General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"Human, civilized society has lost the battle against barbarism. I have lost all hope."
Islamic State now controls more than half of Syrian territory following four years of civil war.
The radical group has destroyed antiquities and monuments in Iraq and there are fears it might now devastate Palmyra, an ancient World Heritage site and home to renowned Roman-era ruins including well-preserved temples, colonnades and a theater.
"This is the fall of a civilization," Syria's antiquities chief Maamoun Abdulkarim told Reuters by telephone on Thursday.
"Human, civilized society has lost the battle against barbarism. I have lost all hope."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/21/us-mideast-crisis-syria-idUSKBN0O60KH20150521
What can be done here? Anything?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)militaries in harms way, I don't see any reason not to use drone strikes on these freaks. The people here are damned if we do and damned if we don't.
Or, the option is to let Darwin's theories play out.
This morning's headlines are worse than ever as the isis morons invade Syria with more brutality than ever before.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)that got us where we are.
When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)than put the lives of US, NATO and other allied troops at risk, why not just hit these guys with those long range drone things?
It wasn't drones that created the isis nuts, it was the actions of the invading military industrial complex under bush that wanted a war for profit. Drones aren't profiteering and exploitation, it's the controlled killing of hornets in a nest, without the 'invade, take over, cash in and get rich' schemes from the bush regime.
There's a big difference.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)even if that was 100% accurate
how do you think the people around these 'bad people' feel? What kind of actions might they consider just as appropriate as our death from above.
When it comes to killing people, it doesn't matter whether your bomb costs $50 or $1 million to make.
Dyedinthewoolliberal
(16,211 posts)to fix this? Why don't the Saudis, Egyptians and other cultural leaders of the Arab world do something?
underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)But it seems to be the thing to do in the ME, ever since the 50's...
But, just to give pause, what if the USA hadn't assisted in the WW's? (never mind those boatloads of refugee jews turned away at the ports and all that hidden bit of nasty history) (oh and the Russians really did get there first, not the Americans) etc, etc.
Conundrums and complexities abound.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)created ISIS in the first place. And it did not work to settle things down in the ME. If the citizens of the ME do not solve this themselves it will never be over.
IMO the only way to solve this is through diplomacy and they are not going to trust us if we are involved. Some other country is going to have to take the role of peace maker. The people of the ME are going to have to recognize that war itself is their enemy. War destroys the very foundation of civilization. First by the destruction of the infrastructure and economy and then by fomenting chaos.
They need to determine just exactly how this war between various sectors of their own society can be brought to a halt and how to resolve the issues. At the beginning of this latest sortie we talked about dividing Iraq up into three sections reflecting the various parties. Maybe they need to go back and start there. Of course now there is more involved besides Iraq so the three divisions are no longer the answer. Put whatever they have to do - they are the only ones who can do it.
underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)their own new holocaust. I don't think these brutal idiots in isis are capable of diplomacy, all I see is spree killers and serial murderers and rapists bent on fulfilling their own selfish brutal desires. I don't see any efforts at governing or control, just wanton brutality for no real reason. How do you deal with a part of the human species that is only possibly defined as the lowest form of life on this planet?
jwirr
(39,215 posts)whole mess. By war I was referring to the 1000 year religious war they have been fighting.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)facets of humanity have banded together. I see little of wanting a better world, instead, they focus IMO on horrific brutality as a game of horror. As to how to stop it, I have no idea. But what does bother me is why does the US always have to be in the middle of it all. Our own country needs attention.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)It was Herbert Spencer.
To kill an idea by killing people requires slayings of idea bearing persons so pervasive and inescapable that a taboo is generated that threatens consequences too fearful to test. Drones can't really do that, even if targets who truly bear the ideas could be identified. And the later requires pervasive and effective total surveillance of the idea managed population.
If you want to understand what trying to stamp out competing ideas and put in place a hegemonic philosophy requires, just look to ISIS/ISIL. They claim to trying to do just that. ISIS/ISIL are demonstrating the basic consequence of the modern history of such pogroms...its pursuit turns those trying to impose it into brutally intolerant totalitarian authorities.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)I don't much about war, but I think you must know even less.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)Though I suppose A-10's or an AC-130 would do the job more effectively.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Drones are best used (if they're going to be used at all...always the real question!) on individual targets. That is, specific people or small installations, vehicles, etc. A large(ish) force like ISIS troop concentrations is better attacked with bombing raids and/or ground assault. ISIS is very nearly defenseless against air strikes.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Escalating violence always works out so well!!
What could possibly go wrong? 
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)who felt screwed by the Shiite Iraqi govt.
We also could put a lot more pressure on people like the Saudis to cut off funding to ISIS. There are many non-military options to deal with ISIS that we haven't done.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)...or any other fucking warmongers latest boogeyman, for that matter. You worried about it? Finance the fight yourself and send your kids to do the dying. Or maybe, just maybe, the people that live in the region can handle their own fucking problems.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)That doesn't sound particularly compassionate. Are we only supposed to care about the suffering of people in our own region?
jwirr
(39,215 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)Perhaps a different approach is needed rather than no approach?
jwirr
(39,215 posts)troops, fight the war with out own ground troops.
What is left? We need to have another country - preferably one they trust (if there is one) try to get them to listen to reason: the wars are destroying everything around them. We would not have gone back in their if they had not started in again. I do not think even a peace attempt at this time will work because unfortunately ISIS's goal seems to be destruction and they appear to be winning that war.
So you seem to still have hope that this can be ended. How?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I'm at a loss which is why I am putting the question out there in the first place.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)cornered will fight back. I think that ISIS (although they are not rats) are in a corner and are fighting back in the only way they know how to. The countries over there are almost totally destroyed and this is what is left.
We did this in WWI - we pushed Germany so far down that their reaction was to fight back - WWII.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)They don't appear to be "fighting back" but rather attempting to expand their territory and grow into a regional power. They do, after all, profess to aspire to take over the world, pretty much.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)Yeah , nothing screams fucking compassion quite like drone strikes.
Geeebus Effen Cripes. Do you even think about the crap you say?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)That's the only possible action that can be taken?
I would think that folks could come up with other options that might actually help the situation.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)They want us to be the savior in this but we should not. Let the countries protect their country and antiquities. Seems like a bunch of complaining and giving up rather then dealing with it which won't help at all once all the history is gone. But complaining never has an expectation date.
cali
(114,904 posts)I have no idea whether this would be effective or good policy.
I don't see that the U.S. can do much. What do you think?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I am looking to read something intelligent from someone who has a plan that makes sense. Maybe there are such articles out there.
sendero
(28,552 posts)... I think this situation is dangerously close to spinning irretrievably out of control. And I don't see any credible actions to stop it, and am not even sure it would be possible to. I have to say I'm losing confidence in Obama, it doesn't seem like has has a handle on this.
babylonsister
(172,759 posts)include sending our troops in? What kind of handle should Obama have that would improve the situation? I think there is none unless surrounding countries step up their efforts.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,161 posts)Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem said on Monday, according to Agence France-Presse.
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2015/02/09/Syria-rejects-foreign-ground-troops-to-fight-ISIS-.html
which is why all the discussion of using ground troops in Iraq, where they would be not barred by whoever is running the country today..
oberliner
(58,724 posts)The situation has changed dramatically for the worse since then. ISIS controls half the country.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)The Synni tribes support daesh.
Telcontar
(660 posts)Accept the fact the population is lost, scrub the area clean of all life, preserve the cultural artifacts for the future.
Or wall it off, morn the loss, and don't let the infection spread.
cali
(114,904 posts)Telcontar
(660 posts)Re-read the thread. My point is about how utterly helpless we are dealing with this. Nothing we can do will improve the situation
cali
(114,904 posts)was intended to be ironic.
Telcontar
(660 posts)Keep calm and coffee on
dumbcat
(2,160 posts)until someone is willing to use actions some will consider vile.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)
thinking.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Barbarians by definition will not listen to reason. They never have and they never will. The only way to stop barbarians is with a ruthless, huge force, which of course implicates grave moral questions.
World War II is an example. Was the firebombing of Nazi Germany and Tokyo a moral horror? Of course. Would it have been morally acceptable to use the atomic bomb on Germany, if it had been finished a few months earlier? I am inclined to think it would have been given the nature of the Nazi regime. As for the use of the Bomb against Japan, there are sound cases to be made both for its use and refraining from using it. The conquest of Japan was going to cost millions of lives, many those of civilians, in any case, Bomb or no Bomb, Perhaps seeing what the Bomb did made it possible to get through the Cold War without an atomic exchange between the US and USSR. I have little doubt it was a contributing factor.
The only relevant question, as I see it, is do the barbarians present a sufficiently imminent threat to what we loosely call civilization to use what can be regarded as even greater barbarism to save itself. That is never an easy question to resolve.
I do not think ISIS rises to that level, at least not yet. The day may come and it would be wrong-headed to deny that it might.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)
romanic
(2,841 posts)I hate to say it, but even if we killed every single member of ISIS, what's stopping another group to fight "for Islam" and avenger their fallen "brothers and sisters".
dixiegrrrrl
(60,161 posts)As Nina Paley so cleverly shows us
olegramps
(8,200 posts)They are driven by their conviction that they are justified by the delusion that they are doing God's will. No act is too vile or brutal in destroying any who do not agree with their determination to enforce their will. Anyone who opposes them are perceived as the enemies of God and are to be liquidation is justified. They cannot be convinced they are in error. Consequently, the only solution is their extermination.
As President Obama pointed out similar crusades have been launched by Christians throughout history. For example it was not until the Enlightenment in Western Civilization that the witch trials and executions where confessions were obtained by hideous torture and which extended over three hundred years were finally halted.
glowing
(12,233 posts)The more resistance they get from outside forces, the more support they seem to get from people on the ground in these regions. At some point, I assume they would have enough land to begin a "country development" type of plan where they form an actual govt... And as far as I can tell, they aren't much worse than Saudi Arabia when it comes to human rights atrocities. I'd stay out of the way and keep from Isis using America and the drones as a recruitment/ support entity.
On the home front, we need to move off oil like its the space race or Manhatten Project. Full bore, take our money and our weapons sales out of these countries all together! Focus on this country and going green. When our money isn't swelling their coffers from oil sales, they may have to let go of their extremism. Why we continue to make this issue our problem is absurd. Do you see anyone else ringing their hands and freaking out? Do you see other countries trying to jump in and "fix it". I don't.
Zoonart
(14,466 posts)Well said.
Nay
(12,051 posts)to depend on them for energy is totally stupid. Let's fix this country up -- we do need a Manhattan Project-style redo to add renewable energy sources, make many things local (for ex., we should have small farms around every city and town), and use our trillions to help US for once.
glowing
(12,233 posts)by selling to both sides. Perpetual war is good business for some.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)But the MIC, oil companies and the bankers will never allow it.
glowing
(12,233 posts)lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)philosslayer
(3,076 posts)Islam is a religion of peace; these are just modern barbarians seeking to justify their crimes under the flag of Islam. It is disgusting in multiple ways.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)its disingenuous and dangerous.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)I see no reason to question that.
You're running dangerously close to the "no true Scotsman" logical fallacy.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)The question was put to you, as, DO you believe they are Christians ?
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)it wasn't what "I believe"...
That said, they say they're Christian so I believe them when they say they are Christians.
I tend to accept a person's self identification when it comes to religion. If you say you're a Christian then I'll believe it even as you commit your own particular varieties of sin. I may also call you a hypocrite who isn't a very good Christian but I wouldn't ever say you aren't a Christian.
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)I can call myself a horse. It doesn't make me a horse.
They rape and sell women. They abuse children. This is not the behavior of followers of Islam.
ProfessorGAC
(76,706 posts)They're gangsters and petty thugs who wrap themselves in a cloak of religion to make it look like they have a purpose other than power and money. I think that describes them pretty well.
They can self-identify all they want. But, i don't really believe they're motivated by their religion. I think it's a smokescreen.
MBS
(9,688 posts)This week, I heard a Senegalese man describe them just as you did: as criminals, and/or as politicians using ISIS and Boko Haram as a means for power. The Senegalese man said in no uncertain terms that these two organizations are not religious and do not represent Islam - they are cloaking their movement in the language of religion, but everything they do is against the precepts of Islam.
In addition to the unspeakable murders of innocent lives, the destruction of ancient history is a tragedy of epic proportions. I share the Syrian curator's despair.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)there are Quranic verses supporting the destruction of idols (the destruction of these historic sites and artifacts), taking slaves, and the secondary status of infidels to do with as Muslims want.
So yes, these actions actually are Islamic. The people committing them are Muslims. Clearly this is a small subsection if Muslims but that doesn't make them any less a part of the Islamic ummah.
We deny that at our peril.
Telcontar
(660 posts)Just because they call it a religion of peace doesn't make it so
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)and the force to back it up. ISIS is just as Islamic as they say they are. Remember the counter-reformation and the Inquisition. Those with the weapons and army make the rules and define themselves and their dogma. They are what they say they are,
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)We all know that the major three monotheistic religions are incredibly enlightened and nobody who is a member of an Abrahamic religion ever does anything wrong. Tut tut. Perish the thought!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Hey, live and learn, huh? 
gollygee
(22,336 posts)This is so annoying. Hateful Christians are indeed Christians, and hateful Muslims are indeed Islamic.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)Syria is in the midst of a 3 sided war: The Syrian government vs the rebels and IS.
Iraq is fragmented: The Kurds who are willing to fight and fight well are under equipped and the White House is unwilling to anger the Turkish and Iraqi governments by giving the equipment they need.
The Sunni elements in the Iraqi military are generally un-willing to fight or fight poorly and the Shia militias who are willing to fight are at least partially under the influence of the Iranian government.
Whether we can do more with just aircraft and drones would depend on what the rules of engagement are and how good our intelligence is in locating leadership targets and large concentrations of conventional IS forces.
Additionally domestic politics is a consideration, probably the most effective means of combating IS with US forces is politically unacceptable to the American public, especially among the Left
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)She's a medievalist but her grief and outrage over the destruction of these ancient sites was palpable.
Barbaric is the right term
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)re-align US policy eastward, using the nuclear deal as a springboard towards bringing Iran into a more prominent role in this issue; Iraq wants their help, they want to help Iraq, and we're in their way currently.
Cease our own support for "Syrian Moderates," our effort to topple Assad isn't just wasteful, it actively empowers Daesh. Assad's a nasty douchebag, but for a moment let's pretend we learned something from Iraq and Libya, yes? Use what contacts we have with these groups to point them towards Daesh, instead pf huddling in the south trying to take Damascus.
Stop supplying Iraq with expensive gadgets and doodads. The Iraqi army shows low morale, these things are just going to get abandoned to Daesh. If we're going to equip Iraq, keep it basic. It's a comparison i'm wary to draw, but think of how the Reagan administration did with the Afghans; nobody gave the mujihadeen advanced tanks. Basic munitions aren't flashy, but they're effective.
And it won't help fix either Iraq or Syria, but the Bush administration needs to face a war crimes tribunal, and hte guilty need to be hanged until they are dead.
mainer
(12,554 posts)Just like Gaddafi was the least worst option.
Topple a dictator and what you get is chaos, war, and hell.
betterdemsonly
(1,967 posts)Last edited Thu May 21, 2015, 09:41 PM - Edit history (2)
I don't think Obama will listen though. He is only marginally smarter than Bush on foreign policy. He just switched tactics from committing troops to funding insurgents. Unfortunately those insurgents were Al Qaeda. He is mostly smart at evading responsibility for his neocon fubars.
mahina
(20,645 posts)Come on.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)makes a powerful argument that the US' best interests would be served by a long-term strategy aimed at making Turkey and Iran our principal allies in the region and turning decisively away from Saudi Arabia. His argument about Israel is too complicated to get into and would hijack the thread.
But Kinzer makes a ton of sense in his book.
barbtries
(31,308 posts)that in the 21st century this is happening. i know the arc of civilization and evolution is long but somehow i had naively believed we had progressed beyond the stone age. i was wrong.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)non-military solutions to end this madness.
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/09/11/six-steps-short-war-beat-isis
mountain grammy
(29,035 posts)There actually are non military solutions..good article!
Thanks for the link and welcome to DU 
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts) Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)Amazed that no one else has considered non-military solutions in this thread.
Personally, I say we redirect all war funding to schools and anti-poverty initiatives focused on women and children. Small-scale, local projects designed to fix local issues. Let's drop food and water, not bombs. More humanitarian aid. Cut all drone strikes. Withdraw military aid and forces and expect local countries to deal with the military end. Meanwhile, pursue diplomatic and other means of dealing with the militants while avoiding harming the poor through things like sanctions.
Betcha that'll work much better. Too bad it'll never happen.
democrank
(12,598 posts)Bring George W. Bush, 5-deferment Dick Cheney and the rest of the war criminals to the capital of whichever state lost the most soldiers per capita in the Iraq War. That would be Vermont, as far as I know. Include all the congressional enablers. Invite the national and international media. Make the criminals sit there as those who voted against the war because they understood the lies question them, one by one.
George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are responsible for whatever is happening now and if we had any kind of moral courage as a nation, we would demand accountability.
JHB
(38,213 posts)Hand each of them a rifle, vest, and helmet, and drop them off without a cent somewhere along the middle of the Iraq/Syria border, and tell them: go fix your own mess.
Moostache
(11,179 posts)The ISIS issue is clearly the consequence of the Iraq war and how botched that effort was for rebuilding the country we had our military break. The removal of Saddam Hussein and his thuggish regime left a massive vacuum that has been filled because we failed to plan for how to fix a region with centuries old grievances against each other.
The problem is that no one is willing to stop the new thugs by using the tactics it requires to do so. A strongman regime used murder and terror to maintain control. ISIS does not use lawful means to establish control. They impose law rather than live under it. There is only one way to stop such men and it is not through negotiations.
The solution though is NOT US TROOPS! This is an Arab-world problem, and unless the sheiks and kings want to eventually be beheaded, they had best unite to address them. The Turks, Kurds and Arabs have a choice to make - unite to defeat a common threat or remain separate and find out that dealing with madmen NEVER gets easier with time, only harder.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)when did all this start and how and why did ISIS come into being?
Probably Obama's fault........
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Late 1920's Egypt - that's really where the modern global jihadist movement got started. The movement has ebbed and flowed and taken on a variety of names and forms over the years, but it's definitely been a force for a century or so.
I think there has often been a conflict between secular dictators like Saddam Hussein, who were barbaric in their own right - but were able to clamp down on these barbarians of the more self-proclaimed religious variety.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)technically, wrong in the 21st century realm.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Obviously what's going on today cannot be made sense of without understanding a wide variety of events that occurred throughout the 20th century.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)yet it is also obvious the GWB and the PNAC crew made it possible, recently, in historical context, by formenting disunity and providing arms and personnel(Bremer III and his 'firing' the Iraqi army ect; ect
, in a very large way, for the the fermenting hatreds of which you allude to be able to gain the violent and tragic momentum these groups have achieved today. That's all I'm interested in. The age old animosities, mean just that the area was ripe, with the right set off circumstances and political vacuums, Iraqi Wars I and II, to erupt again. YES, Georgieboy and Darth made this happen, this time.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)The actions of Bush and company definitely had a lot to do with what we are seeing now.
My real question, though, is - what, if anything, ought to be done about it at this point? Anything?
JHB
(38,213 posts)In 1991 GHW Bush, after Saddam's forces had been pushed out of Kuwait and Coalition forces stopped advancing, was fishing for some general of colonel in the Iraqi army to lead a coup against Saddam when he (Bush) called for patriotic Iraqis to rise up.
One thing Saddam was proficient at was making sure that no one developed a sufficient base of power to try to challenge him, so Bush had no takers ... or at least none in the Iraqi army. Popular uprisings sprang up, and made headway until Bush allowed Saddam to use attack helicopters to help put them down.
So instead of handing off Iraq to a new friendly dictator (who might have been just as bad or worse than Saddam, but wouldn't have his bad press), the situation was left in the limbo of no-fly zones, sanctions, a presence in Saudi Arabia (which was one of the things bin Laden used to agitate around), and a vague hope that Saddam would conveniently keel over or get overthrown sometime soon. But it just dragged on, destroying even more of Iraq's society and leaving primarily the most persistent of networks: old tribal and sectarian ones. Then Darth and Dubya chewed destroyed what was left with their half-assed neoconservative joyride.
I'm sure someone's going to bring up April Glaspie, but it's the fact that Bush didn't have a successor lined up that I don't think Bush had been planning ahead of time to remove Saddam. If histopry has proven anything, it's that the Bushs are not masterminds, just extremely shameless opportunists.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)the original philosopher of nihilist/caliphate jihad, Sayyid Qutb, were Egyptian products.
William King
(42 posts)I cried when those ISIS assholes destroyed Nimrud. Even the State Department rep said they do not know what to do. I will tell you what to do. Fight a damn war to win it and defeat the enemy and make them powerless to do anything. That requires infantry, boots on the ground, and getting politics the hell out of the equation. I support that. But this present government will not do that. Air attacks alone will not cut it. The world is going to lose Palmyra, and we are going to lose the war. ISIS will advance, possibly into Egypt and even Saudi Arabia. I have no hope.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,316 posts) riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)We make the situation ever so much worse every time we get involved.
This administration is 100% correct to stay out. This is now a problem for the Kurds, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan etc. to solve.
They wanted Saddam out. We did that. We also broke Iraq in the process and that destruction is reaping the consequences with the emergence of ISIS. Our support of the effort to get rid of Assad is equally ill advised and underscores how little we understand the region.
Oh and welcome to DU. Enjoy your stay....
Nay
(12,051 posts)
onyourleft
(726 posts)...government??? I really don't understand what that means.
This is not our fight or shouldn't be. Let other countries step up and take on this problem. There should be no boots on the ground. No more wars.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Give the Pentagon more money!!111!! It's the only thing that makes sense!
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I am genuinely curious.
McKim
(2,426 posts)For our family, one who grew up Expat in the Middle East, the imminent destruction of Palmyra is the last straw. These disgusting Neocons who have taken control of our government, have destroyed so many countries that were formerly peaceful and largely functional for their peoples.
The 500,000 deaths in Iraq at a conservative estimate, the destruction of Libya, the destabilization of Lebanon, the destructive meddling in Syria and now the final destruction of the beautiful city of Palmyra is too much to bear for us. Will our heartbreak never end. Indeed for us, all those people whose lives have been destroyed in the Middle East by our arrogance and our evil PNAC plans,
are not strangers, but childhood friends. For all of us here and there, the pain never ends!
We went back "home" to the ME in 2000 and visited childhood haunts and it was peaceful. The crowning glory was a visit to Palmyra and a lovely evening with friendly people from Tadmour who translated an artwork that we bought. We talked of war and peace. Where are they now? Are their lives, like millions of others, also to be ruined by the PNAC monsters?
We spent 15 years in the Peace Movement and this is all we have to show for our work. When will decent people take back democratic control of this sinful country?
OldEurope
(1,282 posts)a piece of hope or consolation.
Maybe this:
Even the most terrible barbarians that I knew so far, the Nazi slaughterers, could not really achieve their goals. In these days we still can keep the memories alive of those whom the Nazis wanted to eradicate from earth. In Germany we teach our children about those days, we have survivors talking to our students about their lives.
So your sweet memories could also build a bridge for the next generation. Write it down, talk to the younger ones, tell us here at DU - we surely would appreciate.
I will keep a little flame of hope in my heart for you and your friends and family.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)and we're stuck at the barbarian stage, have been since Cain allegedly slew Able. Whether these animals of ISIS are killing and maiming innocents in their lust for power and control over others or whether it's the shooting of unarmed people by 'authorities, we're stuck at barbarians. Greedy barbarians, because as we kill each other with impunity, we/they the 1% barbarians are killing our habitat and it's living entity, the mother earth, that we reside on. There's always hope we will wake up and demand a turn around in numbers that cannot be ignored by the 1% barbarians and pseudo religious barbarians, but that hope along with the hope we'll all get along with each other one day is fading fast. 
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)Often depends on which side you happen to be on. Civilization, little more than a resource concentration mechanism, probably wouldn't exist if people didn't just take the stuff they wanted at any given time.
Every group is a bit different from each other, but what we see with ISIS, is really how every nation was built. Have any borders been figured out without violence to determine who gets to make the rules?
world wide wally
(21,836 posts)We are better off without Sadaam Hussein.
Once again, the lie starts with Bush. Then it's repeated by Rubio and the news people start treating it as a fact.
Gee, what could ever go wrong with that?
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)boundaries understanding less than nothing of the 4,000+ year culture and hatreds and wars so they could "contain" the natives. Even Russia gave up. That should tell us something.
But no, the sun never sets on the American Empire. We got it wrong Every Time and we're still "getting it wrong". This is an Arab problem. They are not going to bomb us...ever. They are too busy sorting out their own culture. And as to beheadings and other juicy news events, they've got nothing on the Saudis but different clothing."
To coin a phrase, It's Sunni, Shiite, stupid." Western Europeans have No Business even being there. Yes, oil, Schmoil. Not.
Now we have boots on the ground in Syria. (That means American men and women in harm's way...yet again.) People are wringing their hands...what do to? Simple. Butt out.
(PS...who wants to send their Own Child into that sandy graveyard. I think that should answer the question quite well.)
(PPS... Drone strikes kill innocent men, women and children and create more hatred...imagine if Your Child or Your Wife were to be murdered by some empty technological tool in the sky...think about it...)
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Should the US even via the UN take any kind of steps (non-military ones, for instance) to try to address what is happening?
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)That describes the Middle East, from a Western European Great White Civilization perspective. We need to get out of there...now. Acknowledge we screwed up big time, but not one drone, or soldier (they are not boots, they are humans, sons, daughters, etc.) on their territory. Say goodbye and good luck.
hy·dra
[hahy-druh]
NOUN [PLURAL HY·DRAS, HY·DRAE, GENITIVE HY·DRAE]
1.
(often initial capital letter) Classical Mythology a water or marsh serpent with nine heads, each of which, if cut off, grew back as two; Hercules killed this serpent by cauterizing the necks as he cut off the heads.
2.
any freshwater polyp of the genus Hydra and related genera, having a cylindrical body with a ring of tentacles surrounding the mouth, and usually living attached to rocks, plants, etc., but also capable of detaching and floating in the water.
3.
a persistent or many-sided problem that presents new obstacles as soon as one aspect is solved.
Then, realize that this death feud started, most likely, as reported in the Old Testament. Abraham had a son by his housemaid/likely a slave...of an Arab-related race. Sarah, his wife, was furious and forced Hagar and her son, Ishmael into the desert. Note the similarity of names.
That was the split between what is now the Jews and Arabs (Islamics religion). I believe they were cursed by god/Abraham.
And we think we're going to help out here? Not my son...not my family...just NO.
Get out of the Middle East and let them solve their problems like they have been all these millennia. Put the money in infrastructure, health care, food, housing for Americans. The Islamists are not going to overtake us, bomb us, force our children to learn Sharia Law. It's hard for the US to do nothing, and politically suicidal probably. Plus,we need the military arms sales.
This same event is what has tied Right Wing and other Christians, who believe the Gentiles got grandfathered in to the Abrahamic bloodline and must side with Israel...the Jews. This is another entire situation, but links back to the original event, as told by someone way back when.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)You really think we ought to just focus on Americans and not address any issues going on overseas?
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Even the Russians got the email, so to speak. A good deal of our "global community" is giving money to shore up whomever we happen to like so we can have a military base in their country. Foreign Aid and Sanctions and arms sales are our Carrot/Stick approach to Empire. This has to stop, at some time, and the Theory of Cycles will demand it...whether unrest at home (see the Fall of the Roman Empire) or some cataclysmic Armageddon.
I think we should focus on America, but I somewhat dislike your either/or suppositional one-liner.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Isn't that the idea? That the international community works together to address issues like this one?
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)our preconceived notions. I mean, we Let Them have Prime Office Space here, what more could they want?
IOW, we're more powerful than the UN. It was set up that way. Kind of like the Secretarial Pool in the Global US Corporation Empire.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)For years, the U.S. shorted the UN on these dues, but in 2009, Congress paid in full and addressed recent arrears.
For this year, we are among many countries that are behind in payments.
ONLY TWO OF 15 SECURITY COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE PAID 2015 DUES
Feb. 25, 2015 – New Zealand and France are the only two members of the Security Council to have paid their 2015 United Nations dues so far this year.
Permanent members Britain, China, Russia and the United States have still to pay along with nine of the ten non-permanent countries on the Council.
Neither France nor New Zealand made their payments by the end of January, the UN’s official dues deadline, with Paris paying its $151 million share and Auckland, $6 million, earlier this month, according to information from the UN Committee on Contributions.
http://untribune.com/two-15-security-council-members-paid-2015-dues/
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)by a "sitting Empire"...paid or not? Perhaps BRIIC would be more in line for the Unfortunate...at least economically.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)But at the very least they can get people talking. As I said at the outset, I have no idea what ought to be done, I just feel like doing nothing is also not a great choice either.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)human nature and history and religions being what they are. A cursory study of the Bible indicates it is an unstoppable march toward Revelations/Armageddon...which will likely involve nukes...and we'll be dragged into it, just like the European Wars.
Then comes the Popular Secular Leader to bring the world together, but alas, he's the Anti-Christ (Not Obama), thus it's time for Jesus to come, slay him and his, save those who are holy and to heck with the rest of them.
The first half seems to be happening...the last Act/War/Anti-Savior/Jesus Christ, I hope it's wrong.
If this is the script, the answer is to convert to Christianity and "go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel" and hope to get lifted up to Heaven.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)will turn those same weapons on us in the future.
The US military needs to be a self defense force like the founders of this country envisioned and not Empire builders.
We also need to reintroduce the draft with no BS exemptions and pass a law that any military activity outside our boarders will be paid for in full with immediate taxes raised across the board till the adventure is over.
No more war on the credit card and calling for the dismantling of social security/medicare/food assistance because "we can't afford it" while TRILLIONS of dollars go into the bloody maw of the MIC, year in and year out!
All of a sudden the fucking republican warhawks would be peaceful as lambs!
If the people living in those areas don't like whats going on they will change it. We go in and all sides hate us equally.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)I mean, there are civilians being slaughtered in fairly large numbers - I am pretty sure they don't like what's going on. I am not sure how they could go about changing it. What advice would you give them?
betterdemsonly
(1,967 posts)The bad news is. the neocons dominate American foreign policy, so America will continue arming Isis. They will arm Isis in order to undermine the influence of Iran, on behalf of the Likudniks in Israel, and the Saudis. Doesn't matter if it is a mainstream republican or democrat,the neocon PNAC dominates foreign policy. The only two political affiliations that change this dynamic are the libertarian leaning republicans like the Pauls, and some progressive Democrats like Bernie Sanders, Alan Grayson, and Sherrod Brown. The neocon dominated Press is completely against them.
So there isn't much you can do to stop Isis, if you are committed to mainstream candidates, other than beg in vein. Mainstream politicians are all committed to the foreign policy objectives of the Saudis and the Israelis. More so than they are to America. The neocon Press dictates everything and they want Isis to win. Unless you defy, this dynamic, you should just take up gardening or some other hobby, because nothing will ever change or get better in your lifetime.
Response to oberliner (Original post)
betterdemsonly This message was self-deleted by its author.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)The rethugs and RW media will be certain to gin it up even more.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)What is the general consensus on our side about this? Any definitive word from HRC or BS?
betterdemsonly
(1,967 posts)and wants to focus on Isis over Assad which will help. Also says we need to support the efforts of the Syrian government and the Iranians, in stopping Isis. Hillary won't commit to anything, but supported arming the opposition in the past. Opposition to Assad that is. There is no mainstream lw media. The neocons have purged anyone that might be described this way. The alt lw media favors Bernie's view.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)What form should that support take, per Sanders?
betterdemsonly
(1,967 posts)I don't think many dems are particularly good at foreign policy. I think they have ceded it to the republicans and that is why their ideas are often scaled back versions pnac tripe. I think James Webb is the most impressive candidate in this department.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)I think Hillary's more hawkish reputation might actually help her with voters on this issue.
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)So we can continue doing what America does best.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)nt
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)in Iraq: 'Democracy is messy'. I guess he still believes that and all the rest of our warmongering liars who are responsible for all of this.
We decided to 'arm the rebels' in Syria! Nice going rebels!
They thank us I'm sure.
Response to oberliner (Original post)
Corruption Inc This message was self-deleted by its author.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)One thing, though, the huge numbers of people they are killing bothers me more than the ruining of archaeological sites. Not that the latter doesn't matter, but IMO protecting living people is more important.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Can there really be absolute nothing?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)1) The ISIS people are crazy. And there seem to be a lot of them.
2) US military force has basically never accomplished anything good in the middle east. OK, maybe there are some minor exceptions, and it's arguable that things would be just as bad without US involvement, but there aren't any real shining success stories.
3) There aren't many "good guys" in the area, at least not with any power. This contributes to #2. I'm excluding Israel from this judgement, so as not to get into that whole thing, but however one feels about Israel, they are certainly not going to be bringing stable government to the areas that ISIS currently rules.
4) The US is distrusted in the region (and a lot of the world), and there are pretty good reasons for this. This also contributes to (and is caused by) #2.
What options do we have? Non-militarily, I don't see anything, at least in the short term. ISIS is crazy and they like to go around killing people. They actually believe they are the start of some worldwide Islamic caliphate.
Militarily, well, we could give weapons to the lesser of the evils. That might work, but then what? Probably the "best case" is some kind of Hussein/Mubarak/Gadafi dictatorship (I know, those aren't the same, but still). And it might not work, just prolong the civil war.
We could also do a massive ground invasion. In this case we would definitely win the war. And then we'd be just about where we were at the "end" of the last Iraq War, with hundreds of thousands of dead civilians, humanitarian crisis, and a power vacuum.
Permanent military UN presence? Maybe. I'm thinking it would have to be pretty big and pretty permanent. It would also be hugely controversial. Basically it would be large-scale international nation building. Not much appetite for that. And if people like Wolfowitz and Cheney somehow get control of the operation, it will be another disaster.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I think in Iraq we are actively assisting those who are fighting ISIS by providing various types of support to the Iraqi army and government. The problem is Syria - where the Assad regime is responsible for a pretty hefty amount of brutality and killing of its own so we can't really engaged in a partnership with them against ISIS especially as we've already aligned ourselves with the groups that are trying to out Assad.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)good guys are about being good. And also, they have the military advantage of not having the slightest concern for human rights. The US isn't going to (and shouldn't) give any aid to people who say "if you don't help us, we're going to murder your whole family."
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Do those cries ever necessitate action? They seem to sometimes but not others.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I'm glad I don't have to make those decisions. As a nation, it's definitely true that the interventions we choose are not based solely on need. For example, Rwanda.
In principle I'm a believer if humanitarian intervention, the problem is that in practice most of American's interventions have been pretty far from humanitarian. This is one of the reasons I'm pessimistic. It would be nice to have some kind of principled policy of intervening for good causes, but the problem is when someone like W gets into power, it all goes down the toilet.
As a nation, we can't even really recognize that global warming exists, even though this is a threat to us as well as the rest of the world. So I don't know if our current political system can really handle the delicacies of humanitarian intervention.
Lydia Leftcoast
(48,223 posts)and the local Islamic countries are fighting against them.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)And do nothing?
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)Because rules are subjective. And it really has to be people in a given region that figure it out. That's how every border that makes any sense has been drawn.
That doesn't mean the US Government cant send its military in there to help people figure out what rules will be lived by, but it'll get messy.
Might has always made right. Win, and you get to make the rules.
Lydia Leftcoast
(48,223 posts)You know, like supporting the Mujahedin in Afghanistan to fight the Russians, thereby giving Osama Bin Laden and the most reactionary elements of Afghan society a boost, encouraging the Taliban to take over after the Russians left (yes! because the CIA though they were the most organized), invading Afghanistan in 2001 (suddenly all concerned about the women there, in addition to catching our boy Bin Laden, despite the fact that the REAL left and feminist organizations had been complaining about the Taliban ever since 1997), driving the Taliban out but facing a resurgence of inter-tribal rivalry and the opium trade, spreading the war to Taliban outposts in Pakistan...
Really, it would have been better to let the Soviets take over. No, I'm serious. If you look at what the Soviets did in the neighboring "'Stans," which are also predominantly Muslim areas, they sent everyone to coed schools for a secular education and instituted equal rights for women, two things that Afghanistan needed badly and which the Afghan equivalent of rednecks were opposed to.
I think it's obvious that Afghanistan would be a much different place after 35 years of secular education and equal rights for women, but since the Soviets were Communists, they couldn't be allowed to be successful, so the U.S. government aligned itself with the most backward elements of Afghan society, the ones who didn't know Communism from Consumerism but who sure weren't gonna let their womenfolk get none of that book l'arnin' and walkin' around like shameless hussies with their faces uncovered.
And Iraq, oh, that turned out so well. As nasty as Saddam Hussein was, he had no use for the radical Islamic forces and didn't allow them in his country. He also allowed Christians and Jews and other religious minorities such as the Yazidis (there had been Orthodox Christians in Iraq for more than 1500 years and Jews long before that) to practice their religions freely and had the best record on education, health care, and women's rights of any Arab country.
Don't get me started on Vietnam. Those were my high school and college years.
ISIS is no threat to the U.S., and the Middle Eastern countries need to sort it out among themselves. For one thing, Jordan is really angry about having one of its own people burned alive, and it is going after ISIS. Iran--yes, the Iran we are all told to hate--is also fighting ISIS.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)It's a sort of proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. So, which side to we "help"?
Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)