Posted on 03/06/2017 6:30:07 PM PST by Lorianne
Its about 70% arab. Don’t believe everything you read on Wikipedia. Especially when it is in regard to an ongoing neocon nationbuilding overthrow operation on behalf of the Sunnis.
Oh cool, slick little PR operation in that photo. The CIA and USAID really do some nice work don’t they? lol
In any case, whether Kurds or the Syrian James Madison acolytes for democracy take over, the world will not see the USA shock the world with firepower. There will be no effort to arrest the thousands of war criminals. And the ISIS capitol will be shored up as a center of resistance to Assad.
I think our Generals are too deeply invested on the wrong goals. They are all in for COIN, Nation building, Palestine, and loving some Sunnis.
> “Ridiculous. We have been at war there for 15 years and are worse off than the day we started. I’ve heard the roach motel theory of “fight them over there”. Its BS. They aren’t coming here except the ones we import. And blowing up the whole middle east doesn’t make them less likely to attack us here. It makes it MORE likely.”
I’m not entirely unsympathetic to your point of view. Isolationism is always tempting. I too sometimes think, “The hell with them! Let’s take care of ourselves!”
Even if we become impervious to empathy, though, our interests are necessarily intertwined with the interests of people in other parts of the world. Though internal corruption can weaken us, the most serious physical threats can only come from abroad.
By themselves, terrorists within the country are limited in how much damage they can do. True, the killing of thousands on 9-11 — though the plot originated overseas — could possibly have originated within the country too. That would be an extraordinary event, though, and a country such as the United States, with over 300 million inhabitants, can absorb the more routine attacks that kill 10, 20, or 50 — or even 3,000. There’s a possibility, though, that future attacks will kill hundreds of thousands or millions, make entire cities uninhabitable. In my opinion that’s the main threat that should concern us.
Islamist regimes in the Middle East have the power and money that make the acquisition of nuclear weapons (and very effective chemical and germ weapons) possible. Our domestic terrorists don’t have that kind of power and money. They can set off such weapons if acquired from elsewhere, though.
That’s why we can’t afford to ignore Islamist regimes elsewhere, which might be willing to pass the weapons on to them. With borders and coasts stretching thousands of miles, no wall can be effective enough to isolate us completely. As distasteful as it is, our own security interests compel us to remain involved in the Middle East.
Likewise a case could have been made for the United States not to have become involved in World War II (and it was involved in shipping arms to the Allies before Pearl Harbor). Without its involvement, though, it’s likely that Germany or Japan would have survived long enough to develop nuclear weapons (and without the stimulus of the war, the United States would not have developed them at that time). Even if the United States had remained a non-combatant, who doubts that it would have become susceptible afterward to nuclear blackmail from regimes like Nazi Germany and imperial Japan?
The world is sometimes a nasty place to be in, and unfortunately there’s no good way to isolate ourselves from it.
Perhaps the world won't heal until it all comes tumbling down. The only way for whatever people are still alive to survive will be within their own well-protected borders. It all seems so......unfixable.
I wonder about your premise that “our interests are necessarily intertwined with the interests of other parts of the world”. Why? What is the benefit of not being satisfied with being a wealthy, self-sufficient nation?
You bring up the necessity of the US getting involved in WWII. But what created the monster that had to be destroyed? WW1 and the really bad treaties that followed.
> I wonder about your premise that “our interests are necessarily intertwined with the interests of other parts of the world”. Why?
That’s what I was trying to explain in the previous lengthy posts — it’s dangerous not to be aware of what’s happening and, when at risk, dangerous not to try to influence it.
Sure, there are some areas in which we can be less active, and it’s not our obligation — or within our power — to rectify everything that’s wrong with the world. To the degree that others have power over their destinies, they are the ones responsible.
Still, it’s impossible for us to isolate ourselves from what’s happening elsewhere. It was difficult hundreds of years ago, and it’s impossible now.
While the SDF was recruiting and training non-Kurdish recruits, they were also raising (often conscripting) more Kurds as well. SDF is still majority Kurd, and totally commanded by the YPG/YPJ.
YPG/YPG are far from being jihadis. They are followers of Abdullah Ocalan’s philosophy (and that is whatever Apo (Uncle) Ocalan says it is), just like the PKK. They are more like a Maoist cult of personality - but their doctrine moderated big time after Ocalan was captured (he is in Turkish prison), becoming less Communist, less Kurdish nationalist, and more democratic.
They are often criticized as being atheists - they live collectively, conducting political education classes instead of religious services, and practice a radical form of feminism alien to islam. They have no camps full of ISIS prisoners, after two years of taking over ISIS territory. Interrogation and execution is normally a same day process.
They do not fight Assad’s forces (except for a few small local clashes), and in certain areas (like the border town of Qamishli) they cooperate side by side for the long term. They want to end up with a semi-autonomous Kurdish region inside Syria after the war (like in Iraq), because if they were independent, Turkish tanks would roll in by the weekend.
Just this last week, as the Turks and their militia allies began to attack toward SDF-held Manbij, the SDF coordinated the handover of SDF-held territory to Assad’s forces, to get the Syrian Army between them and the Turks. The Turks have been targeting the SDF as much or more than ISIS since they have been in Syria.
SDF will defeat ISIS in detail (kill them all) in Raqqa - it is what they have been doing all along - but now it is US policy as well. ISIS is running out of places to evacuate to, and increasingly running out of even the possibility of retreat.
Only one Main Supply Route remains in or out of Raqqa - Hwy 4 to the West, and the bridge over the river has already been dropped. It is shaping up as a last stand for the garrison in Raqqa - individuals could swim the river (or take a small boat) to open wide desert, but they can no longer conduct an orderly retreat without fighting through the cordon (under US air attack).
The ISIS Caliphate will be non-operational this Summer.
All for naught in the long run.
Supporting one group of Muslims against another group of Muslims ... who will be back fighting each other again soon enough .. as they have for over 1,000 years.
Team Sunni or Team Shia?
But in the short run, ISIS will be destroyed, and other wannabes will see that, rather than them riding around town like big men, taking sex slaves and killing Americans.
It will rid us of an active threat, and be a great deterrent.
Regular maintenance is required.
We need to develop a concept for “neutralizing” these areas with out leveling them. (we have the technology).
This, so we will still have a place to send all the refugee-hoddies we deport.
Then we can move off to a safe distance and let them duke it out.
We’ve not done that.
We have done everything but that ... and made the situation worse than it otherwise would have been.
Why would we do anything meaningful or useful at this late date?
They don’t want us there. We don’t want them here. It seems pretty clear what needs to be done.
No it won’t. They’ll continue on doing what they have done for over 1,000 years including sex slaves and all the rest of it.
And if Americans don’t want to be killed, don’t go there.
When there is a strongman some of this is tamped down for a while ... but it always comes back.
Because there's a new Sheriff in town, and Americans are sick to death of the endless war, and the constant threat of terrorism?
So we’re sick of endless war so we’re going to keep on with the endless war?
Makes no sense.
And for the record, we are not the Sheriff of the world.
Who said anything about war...I said "neutralize" them.
And for the record, we are not the Sheriff of the world.
No, we are the Sheriff of the US, and if they come here to attack us, either their home country can control them or we can.
Get 'em out....if needed, blow them up.
It’s amazing what transpires when a country finally gets arms to fight against ISIS. Put that in your pipe and smoke it obama.
Very interesting. Thanks for posting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.