ISIS The Real War On Women

[Socrates]

ISIS are a threat to everyone, as they'd kill anyone who doesn't conform to their ideas and practices. However, I think it's clear that the fight against them has to first come from the people in those countries and the surrounding nations. The US and other western countries can assist, maybe with air strikes, which are happening, but another ground offensive wouldn't really be advisable.

What exactly can Hilary Clinton do, or any US offical come to that, beyond what is already being done? I think the lessons of past interventions give rise to valid caution.

Currently, those countries and the surrounding countries have not proved very effective in stopping the horrific spread of ISIS and its reign of terror.  More than limited air strikes are needed to make a real difference.

The question is:  exactly how much of this nightmare must go on before the U.S. or other Western nations must get seriously involved to stop it?  Will we have to wait for a 9-11-style attack on U.S. soil?

Perhaps we should have just left the fight against Hitler to the German Jews and the surrounding countries. . . .

 

And, of course, one of the points of the OP is the obscene hypocrisy of the left and the "mainstream" media, and their highly selective outrage - getting far more more worked up over trumped up pc nonsense like the "Republican War on Women" than the horrific crimes against women by ISIS.  Or being more upset over Americans opposed to "gay marriage" than to regimes that actually stone homosexuals.

Edited August 9, 2015 by Socrates

[little2add]

Don't talk like a right wingnut teabagger.  Everyone knows the constitutional right to privacy is just about how the states must be forced to fund abortion and sanction "gay marriage."  

And the first amendment was all about porn and keeping religion out of public life, and the second amendment grants the federal government the right to have guns.

I stand corrected 

(you don't need a to use foul/bad language to make a point) ( HINT: your first sentence)

[Benedictus]

Ya don't blame the past presidents for current world problems, ya blame the one that is in office in the present.

 

There should be a more global push to end not only ISIS, but other problem areas as you already mentioned. But what do we get instead, everyone just says oh well if it isn't beneficial for us. But it is nice to know that Hilary and womens' rights groups are more concerned about what is going on here and totally oblivious to what is going on abroad making sure to only blame America for how horrible it is in the broad sense of the term.

Anything is possible when people want to make something happen. Should everything be solved with the military, obviously not, but for these third world hell holes that are run by war lords, the military is the best option and probably the only real option to securing those areas and putting an end to endless crimes that have gone unchecked for far too long.  But that won't be happening any time soon in any direction as long as we keep voting in the new socialist party and the party of do nothing.

How can the US, or any allies, make change anywhere?  I don't think any developed country wants to see its own troops sent to such places to be killed and then face years of terrorist action afterwards. What track record does it have over the last fifty years of really helping anyone? Next you'll be saying America should tell China and Russia what to do -  good luck with that one! America's power is reducing and it's only interest will be economic and social preservation over the next century. Best most people face up to it, even if it's slightly depressing.

 

[Benedictus]

Currently, those countries and the surrounding countries have not proved very effective in stopping the horrific spread of ISIS and its reign of terror.  More than limited air strikes are needed to make a real difference.

The question is:  exactly how much of this nightmare must go on before the U.S. or other Western nations must get seriously involved to stop it?  Will we have to wait for a 9-11-style attack on U.S. soil?

Perhaps we should have just left the fight against Hitler to the German Jews and the surrounding countries. . . .

 

And, of course, one of the points of the OP is the obscene hypocrisy of the left and the "mainstream" media, and their highly selective outrage - getting far more more worked up over trumped up pc nonsense like the "Republican War on Women" than the horrific crimes against women by ISIS.  Or being more upset over Americans opposed to "gay marriage" than to regimes that actually stone homosexuals.

Yes, but they have the capacity to do so. Turkey and Lebanon (probably Saudi too) have taken part in attacks against IS. The Kurds have too. How can you stop such groups? The reality is you can't come in from outside and make change happen, it has to come from a local solution. You can supress one group and another takes its place, especially when there's the factors to drive it (such as foreign invasions and attacks). The US (and most western countries) are made to look like colonialist, imperialist, supremacist hypocrites (as usual) and there is always a line of people in those countries who will turn against any interference because of that. They may hate IS, but they don't love and seek to be like the US either.

The US gets involved when it suits them -  WWll is a prime example of that. The Russians basically won it, but got little of the recognition. The US waited until the end and then decided to drop a nuke on civilians to 'end it'.  They didn't decide to nuke (mostly white) Germany though, despite them knowing about the various atrocities for years. In any event, in WWll America was asked to support an active war between nations. The US was also attacked by a nation. The modern situation doesn't equate to that. If anything, the Iraq war started all this instability in the middle east. Bush and Blair have dirty hands for that, all based on false WMD evidence. In terms of human rights let ask what regimes have been supported by the US and others? Saudi Arabia? UAE? Pinochet government? What's all there records on women and human rights?

Comparing IS and overseas issues to the the daily political wrangles of social policy at home is a bit of a cheap shot. So everything in US culture and political policy should be ignored because somewhere overseas they have it worse? I think we all know overseas trauma gets coverage in the news -  framing it as if people with certain political leanings don't care is a low blow to make. I think it could be said Republicans and the conservative media outlets have their hobby horses too. So that type of analysis doesn't get anywhere.

 

 

 

[little2add]

There was a nice piece on "60 minutes" last night about  The plight of the Syrian refugees

 A organization called the "world food bank" (WFB) is supplying food, medicine and hope

It is funded entirely by donations and supported by volunteers Over a third of the donations come from the US 

https://wfpusa.org/donate?utm_source=60Minutes_cultivation&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=homepage_promo

Edited August 10, 2015 by little2add

[little2add]

Syria Situation Update by WFP

Updated May 22, 2015

Since fighting broke out more than four years ago, the crisis in Syria has become WFP’s largest and most complex emergency worldwide.

LINK:  http://wfpusa.org/fact-sheets/syria-situation-update  

[superblue]

How can the US, or any allies, make change anywhere?  I don't think any developed country wants to see its own troops sent to such places to be killed and then face years of terrorist action afterwards. What track record does it have over the last fifty years of really helping anyone? Next you'll be saying America should tell China and Russia what to do -  good luck with that one! America's power is reducing and it's only interest will be economic and social preservation over the next century. Best most people face up to it, even if it's slightly depressing.

 

The US and its Allies can make changes across the world if they wanted to, it is pathetic that we rely so heavily on China for goods and services , with the knowledge of how they treat their workers, slave labor etc. Russia got a pass from Obama for taking a part of the Ukraine and should be held accountable for that move, but wont.  The US does have a better track record of helping others out side of the obama atmosphere. America's power wouldn't be reducing if democrats were not the main power hold over this country, they are the party that has reduced and weakened our military, has undermined Israel at every chance given, and keep low informed ignorant voters under their thumb at every turn. America is the first place illegal immigrants turn to, and every third world country turns to after a major disaster for supplies and help.   If America was as messed up as you think it is we wouldn't be looked at as a country for anything in any regards.  Cowards are the ones in todays world who don't want to send troops into harms ways, soldiers are trained and ready to protect this country and others at any time of day or night for as long as necessary it is what they sign up for. It is the leaders and parties who are too cowardly to do the right thing at the right time, people have the right to be worried about losing a loved one in any conflict, but those who do not have any skin in the game other than tax dollars ( which isn't enough skin ) have nothing to complain about and should only be focused on supporting those active service members in any way they can.

As long as we have the socialists in the democrat party with a tight grip on the welfare state they created and a blow hard worthless republican party we will continue seeing the same results we currently have.

[Benedictus]

The US and its Allies can make changes across the world if they wanted to, it is pathetic that we rely so heavily on China for goods and services , with the knowledge of how they treat their workers, slave labor etc. Russia got a pass from Obama for taking a part of the Ukraine and should be held accountable for that move, but wont.  The US does have a better track record of helping others out side of the obama atmosphere. America's power wouldn't be reducing if democrats were not the main power hold over this country, they are the party that has reduced and weakened our military, has undermined Israel at every chance given, and keep low informed ignorant voters under their thumb at every turn. America is the first place illegal immigrants turn to, and every third world country turns to after a major disaster for supplies and help.   If America was as messed up as you think it is we wouldn't be looked at as a country for anything in any regards.  Cowards are the ones in todays world who don't want to send troops into harms ways, soldiers are trained and ready to protect this country and others at any time of day or night for as long as necessary it is what they sign up for. It is the leaders and parties who are too cowardly to do the right thing at the right time, people have the right to be worried about losing a loved one in any conflict, but those who do not have any skin in the game other than tax dollars ( which isn't enough skin ) have nothing to complain about and should only be focused on supporting those active service members in any way they can.

As long as we have the socialists in the democrat party with a tight grip on the welfare state they created and a blow hard worthless republican party we will continue seeing the same results we currently have.

I think you're living in a bubble. The US can't police the world and it can't even if wanted to do so. It doesn't have the ability anyway. The US gov. has had to sort out problems because it created many of them. Plus it has financial and capital interests to do so -  it's not because they feel simply bad for people. The superpowers are changing with globalization. China, India, South Africa and Brazil can trade and develop without the interference of US and European powers. The Middle East also has enough money and resources to keep it fairly happy. The size, growth and development of all these will outstrip US levels in a number of decades. If you don't realize this then you're missing a big chunk of how things are shaping up.

Edited August 11, 2015 by Benedictus

[superblue]

I think you're living in a bubble. The US can't police the world and it can't even if wanted to do so. It doesn't have the ability anyway. The US gov. has had to sort out problems because it created many of them. Plus it has financial and capital interests to do so -  it's not because they feel simply bad for people. The superpowers are changing with globalization. China, India, South Africa and Brazil can trade and develop without the interference of US and European powers. The Middle East also has enough money and resources to keep it fairly happy. The size, growth and development of all these will outstrip US levels in a number of decades. If you don't realize this then you're missing a big chunk of how things are shaping up.

actually you're in the bubble, no one is saying the US should police the world, the US did not create global problems, It isn't a discussion of trading, i can't help you come to terms with how other rational people are seeing the issue, instead of this  mindset of evil America mucking up the world and needs to stop policing the world as well.  America is not and has never acted as a police force to the world, that is a socialist , leftist mindset that Europeans and Democrats love to whip out as a talking point.  

But i get it, socialists, leftists , and Democrats have a really hard time facing the truth, because it is the rest of us who are constantly trying to clean up their mess. 

You should be well pleased with Obama, he has weakened our military, discredited our credibility with other nations, turned the governments back against Israel , given Iran a pass, exploded our national debt , and has gone on a global tour to basically pass the word on the views you are holding, that America has created such horrible conditions at home and abroad and that we basically need to stay out of global affairs, open our boarders to everyone, and pretend that our military can not and should not stop ISIS, the Taliban or anyone else any more.

Have fun in your own hell hole, don't bring the rest of us with you,and you are going to have a hard time doing it too.

[Benedictus]

You think Bush elevated the state of the nation? Do you realize how damaging things have been going back years -  lets start from Vietnam up to present. That fact sheet is depressing enough. Look into how many military bases the US has overseas and how it props up certain regimes, past and present. Everyone knows this is true. Both Democrats and Republicans have done this, so party blame shaming rubbish is a waste of time.

Denying the truth is also a waste of time because the facts and analysis is out there. You don't think the US would want to police the world? Really? So the posts in this thread calling for action to force changes in overseas countries actually means asking nicely? Is that it?

The reality is some people think the status quo can continue and or they can bomb people into submission and maintain power supremacy. It's getting tired and predictable. If the US elects another Republican idiot with a crazy foreign policy then I predict there will be more terrorist attacks on the mainland of the US. There needs to be more active reconciliation, diplomacy and aid envoys -  not bombs, control tactics and corporate money/resource grabs by the government.

Internationally many would also disagree with you too. Republicans of many strips would disagree with you too anyway. Look at people like Ron Paul on foreign policy and military issues. He's no socialist.  Look here and here. Like usual, even in his audience, the truth hurts some people.

[Socrates]

Yes, but they have the capacity to do so. Turkey and Lebanon (probably Saudi too) have taken part in attacks against IS. The Kurds have too. How can you stop such groups? The reality is you can't come in from outside and make change happen, it has to come from a local solution. You can supress one group and another takes its place, especially when there's the factors to drive it (such as foreign invasions and attacks). The US (and most western countries) are made to look like colonialist, imperialist, supremacist hypocrites (as usual) and there is always a line of people in those countries who will turn against any interference because of that. They may hate IS, but they don't love and seek to be like the US either.

The US gets involved when it suits them -  WWll is a prime example of that. The Russians basically won it, but got little of the recognition. The US waited until the end and then decided to drop a nuke on civilians to 'end it'.  They didn't decide to nuke (mostly white) Germany though, despite them knowing about the various atrocities for years. In any event, in WWll America was asked to support an active war between nations. The US was also attacked by a nation. The modern situation doesn't equate to that. If anything, the Iraq war started all this instability in the middle east. Bush and Blair have dirty hands for that, all based on false WMD evidence. In terms of human rights let ask what regimes have been supported by the US and others? Saudi Arabia? UAE? Pinochet government? What's all there records on women and human rights?

Comparing IS and overseas issues to the the daily political wrangles of social policy at home is a bit of a cheap shot. So everything in US culture and political policy should be ignored because somewhere overseas they have it worse? I think we all know overseas trauma gets coverage in the news -  framing it as if people with certain political leanings don't care is a low blow to make. I think it could be said Republicans and the conservative media outlets have their hobby horses too. So that type of analysis doesn't get anywhere.

Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . everything is Big Bad 'Murica's fault.  The usual standard-issue faculty lounge radical drivel.

I supposed the over 16 million American troops who served in WWII and the over 407,000 who died amounted to nothing, and all glory and honor should go to Uncle Joe Stalin and his glorious Soviets instead.

And the Germans actually surrendered after being militarily defeated, unlike the Japanese.  But let's not let the facts get in the way of a good leftist rant.

If you recall, the Sept. 11 attacks actually predated the Iraq war, so there was obviously unrest and evil in the Middle East before Iraq was invaded, but whatever.

 

The "War on Women" bs and other such nonsense is nothing but pure and utter political garbage, and unworthy of anybody's time or attention.  (And I already gave the Planned Parenthood example of a domestic issue the libs here willfully ignore.)  What's covered by the media nowadays is mostly politically driven, and that's the truth of the matter.

 

[Norseman82]

 

Don't forget the evil First and Second Amendment or the nasty idea of privacy found in that old outdated document the    " Bill of Rights " in the U.S. constitution 

 

 

Didn't you get the memo?  "Privacy" only protects the right to do evil.  [/sarcasm]

The "War on Women" bs and other such nonsense is nothing but pure and utter political garbage, and unworthy of anybody's time or attention.  (And I already gave the Planned Parenthood example of a domestic issue the libs here willfully ignore.)  What's covered by the media nowadays is mostly politically driven, and that's the truth of the matter.

 

Oh, I don't think the libs are ignoring it - on the contrary, I think they know they've been caught, so they're making up excuses to try to save their rears, such as trying to cast doubt on the veracity of the evidence and trying to deflect the evidence with the "war on women" soundbite.

Remember too that Boko Haram (sp?) is doing similar to women in Nigeria, so it is not limited to ISIS.

Edited August 15, 2015 by Norseman82

[Benedictus]

If you recall, the Sept. 11 attacks actually predated the Iraq war, so there was obviously unrest and evil in the Middle East before Iraq was invaded, but whatever.

 

Well, there was the Gulf war.

Nearly all the terrorists from Sep 11th were of Saudi origin. Much of the hardline religious extremism and finance comes from there too. Saudi Arabia maintains its regime with the tactical support of the US. Why is that?

Iraq and all those places were targeted because they created instability in the markets and limited access to resources. It had little to nothing to do with human rights abuses, terrorism or WMD's. We now know all that 'evidence' that was used to create the Iraq war wasn't true.

[Didacus]

For the world to change, hearts must change.  

[Peace]

For the world to change, hearts must change.  

And the first place to look is at the man in the mirror.