Clarity: We Will Be Funding The Terror Group Who Kidnapped Sotloff, and Asking Them to Fight the

[grahamhgreen]

Last edited Sat Sep 13, 2014, 06:36 PM - Edit history (1)

Group they sold him to.

Groups that have already formed alliances with each other.




What could go wronG?



More evidence this is nothing more than the continuation of the neo-con doctrine of perpetual war. Let's stop the cycle of violence now.

25 years in Iraq is enough.




Kidnapping: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/08/steven-sotloff-sold-to-isis_n_5788312.html

Alliance: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014895466

[liberal_at_heart]

1. my head is spinning, but I'm sure that is exactly what they want. If they keep us confused they feed

us whatever narrative they want.

[NYC_SKP]

2. For the most part, posting members of this board, the Democratic Underground, know jack shit.

You are, I assume, a member.

Can your provide something of substance, please?

[grahamhgreen]

3. Ad Hominem attack FAIL. Present your arguments or GTFO. PS- How we gonna pay for the war (crickets)

[IronGate]

6. Jury results.

It was close, but you prevailed.
I voted to leave it.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message



On Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:04 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

For the most part, posting members of this board, the Democratic Underground, know jack shit.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5531292

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

quite a blanket insult to fellow DUers.

No substance at all in this post, a pure personal attack

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:09 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Valid opinion and question, not a personal attack.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Blanket attacks of DU, as a whole, is unqualified and disruptive. I'm against censorship, as a general rule and would request a warning to redact first, then do apprpriately.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I agree with the alert. This is unacceptable.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future

[NYC_SKP]

37. Well how about that?

Pointing out that members here who get their information from the Huffington Post don't have quality intel is just unacceptable.

Wow.

Thank you for your vote!

[BlindTiresias]

7. care to comment

on the validity of the huffpo article?

[grahamhgreen]

18. Crickets.

[NYC_SKP]

38. OMG, the huffington post! I didn't realize!

Clearly, Obama probably didn't have this valuable intel available to him.

[grahamhgreen]

44. You doubt the veracity of Sotloffs family?

[Enrique]

12. only one person knows anything

President Obama

[Thinkingabout]

4. What is your plan to stop the violence?

[grahamhgreen]

10. First. Stop hitting. We can do that. We can stop hitting. Second, I see this is a great opportunity

to unite disparate ME players who have been at war with each other, some for 1400 years.

The Saudi's, Syrians, Iranians,Israeli's, and Iraqi's can all band together to fight this common enemy.... of course, that's assuming it is an enemy and not a proxy of SA. Of course, that does not fit in with the neocon vision of perpetual war for

[Thinkingabout]

14. Good thought on stopping the hitting but there has to be a plan introduced to

Accomplish this goal. On settling the troubles in the ME, you noted this has gone on for 1400 years, it will not be easy. Just as generations here in the US passes thoughts onto their children, the cycle isn't broken. In the US the race wars continue, the same similar events occur in the ME. US has been trying for years to get a peace plan adopted but it hasn't happened. I think a viable plan hasn't been put on the table yet, still looking for a win-win plan.

[Hissyspit]

15. I say we use more violence.

Blow up a few wedding parties.

[Thinkingabout]

17. I know the point you are trying to make, think of a real plan, this is a serious matter.

Just like we need to curb future Sandy Hooks.

[Man from Pickens]

22. My plan to stop the violence

flood the region with weapons of all kinds, big and small

force disparate groups with vastly different cultures to co-exist within borders, borders that were drawn by a pair of Western diplomats a century ago for the purpose of dividing the area politically and preventing any unified opposition to outside domination

pick an enemy every few years to bomb the crap out of

that's sure to fix it in no time

or maybe we can try something else

[Thinkingabout]

26. Is this your final offer, didnt work before, what do you think has changed to get it to work now?

[Man from Pickens]

29. it's clearly the only option

if there were any other options surely someone would have tried them by now

maybe we should add some extra bombing and extra weapons just to be sure

and support all sides with those weapons so that whoever ends up winning out owes us one

I'm sure they'll love us for it

the defense contractors will, anyway, and that's what's really important in America

[Thinkingabout]

31. I would love to see a viable option, meanwhile this radical ISIS has to be stopped, by

Whatever means. I prefer to have fewer troops on the ground. I think the key lies in Syria and getting permission to bomb or use drones may be slow in coming. But, we do not want the negotiations behind closed doors are, it wasn't announced about the bin Laden raid, might be the same this time.

[Man from Pickens]

32. Let me play Devil's advocate for a minute please

I have three key questions on that point.

1) Why exactly does ISIS need to be stopped?
2) Why does it need to be the US doing it?
3) Is achieving the stated objective even possible?

[CentralMass]

41. You should have no problem finding employment in Washington.

[Dems to Win]

5. K&R Let the Saudis take out the Frankenstein they created n/t

[grahamhgreen]

42. This is the solution.

[Progressive dog]

9. It is unfortunate, but if the choices

are between funding the group that sold Sotloff in order oppose the group that beheaded him, having US troops back in combat, or doing nothing--I would vote for funding.
BTW: We have fewer military in combat zones than we have police in many large cities.

[grahamhgreen]

11. But, they're not going to fight them.... they just signed an alliance.

[Progressive dog]

13. Then I guess there is no point in

supplying weapons to people who won't use them against ISIS. We'll just have to fund the Kurds and Iraqis and let it go at that. Continue our air support of course.

[zeemike]

19. Yes but the military have vastly more powerful weapons.

to where one can kill hundreds.

But why is there never a choice to just stop it?...that is not doing nothing.

But we got lots of money we can keep it going for many years...there is lots of money to be made in war materials...

[Progressive dog]

28. Doing nothing?

Sure, we could let them continue to kill until they get tired of killing. That's always been a really clever option.

[zeemike]

35. Or until the people in the region take action to help themselves.

But why do that when they have America willing to spend trillions to protect their interest so they can live safely in golden palaces with their concubines...but that is a clever move on their part.

[Aerows]

24. Deploy the Ferguson, MO police.

They can't make the region any more messed up than it already is, and it might sate their trigger fingers if they are getting shot at, too.

[Progressive dog]

27. If you can get them to go

Start a petition.

[Phlem]

30. +1

awesome!

[grahamhgreen]

39. There's a plan I can get behind!

[Aerows]

40. They have MRAPs, personnel trained to kill

I think they are *perfect* to fight terrorists.

Heck, they can even protect their own when they shoot someone that is giving up.

I say, Deploy FergMO Force!

(George Zimmerman can be on the front line, too!)

If knowing the Ferguson PD and George Zimmerman are loose in your area with guns doesn't make you shit your pants with terror, not a damn thing will.

[dreamnightwind]

43. Yes, also send in the racoons

Let the terrorists deal with them. Not sure whose side I would be on, tough call.

[JEB]

16. Quagmire,

cluster fuck, abyss, treadmill, mirage.

[TwilightGardener]

20. You need to be skeptical of all of this information. Stuff that comes out of Syria, especially

from a family's sources, is not reliable info. There are a lot of groups and interests in Syria with various political goals who are trying to manipulate public opinion. Look at the confusion over who used chem weapons last year--it still hasn't been conclusively proven, though it's likely it was Assad.

[grahamhgreen]

23. The rebel/ISIS alliance seems pretty well documented, we can agree?

[TwilightGardener]

25. There are a number of rebel groups. Probably most of them would like to be

called "moderate" if it means they won't also get bombed by mistake, or if they can have western money and arms. It could also be some sort of move by ISIS to prevent getting the shit bombed out of it, by saying they're going to be now mixed in with more moderate rebels, or it could be Assad/Russian/Iranian propaganda, or something else entirely. US intelligence will have to dig harder.

[99Forever]

21. Enough insanity.

Let them settle their own issues. That's the only way it stands any chance of lasting at all. We CANNOT stop their fight, ONLY they can.

[nashville_brook]

33. k and r -- none of this makes sense.

who are our allies that will make an endgame possible? what has 25 years of war in the ME achieved?

[DirkGently]

34. Here's someone suggesting we're playing into Assad's hands perfectly.

Military leaders don't want a war. Intelligence services don't think we need one. It's the McCains and the McDonnell Douglas' of the world itching for another lucrative, treasury draining bloodbath.

Will we give it to them?

For Bashar Al Assad the ideal scenario is one in which ISIS helps him kill off his armed nationalist opposition in western Syria, American aviation assets pound ISIS positions in the east, and he sits comfortably in Damascus, feeling once again needed by the West as a useful partner against those arguably more evil than him. And a lucrative dividend awaits: The fact or perception of collaboration between Washington and Damascus driving wedges between the U.S. and every one of its regional partners, thereby serving the interests of the party Assad has so faithfully served: Iran.

Based on his experience with Washington since mid-2011, Assad has every reason to believe his strategy will bear fruit. Now, as his own forces focus on bombing, shelling, and starving civilians, ISIS fighters in western Syria work obligingly to eliminate his armed opposition. Now, as the U.S. contemplates an aerial campaign against ISIS targets in the east, Assad envisions a continuation of living large at the expense of others: Iran, Russia, ISIS, and now America. He expects harsh rhetoric from Washington. He will tell allies and adversaries alike to pay no attention to the words of those who have told him to step aside, warned him of red lines, threatened him with military strikes, and promised aid to opponents that never quite materialized in the forms or quantities required.

Indeed, if all the administration has to offer is more rhetoric, it is walking into a deadly geopolitical ambush. Even as Washington—ideally joined by partners—goes its own way operationally against ISIS with no reference whatsoever to the Assad regime, Assad will be believed both inside Syria and around the region when he claims that the fix is in. He will allege coordination and collaboration when none exists. He will hint at prominent visitors from Europe and the U.S., irrespective of their actual authorities. If all there is from Washington is talk, he will be believed.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119226/us-airstrikes-isis-syria-are-not-enough-punish-assad-too

[deminks]

36. but McCain sayuz some of the groups can be trusted...

he knows 'cause he vetted some of them

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mccain-ive-vetted-syrian-rebels-people-not-trusting-them-making-excuses/

(snip)

McCain touted that he’s “vetted a number of them because I know them.” It was at that point Fox aired the infamous photo from last year of McCain and a few Syrian rebels, two of which turned out to be suspected kidnappers. This led to Rand Paul taking a shot at McCain and illustrating this as an example of why it’s hard to properly vet Syrian rebels.

(end snip)