Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 11/14/2015 8:24 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/14/15 7:29 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: Other than our deserting Israel, what's your Libertarian idea for handing ISIS? Don't know what Greg will say, but here's my suggestion: Honor all formal agreements we have with our allies and expect them to honor the agreements in return. Think twice about what kind and who we sign any new agreements with. Let non-allies, including those nations that are predominately Muslim deal with Islamic fundamentalist movements like ISIS on their own. The only reason we are involved is because we stick our nose where it doesn't belong and we have little or no understanding of what motivates the different, religious based Islamic followers. If they attack us ... or any of our allies ... fight back hard, but otherwise mind our own business. If you are a journalist or world do-gooder and value your life, stay the hell out of the areas of the world being controlled by the likes of ISIS. Otherwise, don't expect your government to come and save your ass or expect retaliation because you got killed. "If they attack us..." I'm not sure how we fight back hard, since the attackers are not necessarily from a country with an actual government. Apparently the attackers on Paris, or at least some of them, were Syrians. What do we do? Invade Syria? No. A response is dependent on good intel as to where the "brains" (command and control) exist and take them out. If it happens to be in Syria, so be it. |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 11/14/15 8:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/14/2015 8:24 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 11/14/15 7:29 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: Other than our deserting Israel, what's your Libertarian idea for handing ISIS? Don't know what Greg will say, but here's my suggestion: Honor all formal agreements we have with our allies and expect them to honor the agreements in return. Think twice about what kind and who we sign any new agreements with. Let non-allies, including those nations that are predominately Muslim deal with Islamic fundamentalist movements like ISIS on their own. The only reason we are involved is because we stick our nose where it doesn't belong and we have little or no understanding of what motivates the different, religious based Islamic followers. If they attack us ... or any of our allies ... fight back hard, but otherwise mind our own business. If you are a journalist or world do-gooder and value your life, stay the hell out of the areas of the world being controlled by the likes of ISIS. Otherwise, don't expect your government to come and save your ass or expect retaliation because you got killed. "If they attack us..." I'm not sure how we fight back hard, since the attackers are not necessarily from a country with an actual government. Apparently the attackers on Paris, or at least some of them, were Syrians. What do we do? Invade Syria? No. A response is dependent on good intel as to where the "brains" (command and control) exist and take them out. If it happens to be in Syria, so be it. I don't disagree, but it doesn't seem to solve the problem with this terrorists. As soon as our drones or brave troops cut off one terrorist head, so to speak, there are others that pop right out to take his place. The tactic hasn't worked for us in Iraq or Syria, and it hasn't worked for the Israelis. |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 11/14/15 10:43 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/14/15 8:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/14/2015 8:24 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 11/14/15 7:29 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: Other than our deserting Israel, what's your Libertarian idea for handing ISIS? Don't know what Greg will say, but here's my suggestion: Honor all formal agreements we have with our allies and expect them to honor the agreements in return. Think twice about what kind and who we sign any new agreements with. Let non-allies, including those nations that are predominately Muslim deal with Islamic fundamentalist movements like ISIS on their own. The only reason we are involved is because we stick our nose where it doesn't belong and we have little or no understanding of what motivates the different, religious based Islamic followers. If they attack us ... or any of our allies ... fight back hard, but otherwise mind our own business. If you are a journalist or world do-gooder and value your life, stay the hell out of the areas of the world being controlled by the likes of ISIS. Otherwise, don't expect your government to come and save your ass or expect retaliation because you got killed. "If they attack us..." I'm not sure how we fight back hard, since the attackers are not necessarily from a country with an actual government. Apparently the attackers on Paris, or at least some of them, were Syrians. What do we do? Invade Syria? No. A response is dependent on good intel as to where the "brains" (command and control) exist and take them out. If it happens to be in Syria, so be it. I don't disagree, but it doesn't seem to solve the problem with this terrorists. As soon as our drones or brave troops cut off one terrorist head, so to speak, there are others that pop right out to take his place. The tactic hasn't worked for us in Iraq or Syria, and it hasn't worked for the Israelis. Then there is this from Ted Cruz, GOP POTUS wannabe: "We must immediately recognize that our enemy is not ‘violent extremism.’ It is the radical Islamism that has declared jihad against the west. It will not be appeased by outreach or declarations of tolerance. It will not be deterred by targeted airstrikes with zero tolerance for civilian casualties, when the terrorists have such utter disregard for innocent life." Is Cruz saying we should have lots of airstrikes and not give a damn about collateral damage - the killing of non-involved civilians? What exactly is Cruz proposing? |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 14 Nov 2015 10:43:58 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote: On 11/14/15 8:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: No. A response is dependent on good intel as to where the "brains" (command and control) exist and take them out. If it happens to be in Syria, so be it. I don't disagree, but it doesn't seem to solve the problem with this terrorists. As soon as our drones or brave troops cut off one terrorist head, so to speak, there are others that pop right out to take his place. The tactic hasn't worked for us in Iraq or Syria, and it hasn't worked for the Israelis. I agree. This is like running over cactus with a lawn mower or cutting up star fish and throwing them back overboard. |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 14 Nov 2015 08:31:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 11/14/2015 8:24 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 11/14/15 7:29 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: Other than our deserting Israel, what's your Libertarian idea for handing ISIS? Don't know what Greg will say, but here's my suggestion: Honor all formal agreements we have with our allies and expect them to honor the agreements in return. Think twice about what kind and who we sign any new agreements with. Let non-allies, including those nations that are predominately Muslim deal with Islamic fundamentalist movements like ISIS on their own. The only reason we are involved is because we stick our nose where it doesn't belong and we have little or no understanding of what motivates the different, religious based Islamic followers. If they attack us ... or any of our allies ... fight back hard, but otherwise mind our own business. If you are a journalist or world do-gooder and value your life, stay the hell out of the areas of the world being controlled by the likes of ISIS. Otherwise, don't expect your government to come and save your ass or expect retaliation because you got killed. "If they attack us..." I'm not sure how we fight back hard, since the attackers are not necessarily from a country with an actual government. Apparently the attackers on Paris, or at least some of them, were Syrians. What do we do? Invade Syria? No. A response is dependent on good intel as to where the "brains" (command and control) exist and take them out. If it happens to be in Syria, so be it. When you are talking about attacks like Paris, there wasn't a lot of brain power involved. We have teenagers here who can come up with plots that complicated in their bedroom. The major difference is the attackers are suspected of being battle tested "freedom fighters" from Syria who were better at shooting people. I would not be shocked to hear that the blueprints for attacks like this were on dark web sites, pretty hard to bomb. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Police thugs injure Iraq vet | General | |||
Union Obama Thugs attacking protestors | General | |||
Corporate thugs...of course. | General | |||
Judge Upholds Constitution against Bush Thugs | General | |||
Union thugs target Republicans | General |