Captured Pilot Burned Alive by ISIS

[Reub]

Fox wants to start another war.

Haha, now we're blaming Fox for covering terrorists burning a man alive?

"MSNBC suffers lowest ratings in a decade"

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/201 ... 02135.html

[Ad Orientem]

Speaking of Jordan, the people there are FURIOUS over this and whatever divisions may have existed are now totally gone. There are reports that the King intends to personally lead one or more attacks on ISIS. If I remember correctly the day after our ambassador was murdered in Libya, Obama went to a $25,000 a plate Hollywood fundraiser.

Leadership does matter.

[Ad Orientem]

Fox wants to start another war.

Haha, now we're blaming Fox for covering terrorists burning a man alive?

Oh please. FOX News was screaming bloody murder and shouting "traitor" at the top of their corporate lungs when other networks showed a few still photos of US troops mistreating prisoners at Abu Ghraib.

[dualstow]

I wonder if the remaining Jordanian bomber pilots are issued cyanide tablets, just in case.

[MomTo2Boys]

I'm not sure what they would have to say about a journalist from a country (Japan) that only gives logistical support to the Allies' effort in the mideast. Maybe beheading is the default punishment when they can't think up something more poetic.

Thank you so much for bringing this up, Dualstow.  The beheading of the Japanese hostages was beyond horrific.  One of the Japanese hostages was the father of one of my sons' friends here in Japan.  I don't wish to get more specific - all that to say that the murder of the Japanese hostages has hit very, very, VERY close to home for me and my family.  The whole thing is gut wrenching, especially as Japan spends the vast majority of its time minding its own business in the world and trying to be hardworking, gracious, polite, and kind.  All I want to do is throw my arms around the entire country and use my Americanness to shield it from horrors like this. 

I very, very much hope that all of this insanity by ISIS backfires against it enormously. While I don't see Japan getting more involved in the fight (they can't), I sure hope that Jordan's ramping up is just the beginning of the international effort. 

[dualstow]

  The beheading of the Japanese hostages was beyond horrific.  One of the Japanese hostages was the father of one of my sons' friends here in Japan.  I don't wish to get more specific - all that to say that the murder of the Japanese hostages has hit very, very, VERY close to home for me and my family.

Oh my gosh. I cannot imagine.

While I don't see Japan getting more involved in the fight (they can't), I sure hope that Jordan's ramping up is just the beginning of the international effort.

There seem to be two camps on this forum, as there are everywhere: do the steps we take against ISIS help, or are we making the problem worse and should we just promote peace in the world without blowing things up at the same time? I am firmly in the first camp. Someone has to do it.

[madbean]

There seem to be two camps on this forum, as there are everywhere: do the steps we take against ISIS help, or are we making the problem worse and should we just promote peace in the world without blowing things up at the same time? I am firmly in the first camp. Someone has to do it.

Is there any evidence to suggest that any of our military adventures in the middle east over the last 20 years (and longer) have helped to promote peace and stability in any way? If we hadn't invaded Iraq and toppled Saddam Hussein would there even be an ISIS now? And here we are supporting a Shia government aligned with Iran against Sunni rebels. I thought Iran was supposed to be our sworn enemy? Ditto with al-Assad of Syria. One day he was the bad guy, the next we are defending him. Al-Qaeda even broke away from ISIS so are they now with us or against us, and who is enemy number one now?

At least in Vietnam it was clear who and what we were fighting against, whether rightly or wrongly. In this mess I don't know how you even tell the good guys from the bad guys.

They should have heeded Colin Powell's warning that "If you break it you own it".

Don't we have enough of our own problems here at home without always jumping into somebody else's halfway around the world?

The only thing I can see that we get out of this is the occasional satisfaction of kicking the ass of some people we think need it real bad, which the American people do seem to enjoy watching on TV, kind of like the Super Bowl.  Personally, I'd rather spend my share of what will be the cost of defeating ISIS on a new car or something.

[Libertarian666]

There seem to be two camps on this forum, as there are everywhere: do the steps we take against ISIS help, or are we making the problem worse and should we just promote peace in the world without blowing things up at the same time? I am firmly in the first camp. Someone has to do it.

Is there any evidence to suggest that any of our military adventures in the middle east over the last 20 years (and longer) have helped to promote peace and stability in any way? If we hadn't invaded Iraq and toppled Saddam Hussein would there even be an ISIS now? And here we are supporting a Shia government aligned with Iran against Sunni rebels. I thought Iran was supposed to be our sworn enemy? Ditto with al-Assad of Syria. One day he was the bad guy, the next we are defending him. Al-Qaeda even broke away from ISIS so are they now with us or against us, and who is enemy number one now?

At least in Vietnam it was clear who and what we were fighting against, whether rightly or wrongly. In this mess I don't know how you even tell the good guys from the bad guys.

They should have heeded Colin Powell's warning that "If you break it you own it".

Don't we have enough of our own problems here at home without always jumping into somebody else's halfway around the world?

The only thing I can see that we get out of this is the occasional satisfaction of kicking the ass of some people we think need it real bad, which the American people do seem to enjoy watching on TV, kind of like the Super Bowl.  Personally, I'd rather spend my share of what will be the cost of defeating ISIS on a new car or something.

Shhh, you'll wake them from their dream of "whirled peas"!

[dualstow]

There seem to be two camps on this forum, as there are everywhere: do the steps we take against ISIS help, or are we making the problem worse and should we just promote peace in the world without blowing things up at the same time? I am firmly in the first camp. Someone has to do it.

Is there any evidence to suggest that any of our military adventures in the middle east over the last 20 years (and longer) have helped to promote peace and stability in any way?

If we hadn't invaded Iraq and toppled Saddam Hussein would there even be an ISIS now?

With regard to the middle east, I think the problem is tied up with our support of dictators over there. I'm not sure what kind of a world we'd have if we had never tried to influence the region in the first place. Perhaps better. I think that our invasion of Afghanistan was justified. Iraq, probably not. And yes, you can go back further than Afghanistan and conclude that we, the west, are ultimately to blame for everything.

 

Don't we have enough of our own problems here at home without always jumping into somebody else's halfway around the world?

We do have enough of our own problems, but I cannot imagine not confronting ISIS. It's not for oil, it's not some kind of zeal for vengeance. It's because people shouldn't have to live under the rule of ISIS. At least, that's how I feel. Don't ask me why it's actually being done.

I do think that Jordan and Saudi Arabia should step up and do the job with their own troops, with support from the West.

[Jan Van]

Al-Qaeda even broke away from ISIS so are they now with us or against us, and who is enemy number one now?

Well, ISIS told Al-Zawahiri to STFU and mind his own business. Which goes to show how mighty al Queda is these days.
Didn't the CIA arm the mujaheddin in Afghanistan when they were fighting the USSR, amongst them bin Laden?

Round and round it goes...

[dualstow]

Didn't the CIA arm the mujaheddin in Afghanistan when they were fighting the USSR, amongst them bin Laden?

Round and round it goes...

Sure enough. And before that didn't the Soviets help us fight the Nazis?

[dualstow]

I do think that Jordan and Saudi Arabia should step up and do the job with their own troops, with support from the West.

There are some who think Saudi Arabia is helping to fund ISIS, so I wonder how likely it is that they would devote their military to the fight.

The wiki page I linked earlier offers only this:

According to the United States Department of Defense, Saudi Arabia has proposed that they would provide training to Syrian rebels so they could return to Syria and battle ISIL.

[Jan Van]

Didn't the CIA arm the mujaheddin in Afghanistan when they were fighting the USSR, amongst them bin Laden?

Round and round it goes...

Sure enough. And before that didn't the Soviets help us fight the Nazis?

Yes they did. I was sticking to the middle east though and all the good the USA did there. Like getting the shah into power in Iran. aiding and abetting Saddam for a long time...

[dualstow]

I see. Yes, as I wrote earlier this morning,

With regard to the middle east, I think the problem is tied up with our support of dictators over there. I'm not sure what kind of a world we'd have if we had never tried to influence the region in the first place. Perhaps better.

[dualstow]

Totally agree. If the Saudis can fight their own fight and madbean can still have oil for his new car, that would be a beautiful thing. And I think it is certainly possible.

[Ad Orientem]

Didn't the CIA arm the mujaheddin in Afghanistan when they were fighting the USSR, amongst them bin Laden?

Round and round it goes...

Sure enough. And before that didn't the Soviets help us fight the Nazis?

It would be more accurate to say that we helped the Soviets fight the Nazis.

[clacy]

Didn't the CIA arm the mujaheddin in Afghanistan when they were fighting the USSR, amongst them bin Laden?

Round and round it goes...

Sure enough. And before that didn't the Soviets help us fight the Nazis?

It would be more accurate to say that we helped the Soviets fight the Nazis.

Don't be contrarian just to be contrarian.  We had over 1mm casualties in WWII.  It was called a world war for a reason.  Everyone had allies they were helping and vise versa.  Russia probably doesn't win without the US, and the US probably can't defeat the Nazi's without Russians.

[Ad Orientem]

Sure enough. And before that didn't the Soviets help us fight the Nazis?

It would be more accurate to say that we helped the Soviets fight the Nazis.

Don't be contrarian just to be contrarian.  We had over 1mm casualties in WWII.  It was called a world war for a reason.  Everyone had allies they were helping and vise versa.  Russia probably doesn't win without the US, and the US probably can't defeat the Nazi's without Russians.

I wasn't attempting to be contrarian. Just pointing out historical biases. Americans tend to think we won the war. In the Pacific theater that is pretty much true. The main actors in that drama were Japan and the United States with the other countries mostly in supporting roles. In Europe however, at least from mid 1941, it was pretty much a fight between the Reds and the Nazis. As for numbers, the Soviets lost 26 million defeating Hitler. Did we help? Absolutely. But we were definitely a supporting actor. In no way am I attempting to denigrate the sacrifices of of our troops, or those of Great Britain or any other of the allies. But let's not kid ourselves. Could we have beaten Hitler without the USSR? Almost certainly not. Could they have won without us? Possibly. American historiography tends to emphasize the importance of the Lend Lease aid to the Soviets, which was significant. But when it comes down to the heavy fighting and casualties, there is just no comparison.

[MachineGhost]

Military intervention against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Wikipedia)

http://bit.ly/16fIcYH

Iran's on our side, whoo-hoo.

Good find!  So no one has actually has an invasion force on the ground?  It scary how big of a territory ISIS is.  Who is financing them for weapons and ammo, etc.?

[Ad Orientem]

Military intervention against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Wikipedia)

http://bit.ly/16fIcYH

Iran's on our side, whoo-hoo.

Good find!  So no one has actually has an invasion force on the ground?  It scary how big of a territory ISIS is.  Who is financing them for weapons and ammo, etc.?

Their financing is very shadowy, but an awful lot of their weapons are of course ours. We gave tons of of very serious weapons to the new (supposedly democratic and non-corrupt)  Iraqi Army, who in turn took one look at ISIS forces coming in their general direction and abandoned their weapons/equipment and deserted en-mass.

[MachineGhost]

There seem to be two camps on this forum, as there are everywhere: do the steps we take against ISIS help, or are we making the problem worse and should we just promote peace in the world without blowing things up at the same time? I am firmly in the first camp. Someone has to do it.

Isolationism doesn't work with mystical religious whackjobs.  They're not deterred by mutually assured destruction.  They're the equivalent of zombies.

It's kinda like non-violent resistance only working in civilized societies.  Your potential enemies have to have empathy and respect for armed neutrality to work, which is how we survived the Cold War.  Otheriwse, you're just a juicy target and you better eternally up your defense and never ever slack off.

[madbean]

It would be more accurate to say that we helped the Soviets fight the Nazis.

I wasn't attempting to be contrarian. Just pointing out historical biases.

I was going to say the same thing before you beat me to it. I think it's relevant to point this out because it flies in the face of the standard neocon narrative that Hitler and the Nazis are proof that we have to go abroad looking for monsters to slay. The historical fact is that it was Communist Russia that did most of the heavy lifting to defeat the Nazis.

[Kbg]

Please don't say the reason why the Middle East is a basket case is because of the U.S. It fully demonstrates one's ignorance of what is happening over there. The only people who believe that are Americans watching US/European journalists being played by the locals who know that if you want to "get air" just say America and Israel are the cause of all our problems. Thomas Friedman is one of the few American journalists who has been writing accurately about the region for quite a while.

Moving from the Arab world to the Persian world...a very careful reading of Iranian history from 1950 to 1979 will reveal what was really going on. The whole US/UK assassination thing, guilty as charged. But if you think that is all there was to it, you are the checkers player in a game of chess.

We Amerikanskis like to think we control things far more than we actually do. In the Middle East we have been "played" with some amazing finesse over the years for local agendas. In my view our biggest problem is that rather than being a large and evil force in the region, we are often a large and stupid force in the region.

[dualstow]

Yikes. Is there a better source than Buchanan, though? When I typed

Code: Select all

biden clandestine aid isis saudi

into Google, I couldn't find mainstream sources. It's all stuff like Topix, a rural rumor network AFAIK.

Edit: On ISIL's main wiki page, I found this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_S ... 7s_support

Allegations of Saudi Arabia's support[edit]
Although Saudi Arabia's government rejected these claims,[436] the Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki[437] and some media outlets like NBC, BBC, and NYTimes stated that Saudi Arabia is funding ISIL.[438][439][440][441]

In other places in this same entry, there are allegations from others that Saudi Arabia has offered support. (No doubt there are non-governmental supporters).

[dualstow]

An NBC item, which is one of the numbered citations mentioned in the wiki page above, is a very good read.
http://nbcnews.to/1usNTJ4

“Their governments claim to oppose ISIS,”? {David Phillips} said, “while individuals continue funding terrorist activities."

Zarif called the recently convened Paris conference on fighting ISIS a "coalition of repenters" who are only now seeing that they have created a monster. The Gulf states were among the countries attending the summit.

"Most participants in that -- in that meeting in one form or another provided support to ISIS in the course of its creation and upbringing and expansion, actually at the end of the day, creating a Frankenstein that came to haunt its creators," Zarif told the CFR.