|
Please guys, stay on topic.
This thread is about the situation in Iraq and Syria. |
On June 24 2014 05:20 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Man truthfully, I don't mean to come offensive in terms of offending religion or anything, but:
They say Islam is a religion of peace, but dozens of radical people went to Syria to fight from my city in Canada, it's very troubling to me as someone concerned for safety. All of them say that these crazy ones gives us a bad name, nobody here in Canada does this, but we've had hundreds go to Syria to fight, and then they bring their hatred back. It's a very serious issue, and I feel if this trend continues... There might be some discrimination about Middle eastern people. I feel like there already is where I live, and it will only get worse.
I don't know a good solution, but something needs to happen. This is the most intense the Syrian Civil War has ever been.
With regards to the Western world, the problem is that there hasn't enough singling out of Islam for having huge segments of its base not live up to the "religion of peace" moniker. The very fact that a group like ISIS can secure broad-based local support on the ground in these countries tells us all that we need to know regarding the very real problems that are unique to Islam.
|
Kurdish president Barzani almost declares independence on CNN:
http://amanpour.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/23/exclusive-iraqi-kurdish-leader-says-the-time-is-here-for-self-determination/
“Iraq is obviously falling apart,” he told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in an exclusive interview. “And it’s obvious that the federal or central government has lost control over everything. Everything is collapsing – the army, the troops, the police.”
“We did not cause the collapse of Iraq. It is others who did. And we cannot remain hostages for the unknown,” he said through an interpreter.
“The time is here for the Kurdistan people to determine their future and the decision of the people is what we are going to uphold.”
...
“Now we are living [in] a new Iraq, which is different completely from the Iraq that we always knew, the Iraq that we lived in ten days or two weeks ago.”
“After the recent events in Iraq, it has been proved that the Kurdish people should seize the opportunity now – the Kurdistan people should now determine their future.”
He wants John Kerry to get Barack Obama to sign up for Kurdistan declaring independence. Whether or not it can stop Baghdad from falling the Iraqi government will never get control of the Sunni provinces again so why not. Iraqi Kurds still like America we got rid of Saddam and pretty much gave them a free hand and fought to keep the insurgents from going after them. Independent Kurdistan I say sure.
My point is that the amount of hypocrisy in the US is annoying. Germany and the UK have not proclaimed themselves leader of the free world and painted the Soviet-union as the most evil invention on this planet at the same time.
The Soviet Union was the most evil invention on this planet dude. Open your eyes. They are the only guys who actually were literally worse than Hitler.
I don't think it's only hypocrisy that's got you all indignant it seems a bit much for just hypocrisy.
Also it's not just about shaking hands. the US supported Iraq in it's war efforts against Iran although they were using chemical weapons on that same day Rumsfeld shook Saddams hand. They also supported an absolutist monarchy before that in Iran and they're (probably we are, because Europe isn't much better) supporting Saudi Arabia right now, which is the most ass backwards country on this planet and probably among the biggest financiers of terrorism.
yes we should have stopped supporting him after he started gassing the iranians. it was a bad decision. some might say going to war against him in 1991 and 2003 were attempted rectifications however misguided of that decision. but somehow i doubt that would be your interpretation. it isn't mine either but it sure seems like the US supports a dictator that's bad bad US the US removes a dictator that's bad bad US.
And to relate to the topic of the thread, the US has again prematurely supported Rebels in the region just to observe how they now have created a whole movement of islamistic nutjobs.
from what i've read the most of the sunni tribes that the US allied with against the ISIS in 2007-2008 that are now fighting with the ISIS are in an alliance of convenience and are not on board with the whole extremely fundamentalist islamic caliphate idea. they want to take down the baghdad government they aren't down for the ISIS's no cigarettes super sharia law aspirations.
All these things from supporting saddam over bombing saddam to supporting the Mujaheddin , to invading Iraq and supporting islamistic Rebels all while claiming that it's happening for freedom and that the US are the truly good guys and defenders of democracy is what drives people crazy.
see it isn't just the hypocrisy. it's thinking that the US are the bad guys. well until the US militarily occupies half of europe against its will for 50 years and deliberately starves millions of its own people and enters a united front with brazil for world domination while brazil starves 30 million of its own people or something similar i don't think i'm going to sign on to that one.
|
On June 24 2014 05:31 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 05:20 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Man truthfully, I don't mean to come offensive in terms of offending religion or anything, but:
They say Islam is a religion of peace, but dozens of radical people went to Syria to fight from my city in Canada, it's very troubling to me as someone concerned for safety. All of them say that these crazy ones gives us a bad name, nobody here in Canada does this, but we've had hundreds go to Syria to fight, and then they bring their hatred back. It's a very serious issue, and I feel if this trend continues... There might be some discrimination about Middle eastern people. I feel like there already is where I live, and it will only get worse.
I don't know a good solution, but something needs to happen. This is the most intense the Syrian Civil War has ever been. With regards to the Western world, the problem is that there hasn't enough singling out of Islam for having huge segments of its base not live up to the "religion of peace" moniker. The very fact that a group like ISIS can secure broad-based local support on the ground in these countries tells us all that we need to know regarding the very real problems that are unique to Islam.
Yeah... So what do the western countries do? Exactly because of that, like how they were able to convert people so easily, I am beginning to be afraid of these people, and maybe subconsciously alienating them from the rest of society. I'm just begin to lose that trust, and I feel like many people with an understanding of the situation feel the same way. There will be big issues in western countries due to this. It's not like we can easily prevent all immigration of middle eastern people, and you can't deport people... And assimilating people isn't very effective in the short run.
Right now it seems like the goal is to prevent people from travelling to Syria, so they can't get radicalized hardcore.
|
On June 24 2014 05:40 DeepElemBlues wrote:
see it isn't just the hypocrisy. it's thinking that the US are the bad guys. well until the US militarily occupies half of europe against its will for 50 years and deliberately starves millions of its own people and enters a united front with brazil for world domination while brazil starves 30 million of its own people or something similar i don't think i'm going to sign on to that one.
I wasn't trying to glorify the Soviet Union (because that would be ridiculous, it was a pretty shitty place), but the US Middle-Eastern policy just simply has been a giant mess for the last decades, and that's because it never was about spreading democracy or freedom, it was about being a (imperial) superpower and supporting the leaders that they thought of as their closest Allies, with little interest for the broad population.
Ironically the Iran(as a 80 million pop. country) seems to have the best chances of bringing some kind of stability to the region and to stop the largely Sunni motivated spreading of Islamic terrorism. If the US would really care about stability in the region they should have never have tried to sanction the country off the diplomatic map.
|
On June 24 2014 05:41 FiWiFaKi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 05:31 xDaunt wrote:On June 24 2014 05:20 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Man truthfully, I don't mean to come offensive in terms of offending religion or anything, but:
They say Islam is a religion of peace, but dozens of radical people went to Syria to fight from my city in Canada, it's very troubling to me as someone concerned for safety. All of them say that these crazy ones gives us a bad name, nobody here in Canada does this, but we've had hundreds go to Syria to fight, and then they bring their hatred back. It's a very serious issue, and I feel if this trend continues... There might be some discrimination about Middle eastern people. I feel like there already is where I live, and it will only get worse.
I don't know a good solution, but something needs to happen. This is the most intense the Syrian Civil War has ever been. With regards to the Western world, the problem is that there hasn't enough singling out of Islam for having huge segments of its base not live up to the "religion of peace" moniker. The very fact that a group like ISIS can secure broad-based local support on the ground in these countries tells us all that we need to know regarding the very real problems that are unique to Islam. Yeah... So what do the western countries do? Exactly because of that, like how they were able to convert people so easily, I am beginning to be afraid of these people, and maybe subconsciously alienating them from the rest of society. I'm just begin to lose that trust, and I feel like many people with an understanding of the situation feel the same way. There will be big issues in western countries due to this. It's not like we can easily prevent all immigration of middle eastern people, and you can't deport people... And assimilating people isn't very effective in the short run. Right now it seems like the goal is to prevent people from travelling to Syria, so they can't get radicalized hardcore.
What's actually scary is that in NL we have a politician from a municipality who publicly supports ISIS. Just imagine how many politicians there must be supporting ISIS not publicly.
|
On June 24 2014 05:57 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 05:40 DeepElemBlues wrote:
see it isn't just the hypocrisy. it's thinking that the US are the bad guys. well until the US militarily occupies half of europe against its will for 50 years and deliberately starves millions of its own people and enters a united front with brazil for world domination while brazil starves 30 million of its own people or something similar i don't think i'm going to sign on to that one. I wasn't trying to glorify the Soviet Union (because that would be ridiculous, it was a pretty shitty place), but the US Middle-Eastern policy just simply has been a giant mess for the last decades, and that's because it never was about spreading democracy or freedom, it was about being a (imperial) superpower and supporting the leaders that they thought of as their closest Allies, with little interest for the broad population.
It wasnt even about allies really, it was about the Petrodollar. Basically everything we've done in the Middle East has been in support of the Petrodollar. Look at Arab Spring. Every country that fell into turmoil during it had been considering doing something which would undermine the Petrodollar. Libya wanted to make a new currency for Africa, kind of like the Euro is for Europe. The Egyptian government was thinking of trading in the oil market in something other than USD. So was Assad in Syria.
|
On June 24 2014 06:11 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 05:57 Nyxisto wrote:On June 24 2014 05:40 DeepElemBlues wrote:
see it isn't just the hypocrisy. it's thinking that the US are the bad guys. well until the US militarily occupies half of europe against its will for 50 years and deliberately starves millions of its own people and enters a united front with brazil for world domination while brazil starves 30 million of its own people or something similar i don't think i'm going to sign on to that one. I wasn't trying to glorify the Soviet Union (because that would be ridiculous, it was a pretty shitty place), but the US Middle-Eastern policy just simply has been a giant mess for the last decades, and that's because it never was about spreading democracy or freedom, it was about being a (imperial) superpower and supporting the leaders that they thought of as their closest Allies, with little interest for the broad population. It wasnt even about allies really, it was about the Petrodollar. Basically everything we've done in the Middle East has been in support of the Petrodollar. Look at Arab Spring. Every country that fell into turmoil during it had been considering doing something which would undermine the Petrodollar. Libya wanted to make a new currency for Africa, kind of like the Euro is for Europe. The Egyptian government was thinking of trading in the oil market in something other than USD. So was Assad in Syria.
US would love for the petrodollar not to be in dollars. Petrodollars push up demand of US dollars, making them cost more than economics should, undermining American manufacturing and increasing American imports. The myth that the petrodollar is some magical super power is just stupid.
|
@deb
yes, the participants produced plenty of potatos to parade around and make patriots pitch tents, money well spent...
the mood seems to be a bit more sombre among the brits, the us should up the flouride dosage in their water supply.
|
On June 24 2014 05:31 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 05:20 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Man truthfully, I don't mean to come offensive in terms of offending religion or anything, but:
They say Islam is a religion of peace, but dozens of radical people went to Syria to fight from my city in Canada, it's very troubling to me as someone concerned for safety. All of them say that these crazy ones gives us a bad name, nobody here in Canada does this, but we've had hundreds go to Syria to fight, and then they bring their hatred back. It's a very serious issue, and I feel if this trend continues... There might be some discrimination about Middle eastern people. I feel like there already is where I live, and it will only get worse.
I don't know a good solution, but something needs to happen. This is the most intense the Syrian Civil War has ever been. With regards to the Western world, the problem is that there hasn't enough singling out of Islam for having huge segments of its base not live up to the "religion of peace" moniker. The very fact that a group like ISIS can secure broad-based local support on the ground in these countries tells us all that we need to know regarding the very real problems that are unique to Islam.
I doubt their success has much to do with religion at all. How much of their support is because of :
a) fear
b) opposition towards other powers in the region (for example government in Baghdad)
c) tribalism
d) wish for a change (any will do in such cases)
e) ....
I see very little of the issues that are actually caused by islam to be unique to islam. Christianity actually has the same problems, especially in countries in similar development stages. The difference is not of type, just of scale.
|
On June 24 2014 06:14 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 06:11 Millitron wrote:On June 24 2014 05:57 Nyxisto wrote:On June 24 2014 05:40 DeepElemBlues wrote:
see it isn't just the hypocrisy. it's thinking that the US are the bad guys. well until the US militarily occupies half of europe against its will for 50 years and deliberately starves millions of its own people and enters a united front with brazil for world domination while brazil starves 30 million of its own people or something similar i don't think i'm going to sign on to that one. I wasn't trying to glorify the Soviet Union (because that would be ridiculous, it was a pretty shitty place), but the US Middle-Eastern policy just simply has been a giant mess for the last decades, and that's because it never was about spreading democracy or freedom, it was about being a (imperial) superpower and supporting the leaders that they thought of as their closest Allies, with little interest for the broad population. It wasnt even about allies really, it was about the Petrodollar. Basically everything we've done in the Middle East has been in support of the Petrodollar. Look at Arab Spring. Every country that fell into turmoil during it had been considering doing something which would undermine the Petrodollar. Libya wanted to make a new currency for Africa, kind of like the Euro is for Europe. The Egyptian government was thinking of trading in the oil market in something other than USD. So was Assad in Syria. US would love for the petrodollar not to be in dollars. Petrodollars push up demand of US dollars, making them cost more than economics should, undermining American manufacturing and increasing American imports. The myth that the petrodollar is some magical super power is just stupid.
Well the US economy is a consumer economy and thus mainly profiting from a highly valued US-Dollar, but I guess deriving every foreign political action from that doesn't make much sense and tends to border on tinfoil-territory.
|
On June 24 2014 06:14 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 06:11 Millitron wrote:On June 24 2014 05:57 Nyxisto wrote:On June 24 2014 05:40 DeepElemBlues wrote:
see it isn't just the hypocrisy. it's thinking that the US are the bad guys. well until the US militarily occupies half of europe against its will for 50 years and deliberately starves millions of its own people and enters a united front with brazil for world domination while brazil starves 30 million of its own people or something similar i don't think i'm going to sign on to that one. I wasn't trying to glorify the Soviet Union (because that would be ridiculous, it was a pretty shitty place), but the US Middle-Eastern policy just simply has been a giant mess for the last decades, and that's because it never was about spreading democracy or freedom, it was about being a (imperial) superpower and supporting the leaders that they thought of as their closest Allies, with little interest for the broad population. It wasnt even about allies really, it was about the Petrodollar. Basically everything we've done in the Middle East has been in support of the Petrodollar. Look at Arab Spring. Every country that fell into turmoil during it had been considering doing something which would undermine the Petrodollar. Libya wanted to make a new currency for Africa, kind of like the Euro is for Europe. The Egyptian government was thinking of trading in the oil market in something other than USD. So was Assad in Syria. US would love for the petrodollar not to be in dollars. Petrodollars push up demand of US dollars, making them cost more than economics should, undermining American manufacturing and increasing American imports. The myth that the petrodollar is some magical super power is just stupid.
The Petrodollar being USD allows the US to just keep printing money and dump the inflation off on the rest of the world. There'll always be a high demand for USD, even if there's way too many being printed, as other nations need USD to buy oil.
So the government can counter deficit spending by just printing more money, without worrying much about inflation. And enforcing the Petrodollar is easy money for the military-industrial complex. So you can clearly see that the two most powerful groups in the country, the banking industry and the military-industrial complex, both profit off the Petrodollar.
I'm not saying the US covertly caused Arab Spring. I think that's a possibility, but unlikely. But the Petrodollar certainly influenced which side we picked though. Look at Syria. The rebels the Obama administration so desperately wanted to aid were primarily radical Muslims, while the Syrian government was secular.
It seems odd to me that a country supposedly waging a war on terror would side with fanatics. Unless of course that wasn't the real motive.
|
Obama needs to get on the phone with these ISIS guys and tell them to stop clinging to their guns and religion.
|
On June 24 2014 05:57 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 05:40 DeepElemBlues wrote:
see it isn't just the hypocrisy. it's thinking that the US are the bad guys. well until the US militarily occupies half of europe against its will for 50 years and deliberately starves millions of its own people and enters a united front with brazil for world domination while brazil starves 30 million of its own people or something similar i don't think i'm going to sign on to that one. I wasn't trying to glorify the Soviet Union (because that would be ridiculous, it was a pretty shitty place), but the US Middle-Eastern policy just simply has been a giant mess for the last decades, and that's because it never was about spreading democracy or freedom, it was about being a (imperial) superpower and supporting the leaders that they thought of as their closest Allies, with little interest for the broad population. Ironically the Iran(as a 80 million pop. country) seems to have the best chances of bringing some kind of stability to the region and to stop the largely Sunni motivated spreading of Islamic terrorism. If the US would really care about stability in the region they should have never have tried to sanction the country off the diplomatic map.
You do realize that Iran's the country that's gunning for nuclear capabilities, right? That they've repeatedly vowed to blow Israel off the map? That they provide funding for terrorists for the express purpose of spreading terror?
If the U.S. really cares about stability in the region, it won't just sanction Iran off the map, it'll blow it off the map as well if that's what it takes to keep them from getting the bomb.
|
On June 24 2014 07:35 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 05:57 Nyxisto wrote:On June 24 2014 05:40 DeepElemBlues wrote:
see it isn't just the hypocrisy. it's thinking that the US are the bad guys. well until the US militarily occupies half of europe against its will for 50 years and deliberately starves millions of its own people and enters a united front with brazil for world domination while brazil starves 30 million of its own people or something similar i don't think i'm going to sign on to that one. I wasn't trying to glorify the Soviet Union (because that would be ridiculous, it was a pretty shitty place), but the US Middle-Eastern policy just simply has been a giant mess for the last decades, and that's because it never was about spreading democracy or freedom, it was about being a (imperial) superpower and supporting the leaders that they thought of as their closest Allies, with little interest for the broad population. Ironically the Iran(as a 80 million pop. country) seems to have the best chances of bringing some kind of stability to the region and to stop the largely Sunni motivated spreading of Islamic terrorism. If the US would really care about stability in the region they should have never have tried to sanction the country off the diplomatic map. You do realize that Iran's the country that's gunning for nuclear capabilities, right? That they've repeatedly vowed to blow Israel off the map? That they provide funding for terrorists for the express purpose of spreading terror? If the U.S. really cares about stability in the region, it won't just sanction Iran off the map, it'll blow it off the map as well if that's what it takes to keep them from getting the bomb.
That Iran isn't exactly the dream of a partner is pretty obvious, but whether they really are building nuclear weapons is debatable. No matter in what state the country is, thinking that stability in the region is possibly without the biggest country in the region is delusional.
Also it seems like Rouhani is willing to slowly reform the country and move away from the ridiculous anti-Israel course.
|
This thread is quickly approaching Ukraine thread status lol. "Peacekeeping forces" leave the thread for a day and the thread already gets interesting again. While there's no one else who's saying ethnic cleansing and genocide are okay, there's now more gross historical inaccuracies and outlandish statements, some of which I've even addressed in past threads or even this 3-year old one as I recall hehe. The various strawmen to make various 'points' make a fantastic addition. Although certainly not the most astonishing statement in the last 2 pages, the petrodollar claimed as not important to the US was a rather intriguing declaration. We may as well say the same about agriculture while we're there.
Thanks Millitron for making a reasonable post and Stealth for news rather than fantasy twists on history, politics, and economics.
Anywho, job/sports/girls/charity/World Cup are a big time drain. Will return to this thread if/when it improves. It's almost as bad as today's Iraq ironically (apologies for the dark humor).
What I'm curious about though is why are there so many terrorists coming from Britain? Seems strange that of all places Britain would have this issue in observable excess.
|
![[image loading]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wTaA0X3miFQ/U6iGp0sWCKI/AAAAAAAABFQ/L6ZhRiLuD5w/s1600/2014-06-23+Control+Zone+Map.png)
Source
The border to Jordan seems secure for now. How long that will last remains to be seen...
|
On June 24 2014 07:35 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 05:57 Nyxisto wrote:On June 24 2014 05:40 DeepElemBlues wrote:
see it isn't just the hypocrisy. it's thinking that the US are the bad guys. well until the US militarily occupies half of europe against its will for 50 years and deliberately starves millions of its own people and enters a united front with brazil for world domination while brazil starves 30 million of its own people or something similar i don't think i'm going to sign on to that one. I wasn't trying to glorify the Soviet Union (because that would be ridiculous, it was a pretty shitty place), but the US Middle-Eastern policy just simply has been a giant mess for the last decades, and that's because it never was about spreading democracy or freedom, it was about being a (imperial) superpower and supporting the leaders that they thought of as their closest Allies, with little interest for the broad population. Ironically the Iran(as a 80 million pop. country) seems to have the best chances of bringing some kind of stability to the region and to stop the largely Sunni motivated spreading of Islamic terrorism. If the US would really care about stability in the region they should have never have tried to sanction the country off the diplomatic map. You do realize that Iran's the country that's gunning for nuclear capabilities, right? That they've repeatedly vowed to blow Israel off the map? That they provide funding for terrorists for the express purpose of spreading terror? If the U.S. really cares about stability in the region, it won't just sanction Iran off the map, it'll blow it off the map as well if that's what it takes to keep them from getting the bomb.
And you realize Iran is one of the few countries in the region without WMDs, while almost everyone in their neighbourhood is armed with nukes, Israel included + the USA stations forces all around them? Syria needed the chem weapons stockpile for this very reason.
Interesting how bombing the shit out of countries to bring them out of the "stone age mentality" so often cited here is seen in a positive light, but it's ok attempting to keep a country in the stone age by denying nuclear power and sanctioning them.
|
On June 24 2014 15:16 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
Although certainly not the most astonishing statement in the last 2 pages, the petrodollar claimed as not important to the US was a rather intriguing declaration. We may as well say the same about agriculture while we're there.
Just to blame the petro-dollar and the military complex for everything the US does is a little one-dimensional to say the least and sounds a little like "the fed is run by lizard people"
What I'm curious about though is why are there so many terrorists coming from Britain? Seems strange that of all places Britain would have this issue in observable excess.
Probably just because they have a pretty large muslim minority in the country and most of the Europeans that go to Syria to fight have a muslim background. Germany also has a few hundred people over there, which is a pretty insane number in my opinion.
What worries me even more are the people without even the tiniest Muslim or middle-eastern background that just go over there Nicholas Brody like. I wonder what has happened to these people.
|
On June 24 2014 05:40 DeepElemBlues wrote:
see it isn't just the hypocrisy. it's thinking that the US are the bad guys. well until the US militarily occupies half of europe against its will for 50 years and deliberately starves millions of its own people and enters a united front with brazil for world domination while brazil starves 30 million of its own people or something similar i don't think i'm going to sign on to that one.
If you think like that you have a very big tolerance until you consider someone a bad guy.
By those standards Al Qaida, ISIS and the likes aren't that bad.
|
On June 25 2014 02:55 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 15:16 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
Although certainly not the most astonishing statement in the last 2 pages, the petrodollar claimed as not important to the US was a rather intriguing declaration. We may as well say the same about agriculture while we're there.
Just to blame the petro-dollar and the military complex for everything the US does is a little one-dimensional to say the least and sounds a little like "the fed is run by lizard people" Show nested quote +
What I'm curious about though is why are there so many terrorists coming from Britain? Seems strange that of all places Britain would have this issue in observable excess.
Probably just because they have a pretty large muslim minority in the country and most of the Europeans that go to Syria to fight have a muslim background. Germany also has a few hundred people over there, which is a pretty insane number in my opinion. What worries me even more are the people without even the tiniest Muslim or middle-eastern background that just go over there Nicholas Brody like. I wonder what has happened to these people.
The Petrodollar isn't the only reason the US does anything. But it IS the only reason we do anything in the Middle East.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
