09-25-2014, 05:48 PM
I was getting a bit tired of seeing the SPAM topic at the top.
As for ISIL, I'm a little disappointed that we are back at war intervening in the middle east. I'm very disappointed with the 180,000 or so dead in Syria, and the 2.5 million refugees who've fled and the 6.5 million internally displaced. I very rarely find myself in agreement with Bill Maher, but I don't think the world can live harmoniously with this extremist element. I'm not sure they are all Wahabist, but it seems to be the root. Much like Nazism, this root must be ripped up, debunked, and never be allowed to grow again.
Again, our troubles in Syria seem to also stem from our unwillingness to either get into bed with Assad to tamp down his internal security issues, or fully get behind any number of those who seek to uproot Assad's regime. Then, coupled with our inability to persuade middle east Sunni nations to rein in their citizens (or perhaps national) heedless support of sectarian violent extremists. It might even be the case that our own covert policy was to encourage middle east nations to secretly support the insurgency in Syria to destabilize Assad.
But, here we are with a bigger, better armed, better funded bunch of barbaric cut-throats running amok in Syria, which was one of the oblique reasons the US had justified taking out Saddam in Iraq. That was, if we recall, to prevent Iraq from becoming a safe haven for terrorists. It is as if we never learned the lesson, from Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, etc., that wherever extremists can find shelter and grow, they will. In my mind, this administrations mostly hands off approach to unrest in Libya, Syria, Egypt and elsewhere is the example of how not to transact foreign policy. Much like our inaction on Ebola in Liberia, we wait until it becomes a crisis before we begin to act. Whereas, had we formulated a better foreign policy plan for Syria 2 years ago, we'd be in a better place today.
No, I don't mean military intervention, however if I were Obama, I'd never take those cards off the table. It is better for your opponents to be left guessing what you may do, and in that vein, crazy man Ronald Raygun was able to use that tangible unhinged fear of reprisal to finally end the cold war. Would Putin march over Ukraine if he were not certain of the inaction of the US, and the rest of NATO? I doubt it. We've projected an aura of inaction, and weakness, which has emboldened the despots of this world to move violently to grab what they want.
I'm not a big fan of a bellicose and jack booted US projection of threat, and force around the globe, but neither do I think we need to bury our heads under the pillows while the world burns.
As for ISIL, I'm a little disappointed that we are back at war intervening in the middle east. I'm very disappointed with the 180,000 or so dead in Syria, and the 2.5 million refugees who've fled and the 6.5 million internally displaced. I very rarely find myself in agreement with Bill Maher, but I don't think the world can live harmoniously with this extremist element. I'm not sure they are all Wahabist, but it seems to be the root. Much like Nazism, this root must be ripped up, debunked, and never be allowed to grow again.
Again, our troubles in Syria seem to also stem from our unwillingness to either get into bed with Assad to tamp down his internal security issues, or fully get behind any number of those who seek to uproot Assad's regime. Then, coupled with our inability to persuade middle east Sunni nations to rein in their citizens (or perhaps national) heedless support of sectarian violent extremists. It might even be the case that our own covert policy was to encourage middle east nations to secretly support the insurgency in Syria to destabilize Assad.
But, here we are with a bigger, better armed, better funded bunch of barbaric cut-throats running amok in Syria, which was one of the oblique reasons the US had justified taking out Saddam in Iraq. That was, if we recall, to prevent Iraq from becoming a safe haven for terrorists. It is as if we never learned the lesson, from Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, etc., that wherever extremists can find shelter and grow, they will. In my mind, this administrations mostly hands off approach to unrest in Libya, Syria, Egypt and elsewhere is the example of how not to transact foreign policy. Much like our inaction on Ebola in Liberia, we wait until it becomes a crisis before we begin to act. Whereas, had we formulated a better foreign policy plan for Syria 2 years ago, we'd be in a better place today.
No, I don't mean military intervention, however if I were Obama, I'd never take those cards off the table. It is better for your opponents to be left guessing what you may do, and in that vein, crazy man Ronald Raygun was able to use that tangible unhinged fear of reprisal to finally end the cold war. Would Putin march over Ukraine if he were not certain of the inaction of the US, and the rest of NATO? I doubt it. We've projected an aura of inaction, and weakness, which has emboldened the despots of this world to move violently to grab what they want.
I'm not a big fan of a bellicose and jack booted US projection of threat, and force around the globe, but neither do I think we need to bury our heads under the pillows while the world burns.
”There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio.
![[Image: yVR5oE.png]](http://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/329/yVR5oE.png)
![[Image: VKQ0KLG.png]](http://i.imgur.com/VKQ0KLG.png)