American Journalist James Foley Reportedly Beheaded

[Pearsy92]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
^^

You already said the Soviet Union was a much greater threat to the US than IS - yet, you decry US backing of anti-Soviet regimes during the Cold War? How do you reconcile that with your position of backing secular forces in the ME?[/quote]

I would describe myself at this moment in my political development as a free market advocate, I would advocate as small a state as possible with the most minimal os state infrastructure and the least market intervention.

I understand that we do not live in a free society but rater in countries on a planet where most other countries suck too. There is a certain amount of geo political realism that needs to be accepted hence why I also stated “I would love to see the U.S go in and smash IS”.

My problem is I think the only way to ever have a truly free society and extricate ourselves from continuous wars is to take up a very set in stone policy. A free market. A population with the access to arms and the ability to defend themselves and their nation internally and a strong armed forces that is only used in the defence of our nation in cases of invasion.

I think a lot of movements, specifically the communist movements in South America were direct results of the domination of the continent by the U.S, the puppet regimes and the open discarding of democracy for people who were elected who didn’t support U.S policy in the region.

When people are continuously fucked over they turn to radical and authoritarian systems as solutions, France and England’s treatment of Germany post ww1 and their crippling of the german economy and humiliation of the German population can be seen as a direct cause for the sentiment and atmosphere in Germany that ended up voting Hitler into power.

I do understand some of your points but I in general don’t see anything but true free market and not isolationist but rather non expansionist and geo politically neutral governance as leading to us living in a peaceful and safe society without wars and crises always popping up.

I do acknowledge your points that something must be done right now, and I agreed and offered a military and logistical option, but that does not mean I support America’s track record.

[Gkhan]

[quote]Pearsy92 wrote:

Don’t get me wrong I don’t single the U.S out, Britain, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Germany, France, Russia etc etc have all been involved in imperialist wars and or genocide. Why you feel the need to deny your countries involvement in such acts confounds me. No one is saying you are responsible.

[/quote]

What country are you from? What should be done about ISIS? How can it be stopped if not militarily?

[Gkhan]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
^^

You already said the Soviet Union was a much greater threat to the US than IS - yet, you decry US backing of anti-Soviet regimes during the Cold War? How do you reconcile that with your position of backing secular forces in the ME?[/quote]

Because I’m guessing he’s anti-everything America has ever done. Another one of those.

[SexMachine]

[quote]Pearsy92 wrote:

I would describe myself at this moment in my political development as a free market advocate, I would advocate as small a state as possible with the most minimal os state infrastructure and the least market intervention.

I understand that we do not live in a free society but rater in countries on a planet where most other countries suck too. There is a certain amount of geo political realism that needs to be accepted hence why I also stated “I would love to see the U.S go in and smash IS”.

My problem is I think the only way to ever have a truly free society and extricate ourselves from continuous wars is to take up a very set in stone policy. A free market.
[/quote]

A free market is not really relevant to foreign policy.

A population with the access to arms and the ability to defend themselves and their nation internally and a strong armed forces that is only used in the defence of our nation in cases of invasion.

Sounds good. Unfortunately international relations is an inherently anarchic environment and the US needs to maintain its unipolarity for economic and national security reasons.

I think a lot of movements, specifically the communist movements in South America were direct results of the domination of the continent by the U.S, the puppet regimes and the open discarding of democracy for people who were elected who didn’t support U.S policy in the region.

The revolutionary movements in South and Central America were/are a manifestation of Jacobinism that has plagued the world for two hundred years.

When people are continuously fucked over they turn to radical and authoritarian systems as solutions, France and England’s treatment of Germany post ww1 and their crippling of the german economy and humiliation of the German population can be seen as a direct cause for the sentiment and atmosphere in Germany that ended up voting Hitler into power.

There were many reasons for the rise of Hitler. The terms of the Versailles treaty were not really the main factor. The society was destroyed by over 15 million casualties from WWI and Spanish influenza and Marxist revolutionaries.

I do understand some of your points but I in general don’t see anything but true free market and not isolationist but rather non expansionist and geo politically neutral governance as leading to us living in a peaceful and safe society without wars and crises always popping up.

The US will be continuously involved in asymmetric warfare for the foreseeable future. It’s unavoidable.

[Pearsy92]

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
^^

You already said the Soviet Union was a much greater threat to the US than IS - yet, you decry US backing of anti-Soviet regimes during the Cold War? How do you reconcile that with your position of backing secular forces in the ME?[/quote]

Because I’m guessing he’s anti-everything America has ever done. Another one of those.[/quote]

As someone who identifies with economic theories of Rand, Hayek and Locke I of course am against everything the U.S has done.

I might understand the historic reasons that the united states was a progressive force in the world initially however as someone who would be put into the category of “libertarian” (I hate that phrase) I would be against every government of the united states that has ever been.

I am for universal human rights, so every part of America’s history up until the 1960’s I have to be against on basic human rights grounds, not even mentioning their economy or foreign affairs.

I do however maintain the United States is the most free place that has ever existed.

Of course you are one of those people that defend the united States because you are in one camp as opposed to the tree hugging liberals in the other and you have your talking points and phrases that you never go over and think do I actually support this.

[Pearsy92]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Pearsy92 wrote:

I would describe myself at this moment in my political development as a free market advocate, I would advocate as small a state as possible with the most minimal os state infrastructure and the least market intervention.

I understand that we do not live in a free society but rater in countries on a planet where most other countries suck too. There is a certain amount of geo political realism that needs to be accepted hence why I also stated “I would love to see the U.S go in and smash IS”.

My problem is I think the only way to ever have a truly free society and extricate ourselves from continuous wars is to take up a very set in stone policy. A free market.
[/quote]

A free market is not really relevant to foreign policy.

A population with the access to arms and the ability to defend themselves and their nation internally and a strong armed forces that is only used in the defence of our nation in cases of invasion.

Sounds good. Unfortunately international relations is an inherently anarchic environment and the US needs to maintain its unipolarity for economic and national security reasons.

I think a lot of movements, specifically the communist movements in South America were direct results of the domination of the continent by the U.S, the puppet regimes and the open discarding of democracy for people who were elected who didn’t support U.S policy in the region.

The revolutionary movements in South and Central America were/are a manifestation of Jacobinism that has plagued the world for two hundred years.

When people are continuously fucked over they turn to radical and authoritarian systems as solutions, France and England’s treatment of Germany post ww1 and their crippling of the german economy and humiliation of the German population can be seen as a direct cause for the sentiment and atmosphere in Germany that ended up voting Hitler into power.

There were many reasons for the rise of Hitler. The terms of the Versailles treaty were not really the main factor. The society was destroyed by over 15 million casualties from WWI and Spanish influenza and Marxist revolutionaries.

I do understand some of your points but I in general don’t see anything but true free market and not isolationist but rather non expansionist and geo politically neutral governance as leading to us living in a peaceful and safe society without wars and crises always popping up.

The US will be continuously involved in asymmetric warfare for the foreseeable future. It’s unavoidable.
[/quote]

I would actually be interested in discussing these things with you, you have some opinions I have never been exposed to and I think our opinions on foreign policy aside and what constitutes what we would hold similar opinions on what we would term a free society in which to live:

Free market with minimal regulation
Rights to own firearms
Low taxes
Freedom of thought and expression
etc etc

Despite claims of me being a leftist I am very very right leaning on many issues. I think one of the only things I have a pro left position on is universal healthcare, I am not sure what I think on that issue. I am against it in principle but I think instead of wasteful spending by government for example in the U.S universal healthcare could be implemented as opposed to the trillions spent on what I deem unnecessary wars.

Again though that is one I am unsure of.

Could you explain why you have such negative views on the Jacobin revolts etc, are you saying you were against the initial slave revolts on the Islands? Or against a political movement that arose out of the initial rebellions?

[Sifu]

[quote]Pearsy92 wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:
I m sure that whatever is done about this, the response will be “measured” and “proportional”. Nothing scares the Jihadi’s more than the possibility that the political winds could blow strong enough for the US to muster a measured and proportional response. [/quote]

Well what can the U.S do? The country is in massive debt, has recently been in two very costly wars and is still propping up the very likely to collapse governments installed there with money and arms.

The U.S can not afford to go to war really and even if they did hatred of the U.S around the world is so strong right now that it could just make things worse.

I would love to see the U.S go in and smash IS but the problem is can they? What do they do if IS is defeated, there is a vacuum in that region after the U.S overthrew regimes, these will eventually be filled and it won’t be by a democrat or an independent, it will be by someone with views and laws we deem horrendous, the U.S can’t stay in that region forever without crippling itself economically.

On the other hand it eventually might need to. This is a very very hard topic and rashness and bravado won’t really help. The U.S has the greatest military power known to man, but its about what comes after the victory. You can’t and won’t defeat insurgencies that have popular backing. They just keep sprouting up. [/quote]

What we can do is handle it the Chicago way. They killed one of ours, now we kill all of them.

The Chicago Way - The Untouchables (2/10) Movie CLIP (1987) HD

The US populace needs to grow up and stop with all this juvenile people aren’t going to like us bullshit. We need to do what is best for us and not worry about what others are going to think about it. Especially people who already don’t like us.

The Jihadists aren’t going to go away, they have designs on the entire world. Sooner or later they are going to come after us. Aside from giving up and surrendering, the only option we have is to go after them and kill all of them.

[Pearsy92]

[quote]Sifu wrote:

[quote]Pearsy92 wrote:

[quote]Sifu wrote:
I m sure that whatever is done about this, the response will be “measured” and “proportional”. Nothing scares the Jihadi’s more than the possibility that the political winds could blow strong enough for the US to muster a measured and proportional response. [/quote]

Well what can the U.S do? The country is in massive debt, has recently been in two very costly wars and is still propping up the very likely to collapse governments installed there with money and arms.

The U.S can not afford to go to war really and even if they did hatred of the U.S around the world is so strong right now that it could just make things worse.

I would love to see the U.S go in and smash IS but the problem is can they? What do they do if IS is defeated, there is a vacuum in that region after the U.S overthrew regimes, these will eventually be filled and it won’t be by a democrat or an independent, it will be by someone with views and laws we deem horrendous, the U.S can’t stay in that region forever without crippling itself economically.

On the other hand it eventually might need to. This is a very very hard topic and rashness and bravado won’t really help. The U.S has the greatest military power known to man, but its about what comes after the victory. You can’t and won’t defeat insurgencies that have popular backing. They just keep sprouting up. [/quote]

What we can do is handle it the Chicago way. They killed one of ours, now we kill all of them.

The Chicago Way - The Untouchables (2/10) Movie CLIP (1987) HD

The US populace needs to grow up and stop with all this juvenile people aren’t going to like us bullshit. We need to do what is best for us and not worry about what others are going to think about it. Especially people who already don’t like us.

The Jihadists aren’t going to go away, they have designs on the entire world. Sooner or later they are going to come after us. Aside from giving up and surrendering, the only option we have is to go after them and kill all of them.
[/quote]

That isn’t a real plan that is just saying something that makes us feel better.

[SexMachine]

[quote]Pearsy92 wrote:

I would actually be interested in discussing these things with you, you have some opinions I have never been exposed to and I think our opinions on foreign policy aside and what constitutes what we would hold similar opinions on what we would term a free society in which to live:

Free market with minimal regulation
Rights to own firearms
Low taxes
Freedom of thought and expression
etc etc

Despite claims of me being a leftist I am very very right leaning on many issues. I think one of the only things I have a pro left position on is universal healthcare, I am not sure what I think on that issue.
[/quote]

Well at least you’re honest about it. Ayn Rand was of course adamantly against universal healthcare yet availed herself of it when she got cancer. I guess her ethical egoism was more important than her economic principles.

I am against it in principle but I think instead of wasteful spending by government for example in the U.S universal healthcare could be implemented as opposed to the trillions spent on what I deem unnecessary wars.

The “unnecessary wars” line is part and parcel of the Rothbardian libertarian brand. It harks back to the anti-interventionism of the old right. It’s not something I subscribe to.

Again though that is one I am unsure of.

Could you explain why you have such negative views on the Jacobin revolts etc,

I use the term “Jacobin” in its original sense: revolutionary left-wing movements. Marxism is just a continuation of the Jacobinism of revolutionary France. The reasons I’m against? Many. For one thing I favour limited government, free market capitalism and natural rights.

are you saying you were against the initial slave revolts on the Islands?

Not exactly. I’m against the revolutionary movements that sprung from them.

[quote]

Or against a political movement that arose out of the initial rebellions?[/quote]

Yep.

[BPCorso]

[quote]Pearsy92 wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:
Has that video been authenticated? I’m not saying it was faked, but certain things just seemed off to me.[/quote]

IS are in a weird way trying to do their best to put a positive PR spin on everything, one of the journalists for one of the big papers commented on how they do this horrific sub human shit but will try and clean up the scenery to make it look more sanitised. For example wiping blood of a crucified man and posting a beheading video but skipping over the most horrific scenes. [/quote]

Yes, it was quite powerful propaganda and well done. It certainly had an effect on me. I don’t mean that it changed my opinion of them, but I was chilled to the core. Cutting away from the gurgling and blood made it more effective and chilling. I’ve seen other videos that show savagery but without any haunting message. The video we are discussing now is something else. I’ve never seen anything like it.

[BPCorso]

[quote]Sifu wrote:
The US populace needs to grow up and stop with all this juvenile people aren’t going to like us bullshit. We need to do what is best for us and not worry about what others are going to think about it. Especially people who already don’t like us.

The Jihadists aren’t going to go away, they have designs on the entire world. Sooner or later they are going to come after us. Aside from giving up and surrendering, the only option we have is to go after them and kill all of them.
[/quote]

I agree. There will be no chance for any reconciliation or making them like us, no matter what actions we do or not take. And I agree that they are after much more than Iraq and Syria. The movement needs to be crushed outright before it spreads any further. USA is probably the only country with both the will and ability to it efficiently.

The more success IS has will build momentum and result in increasing numbers and more people coming from all over the world to join. It’s really disconcerting that educated people are already in its ranks.

[BPCorso]

The people who have funded IS are culpable and I hope the various intelligence communities can figure out where the money came from. I know the various countries in play, but the specific people or families doing it need to be publicly admonished.

[Pearsy92]

[quote]BPCorso wrote:
The people who have funded IS are culpable and I hope the various intelligence communities can figure out where the money came from. I know the various countries in play, but the specific people or families doing it need to be publicly admonished.[/quote]

The people funding them are U.S allies, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. The U.S government has been in bed with the Islamist movement via proxy since the newest incarnation of it began.

[Pearsy92]

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Pearsy92 wrote:

…I would be against every government of the united states that has ever been…

[/quote]

Vs. what governments throughout history would you “be for?”
[/quote]

None. I just acknowledge which one is less shit to live under. For example I might be against the U.S government and the Iranian government but I would much rather live in the U.S. Not because they give me more rights, they just take less rights away.