mean that Saddam was not hiding the fact from the UN that he had no more wmd?

And really now. If you want to use information as proof and want people to read it, use unbiased sources. And please something more valid than second hand opinion. And by that I do not mean the opinion out of context by someone like Brennan, who is there describing a very normal occurrence in large organizations. Of course there was pressure. There is always pressure for results.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

I am VERY pro-Soldier and very proud of our Military. It bothers me to see the condition that some of our Solider's are returning..fighting a war that will never be won. Even tho a Soldier makes the sacrifice to protect his or her country does not mean that we as a Nation should be reckless where we send them. The region is not worth the casualties or the resources. They will never separate religion from government and this is a must for peace. I do not think WE failed, I think the Iraqi people and government failed. We gave them a chance and they blew it. There isn't anything left to do, except maybe built a base there for stability, or stake an American flag there...since we have spent so much $$$, we practically own Iraq. :) j/k

Powell did say, "if you break it, you own it"!!!!

Not only was Iraq not worth it, it was wholly unnecessary.

The National Campaign for Eradication of Illiteracy:
Refusing to send your child to school at the age of six was a crime punished by law, usually by prison time, under Saddam's regime starting from the late '70s and up until he was removed from power, and yes, that did include girls. Saddam was actually very supportive of women in that regard. In 1976, Iraq hosted the "Baghdad Conference for the Eradication of Illiteracy". Shortly after, he initiated the "National Campaign for Eradication of Illiteracy". The results were very positive, so much that Iraq was awarded The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) prize for eradicating illiteracy in 1982, just three years after Saddam became president.[1]

Education was made free to everyone in Iraq under Saddam's regime. This not only includes grade school, but also covers college and graduate level education.[2] It started in the early '70s and resulted, by the mid '80s, in an unprecedented 100% enrollment rates, and of course helped build a better educated middle class. Those years were called "The Golden Years" for the Iraqi Education System. [2][3]

Nationalization of Oil:

Agriculture and Empowering of Farmers:

Helping The Middle Class:
Saddam had numerous achievements in this area. Iraqis, and especially government employees, were given small pieces of land for them to build houses on, which was complimented by loans specifically tailored for that purpose. Houses and apartments were also given to some government employees. That either came in the form of living on government property without paying rent for college professors for example, but also manifested in building housing units that were given for free for people to own. Another way to give out housing units was by encouraging communities to collaboratively build housing complexes on government-owned land for those in need. I was unable to find any citations for this, feel free to post what you find in the comments and I'll update the answer accordingly.
 
Last edited:
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Just because it is not the way the country works does not mean what happens cannot be horrendous. We both know that. But when the information is consistent with normal and desirable behavior? And it is quite possible that the Administration did construct a conspiracy and publish lies and was able to hide it from the public. And maybe the large number of people that had to be party to the information. ....
But as I pointed out, the information I have seen was before the invasion and in its aftermath relatively massive. This type of analysis is always statistical and one can always miss the important bits. But in this case,I will be surprised if it turns out that Obama has been sitting on tapes that provide proof that Bush lied.

"Tapes"? Presidents do not prosecute former presidents, that's unfortunately never going to happen. The best one can hope for is pardon, lol.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

I do not think I said, what you insinuate. Of course there were consequences of removing a harsh dictator. And we did not do a sufficient job of making peace and stability. And yes, the snippets sound like there had been grounds to want to be easy on the dictator at the time of the statements. And? So what? That has nothing to do with it.
Does that mean that the decision to enforce the Resolution was wrong?
Does it mean that Saddam was not acting against the Security Council demands?
Does it mean that Saddam was not hiding the fact from the UN that he had no more wmd?

And really now. If you want to use information as proof and want people to read it, use unbiased sources. And please something more valid than second hand opinion. And by that I do not mean the opinion out of context by someone like Brennan, who is there describing a very normal occurrence in large organizations. Of course there was pressure. There is always pressure for results.


What apologetics that is?? There's always pressure to falsify facts to achieve desired results. :roll:

"We want the facts to fit the preconceptions. When they don't, it is easier to ignore the facts than change the preconceptions".

-American author Jessamyn West
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Basic healthcare was free for everyone, and generally dirt cheap for anything that requires more than a simple visit to the doctor. Medicine prices were heavily discounted by the government. Things like birth control pills were made available, usually for free, for Iraqi women. Kids were vaccinated door-to-door by the government. Medical care reached 97% of the urban population and 71% of the rural population. Mortality rate was 50/1000 LB, infant mortality was 40/1000 LB. Hospitals were built in every city and the Iraqi healthcare system was known to be of very high quality, Iraq was actually about to gain developed country status, versus being a developing country.[16]

What are some of Saddam Hussein's positive achievements and progressive contributions to Iraq and the Arab World? - Quora
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

[/B]

What apologetics that is?? There's always pressure to falsify facts to achieve desired results. :roll:

"We want the facts to fit the preconceptions. When they don't, it is easier to ignore the facts than change the preconceptions".

-American author Jessamyn West

As usual, you put things in other peoples mouths. But I did not say, what you imply. But thanks to such maneuvering, it becomes quite clear how weak your arguments are.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

No one wants to die - unless for desperation. There are no humans that are eager to die. Even the suicide bombers must have qualms about dying. Most of them do it not out of envy, but out of need.

Again, the existence of a suicide bomb waiting list for ISIS stands against your willfully ignorant belief... as do the 9/11 hijackers who, to the man, were not destitute or desperate. Whether you believe it or not does not change the reality that there are a lot of people out there who don't fit your paradigm.

Yes - absolutely. What, you prefer the guy with a stick versus a tank? Probably, if you're the one in the tank. IMO it's worse when the party blowing up schools, water treatment plants, hospitals etc is the one party with the means to do otherwise.

So when a suicide bomber blows up worshipers in a mosque are the worshipers in tanks? ISIS has tanks and they still have a waiting list for suicide bombers. The world just doesn't work the way you want it to. Reality proves you wrong.

Dying as a soldier in any war is seen as noble by a majority of people. Wouldn't yourself find it noble if one german officer killed himself while trying to kill Hitler? When your ideals are firm, you are ready to suffer and die for them. It's that simple.

Again, you are confusing ready-to-die with want-to-die. Until you see the difference you will remain bogged down in your inane equivalencies.

So... Arlington cemetery, and all these ceremonies in the memory of the dead at war... is the evidence that the USA are a death cult too? Why do you want to die?

Do you see any parties being thrown at the grave sites? When a family gets word that there son or daughter died in a war, do we cheer? Is it our goal for our sons and daughters to die?

Personal gain... after they died. Ha ha ha funny guy.

It doesn't matter one bit what you think of their beliefs. Surely you know that the suicide bomber believes that he will be rewarded for his wanton carnage in the afterlife? I mean, if you can't even grasp that simple fact then you are lost.

There are no sides that wants to die. Period.

Saying it over and over again doesn't make it so. It just makes you look stubbornly ignorant.
 
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Basic healthcare was free for everyone, and generally dirt cheap for anything that requires more than a simple visit to the doctor. Medicine prices were heavily discounted by the government. Things like birth control pills were made available, usually for free, for Iraqi women. Kids were vaccinated door-to-door by the government. Medical care reached 97% of the urban population and 71% of the rural population. Mortality rate was 50/1000 LB, infant mortality was 40/1000 LB. Hospitals were built in every city and the Iraqi healthcare system was known to be of very high quality, Iraq was actually about to gain developed country status, versus being a developing country.[16]

What are some of Saddam Hussein's positive achievements and progressive contributions to Iraq and the Arab World? - Quora



Healthcare for everyone*




(* - Except the millions we drove off their land in our ethnic cleansing campaigns, or fed into plastic shredders, or dissolved in acid baths, or raped to death, or shot and buried in shallow graves or gassed!)


Apparently if the US decided to run murder and cleansing campaign against the 15% of the US population without healthcare, driving the survivors into neighboring countries then Montecresto would call that universal health care! :roll:
 
Last edited:
Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

Again, the existence of a suicide bomb waiting list for ISIS stands against your willfully ignorant belief... as do the 9/11 hijackers who, to the man, were not destitute or desperate. Whether you believe it or not does not change the reality that there are a lot of people out there who don't fit your paradigm.

Okay - listen here:

We are all humans here. By nature, humans want to live long, prosperous lives.

Being muslim does not make any one less human.

I don't see what so hard to comprehand here. You are trying to tell me that there is a group of beings here that are not human - a group who want to des-humanize, in other terms? I won't drink your disgusting cool-aid, my friend.

So when a suicide bomber blows up worshipers in a mosque are the worshipers in tanks? ISIS has tanks and they still have a waiting list for suicide bombers. The world just doesn't work the way you want it to. Reality proves you wrong.

IS has suicide bombers because they can't get high-altitude bombers, drones or guided missiles. If they had, would you think that they would still rely on suicide bombers? Israel doesn't need suicide bombers - they can safely target hospitals from a safe distance.

Be it in the US or in Palestine, you will always find people ready to die for their beliefs. That, is reality.

Again, you are confusing ready-to-die with want-to-die. Until you see the difference you will remain bogged down in your inane equivalencies.

All "want-to-dies" are really "ready-to-dies" passed throught a chauvinistic process.

Do you see any parties being thrown at the grave sites? When a family gets word that there son or daughter died in a war, do we cheer? Is it our goal for our sons and daughters to die?

Google "Baruch Goldstein".

I have seen Yanks cheering for the destruction they caused, yes. It's quite common. Some cultures cheers at the passing of their closed ones, too.

It doesn't matter one bit what you think of their beliefs. Surely you know that the suicide bomber believes that he will be rewarded for his wanton carnage in the afterlife? I mean, if you can't even grasp that simple fact then you are lost.

Post-death personal gain? Ha ha ha. I love it.
 
Back
Top Bottom