Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Comrade Grumpy

(13,184 posts)

7. Well, maybe people don't comment because ISIS is such an intractable problem.

Reply to samsingh (Reply #4)

Mon Aug 3, 2015, 12:44 PM

Aug 2015

I mean, I don't have a good solution. I'm not a big fan of US imperial war adventures, but I also can't see just ignoring ISIS. They are just too horrible--in ways that even Al Qaeda wasn't.

But, if we are going to engage in war with ISIS, it behooves us to at least acknowledge what we are doing and what the consequences are, including a bunch of innocent people killed by OUR bombs.

I understand the Cecil the Lion thing. It's easy outrage. Dealing with ISIS or our responses to ISIS isn't so easy.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

29 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Cecil the Lion vs. Hundreds of Dead Arab Civilians Killed by US Air Strikes [View all] Comrade Grumpy Aug 2015 OP

Because everything is the same! Blue_Adept Aug 2015 #1

We often fail to realize or understand that a concern for one or more stories... LanternWaste Aug 2015 #2

because most people are not outraged by collateral damage incurred in the pursuit of terrorists. Takket Aug 2015 #3

we are outraged by both the collatorel damage and the immense damage samsingh Aug 2015 #6

they are not mutually exclusive and ISIS seems to be killing a lot more people than the strikes samsingh Aug 2015 #4

Well, maybe people don't comment because ISIS is such an intractable problem. Comrade Grumpy Aug 2015 #7

i think you've described the problem very well samsingh Aug 2015 #22

Because it's possible to be outraged by more than one thing at a time ... GeorgeGist Aug 2015 #5

Yes aint_no_life_nowhere Aug 2015 #8

Sure. But there seems to be little evidence of any outrage over the dead Arab civilians. Comrade Grumpy Aug 2015 #9

Why do you think these are one or the other issues? procon Aug 2015 #10

I'm sure people can be concerned about both. I just don't see much evidence of it. Comrade Grumpy Aug 2015 #13

A forum like this probably not the best gauge for any specific issues that concern you. procon Aug 2015 #17

NTSA NuclearDem Aug 2015 #11

Yay! Another outrage contest! Lizzie Poppet Aug 2015 #12

No contest. Clearly. I am curious, however, about why the difference in responses. Comrade Grumpy Aug 2015 #14

I suspect some of it is "Middle East fatigue." Lizzie Poppet Aug 2015 #23

Well, I anteed in my 2 bits down thread. Eleanors38 Aug 2015 #19

The purpose of the US airstrikes is to defeat ISIS Freddie Stubbs Aug 2015 #15

oh yeah.... restorefreedom Aug 2015 #25

"Why is this?" "This' is because the US government is Malraiders Aug 2015 #16

Lions, murdered church-goers, schoolyard butchers ---these are proxys for raging impotency. Eleanors38 Aug 2015 #18

Americans have never cared about the collateral avebury Aug 2015 #20

I'd like to discuss this need many have on DU to pit issues against each other, unrelated and very Bluenorthwest Aug 2015 #21

This the part where I mention the 100+ civilians killed in Burundi Blue_Tires Aug 2015 #24

The million dead Iraqis got even fewer malaise Aug 2015 #26

It's possible to be outraged by many things at once The Velveteen Ocelot Aug 2015 #27

Excellent observation. Excellent question. Octafish Aug 2015 #28

One had a tangible benefit, the other not so much One_Life_To_Give Aug 2015 #29