Tweet
The strategy seems to be to keep them divided and fighting each other. We actually don't need a strategy. But just let them do it and don't let any of them get too strong.
-
I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett Kavanaugh -
wow kid, i figured you were in jail
To us, it is the BEAST.Comment
-
Nope. I haven't been accused of rape or anything, just suspected.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
No means no broTo us, it is the BEAST.Comment
-
Hah I'm sorry that's a cheap shotTo us, it is the BEAST.Comment
-
It's ok. You're the only one who suspects me, that I know of.
I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
aeson: i've a low tolerance for your dishonest debating style and you're not as ridiculously entertaining (or is that entertainingly ridiculous) as ben. i'm afraid we're done.
elok: i certainly agree that a world without ISIS would be a better one; that's not the issue i have. my question, and doubt is whether given the possible responses, given current political realities, any action that western powers could conceivably take could achieve that aim. there are several distinct but related problems:
1) the syrian civil war
2) iraqi sunnis' unhappiness (this is putting it very mildly) with the government
3) the kurds (also part of 1 and 4)
4) the lack of support for the iraqi state, a lot of which stems from the fundamental contradiction in its continued existence
5) the practical challenges of defeating ISIS as a military force
my contention is that unless any solution, or rather range of solutions, tackles all these problems, it will be doomed to failure before it has even begun. if we look at what has been proposed and done thus far, we get some talk of 2 and some action on 3 and 5, but nothing on 1 and 4. no western leader has said anything about bringing the syrian civil war to a quick close, because this means backing assad. equally, no one has anything to say about a post-iraq future; or even how the iraqi state, and the people's trust and belief in it might be rebuilt, beyond some vague platitudes about a broad based government.
the character of any western response is also seriously limited by political constraints. the western public will not support ground troops going in, so this means that airstikes, and money and weapons to proxies (the iraqi government, the kurds, perhaps some sunni elements in the future) are the order of the day. giving this kind of support to non-iraqi state players, clearly weakens the already moribund iraqi state, whose preservation is a key aim of the western powers. the kurdish situation is quite interesting, but i will probably leave that for another day, as there's a lot to say about it.
now having said all that, it makes it sound - and this view is given by the sensationalist media - as if ISIS were an unbeatable force of military geniuses. this is of course not the case and...well i'm going to come back to this tomorrow."The Christian way has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found to be hard and left untried" - GK Chesterton.
"The most obvious predicition about the future is that it will be mostly like the past" - Alain de BottonComment
-
Not worth the taunt.No, I did not steal that from somebody on Something Awful.Comment
-
Sure C0ckney, it's understandable you wouldn't want to stick around to try to support any of the ridiculous assertions you've made. Rather you only want to avoid addressing salient points and instead cast insults as you run away from the fight you picked. The simple fact is that I gave an example of what western military intervention could achieve in response to your question about that subject (which you hilariously then claimed had not been addressed), and pointed out the value that would be present in doing so. You wanted to paint that as "merely salving consciences" and then pretend it wasn't even what was being talked about, even though the conversation was clearly about the effect of boots on the ground. You yourself were talking about it by referencing Iraq and Afghanistan occupations.
If you want to drop it, you can drop it. If you want to go on casting insults while you run away, don't expect me to not point it out and mock you for it.Comment
-
I think Aeson soundly wins this one.
If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
){ :|:& };:Comment
-
Also worth pointing out: Every single one of these "advisors" we've been sending to Iraq have actually very blatantly just been US Army Special Forces. So we do have boots on the ground.If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
){ :|:& };:Comment
-
Nobody really cares what you think.Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View PostI think Aeson soundly wins this one.
"Ceterum censeo Ben esse expellendum."Comment
-
Well I, for my part, am deeply apathetic about your opinion. I care so little about it that I felt obligated to post just to make sure you were aware of the utter depths of my unconcern. Yessir, I certainly don't have any opinions about your opinions.Originally posted by dannubis View PostNobody really cares what you think.
C0ckney, I'll get back to you later.Comment
-
Then please show me how HC's post was more helpful than mine.Originally posted by Elok View Post
Until then, please take your self-rightgeous attitude and shove it where the sun doens't shine. With my compliments."Ceterum censeo Ben esse expellendum."Comment
-
That's easy. HC shows remarkable judgement in his post, while you are posting scurrilous lies about the rest of us in your post.No, I did not steal that from somebody on Something Awful.Comment
Comment