This should be required reading for certain people.
Paris Attack
- Thread starter N3WMAN
- Start date
This should be required reading for certain people.
good point.. but i guess the question is how far do they go? its a slippery slope..how can they solve this problem without addressing the core issues... and lastly interventionism created this monster.. will more intervention solve it.. i honestly don't think so.. west needs to swallow its pride and reach out to the only nations doing something tangible about it.. iran and syria.... saudis are a large part of the problem not the solution.. so why are we teaming up with the trouble makers?
have i not pointed out that ISIS is too extreme even for extremist.... perhaps if a certain alliance did not arm and train ISIS and its sister groups we wouldn't have this problem
I am not sure if this is "trolling" but I wanted to ask if you were Shia or Sunni.. or another? (if you don't mind sharing) I wonder if the differences between those two sects and their personal political aspirations has an affect on where you stand personally. A lot of the problems stem from infighting on which groups gets to hold power. Just curious..
I am sunni ... although the prophet said those who create divisions amongst my people will not be counted as amongst my people on the day of judgement***loose translation***
I side with who ever in my view is right... not based on whether he/she is a shia or sunni or other... right and wrong is what matters to me.
I side with who ever in my view is right... not based on whether he/she is a shia or sunni or other... right and wrong is what matters to me.
Last edited:
Why should the West "reach out" to Iran and Syria?
"Reaching out" to someone in the Middle East has proved destructive in the past when something happened that turned the tables.
Any "training" that the West has done, was most certainly done because it seemed like the thing to do at the time, even though it didn't work out that way in the long term.
How would we (the West) know that "reaching out" to Iran and Syria would not result in the tables being turned again?
These countries are either not able, or not willing, to do something about this terrorist/extremist problem themselves. Evidence would suggest that NONE of them are.
"Reaching out" to someone in the Middle East has proved destructive in the past when something happened that turned the tables.
Any "training" that the West has done, was most certainly done because it seemed like the thing to do at the time, even though it didn't work out that way in the long term.
How would we (the West) know that "reaching out" to Iran and Syria would not result in the tables being turned again?
These countries are either not able, or not willing, to do something about this terrorist/extremist problem themselves. Evidence would suggest that NONE of them are.
what evidence is that?? are you saying syria is not fighting foreign terror groups armed and trained by NATO member nations? is that your version of evidence bryan?? IRAN was the FIRST country to send weapons, troops(trainng) and financial aid as well as ACTUAL TROOPS(combat unofficially) to IRAQ and SYRIA not US,UK or France etc. in fact US and UK refused( excuse given: needed deliberation first) to expedite delivery of weapons and weapons systems already paid for when iraq requested in light of its security situation.. both nations are still deliberating whether to expedite the delivery of the weapons.. on the other hand when ISRAEL was targeting UN SCHOOLS with bombs(air,land and sea) .. they ran low on bombs.. US sent them resupplies in a DAY from its own weapons depots in ISRAEL and the region... shows a lot about who wants to solve the crisis and who wants it to continue.
i suggest you have your evidence independently verified.
on a similar but unrelated note... read this
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/rabah-kherbane/germany-islam_b_6486818.html
Last edited:
Every single time in the past that outside countries have been "helping" in ANY conflict in the middle east, it has not ended well. Every. Single. Time. It doesn't matter WHO was the country that was being "helped".
The only time the Americans ever "won" was in the 1991 conflict where they were not "helping" but rather taking the matters into their own hands ... and there is a fair argument that they stopped too soon and should have gone clear through Iraq and cleaned the whole place out.
Give me a specific example that indicates otherwise.
Why do you think the Americans were training anyone in the Middle East? Do you really think the Americans didn't think it was the right thing to be doing at the time? Do you really think they would be training someone that they didn't think at the time was "on their side"?
The only time the Americans ever "won" was in the 1991 conflict where they were not "helping" but rather taking the matters into their own hands ... and there is a fair argument that they stopped too soon and should have gone clear through Iraq and cleaned the whole place out.
Give me a specific example that indicates otherwise.
Why do you think the Americans were training anyone in the Middle East? Do you really think the Americans didn't think it was the right thing to be doing at the time? Do you really think they would be training someone that they didn't think at the time was "on their side"?
since you brought out 1991.. don't you think not helping saddam in the first place to attack iran unprovoked(intel/wmd production equipment/financial/military aid) would have been non interventionism.. coming in afterwards and saying we saved iraq is pure ********... if they hadn't propped up saddam their would have been no gulf war 1 period.
what about the over a million who simple disappeared under CIA supervision in Iran before the revolution... why do you remember only the few who were taken hostage after almost 20years political cleansing.. oppression and out right genocide... hostage crisis only happened because US refused to hand over the dictator to Iran.. are you even aware of that.. their conditions were simple.
return the shah.
return the state funds the shah gave/invested in US
I AM NOT IRANIAN.. but everyone deserves their due..
Iran did not occupy US..
US occupied IRAN through covent means..
iranian people revolted against a foreign occupier..
if they were wrong to resist a foreign occupation then so were the french and the polish, etc when they resisted the germans.. wouldn't you say so
Last edited:
The writer of the HuffPost article that you linked to is not wrong.
BUT.
If you review all of the severe terrorist actions of the last three or four decades, how come the perpetrators are disproportionately Islamic?
*That* is the problem that needs to get fixed ... and I would suggest that it can only be Islam itself that can fix this.
BUT.
If you review all of the severe terrorist actions of the last three or four decades, how come the perpetrators are disproportionately Islamic?
*That* is the problem that needs to get fixed ... and I would suggest that it can only be Islam itself that can fix this.
I cannot dispute this. There is no question that US meddling has caused many problems and this is one of them.
But the question now is HOW DO WE FIX THIS, and who can do it?
i see only the alliance of IRAN, SYRIA, and RUSSIA being able or even wiling to do what needs to be done.. NATO would literally have to bomb itself since it is the main supporter of these terrorist... if you ask the mother/father of a terrorist to kill the terrorist you are not gonna get the required results.. it has to be those who are being victimized/targeted.
Last edited:
you need to gain further depth understaning into all the terrorist you mentioned you will find foreign intervention as a bedrock to this all...EVERY SINGLE INCIDENT...
as I've been saying here from the beginning.. respect and non interference is the way to solve this.. yes it will be harsh.. brutal and even an out right massacre.. but the respective nations will solve this in their own way... we created this mess.. time to apologize.. and if we can't pay restitution then simple walk away...they will do what needs to be done... none of our business.
don't bother saying please be gentle with our terrorists.
on our side we have to do the same to our extremist(politicians/corporate elites/security aparatus) with in our institutions both governmental and private who created this mess out of pure greed(money/power)...
Last edited:
The best thing for that region of the world would be
... So the French should go after them?
... And you then agree with the Americans going after those in Afghanistan/Iraq following 9/11?
The Russians are in no position to do much right now. It would be nice to go back to the 1970s and tell the Americans in no uncertain terms to stop meddling in the affairs of foreign countries, but we can't.
Once again, HOW can the required results be achieved?
