Bagdad Falling

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
601

[quote]Bismark wrote:

I believe that poverty is the swamp that must be drained for terrorism to be curtailed.
[/quote]

No you don’t…you couldn’t. Could you? You have some hidden motive for claiming something so patently ridiculous.

Do I really need to address this nonsense? Are you really taking the position that it has nothing to do with culture and everything to do with poverty? You can’t be serious.

[quote]

I believe contemporary terrorism to be more indicative of socio-economic conditions rather than purely religious.[/quote]

You’re pulling our legs. Sarcasm? Trolling? Ulterior motive? I don’t believe that you believe what you’ve just written.

602

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

I believe that poverty is the swamp that must be drained for terrorism to be curtailed.
[/quote]

No you don’t…you couldn’t. Could you? You have some hidden motive for claiming something so patently ridiculous.

Do I really need to address this nonsense? Are you really taking the position that it has nothing to do with culture and everything to do with poverty? You can’t be serious.

[quote]

I believe contemporary terrorism to be more indicative of socio-economic conditions rather than purely religious.[/quote]

You’re pulling our legs. Sarcasm? Trolling? Ulterior motive? I don’t believe that you believe what you’ve just written.[/quote]

Religious terrorism is a hydra of which the sword alone is ineffectual in addressing.

Terrorism is a tool for the weak, who cannot hope to compete militarily in conventional conflicts.

603

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

I believe that poverty is the swamp that must be drained for terrorism to be curtailed.
[/quote]

No you don’t…you couldn’t. Could you? You have some hidden motive for claiming something so patently ridiculous.

Do I really need to address this nonsense? Are you really taking the position that it has nothing to do with culture and everything to do with poverty? You can’t be serious.

[quote]

I believe contemporary terrorism to be more indicative of socio-economic conditions rather than purely religious.[/quote]

You’re pulling our legs. Sarcasm? Trolling? Ulterior motive? I don’t believe that you believe what you’ve just written.[/quote]

Religious terrorism is a hydra of which the sword alone is ineffectual in addressing.

Terrorism is a tool for the weak, who cannot hope to compete militarily in conventional conflicts. [/quote]

And poverty has absolutely nothing to do with Islamic terrorism. You only need to compare Christian South Sudan with the Islamic North to see that.

604

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
That sounds logical and rational, BUT you are proposing logical and rational solutions to an unrational people. Unfortunately these folks understand only the Saddam Method: control w brute force. That’s the only thing they respect: strength. [/quote]

All Muslims/Arabs are irrational? On what grounds? If you state their religion is the cause, the remaining Abrahamic faiths must also be lumped into this irrational categorization.[/quote]

I like a lot of your posts…but this is extreme bullshit.

Radical Islam…estimates peg it at 10% of the worldwide 2.5 billion Muslim population… are fucking INSANE.

And they run countries.

Sweet jeebus, the devils advocate goes only so far graduate student.[/quote]

I believe that poverty is the swamp that must be drained for terrorism to be curtailed. [/quote]

I understand what you are saying, but on the other hand the head of Al-Qaeda is a doctor. Bin laden was from a rich family with an engineering & construction background. A lot of these guys are very well off…how can you explain this? (I’m almost sorry I asked.)

605

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
to quote myself:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Should America and other nations wage war with it or should they wait until they are threatened to do so? [/quote]

they threatened the world:

So you are in favor of US forces being deployed in offensive operations against ISIS in Iraq?[/quote]

Yes.[/quote]

What forces, and in what capacity? Someone responding to the affirmative should have sufficient knowledge to offer more than a simple yes. [/quote]

Army, Marines, & Air Force. I’ll let the Pentagon handle the strategy.

606

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
to quote myself:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Should America and other nations wage war with it or should they wait until they are threatened to do so? [/quote]

they threatened the world:

So you are in favor of US forces being deployed in offensive operations against ISIS in Iraq?[/quote]

Yes.[/quote]

What forces, and in what capacity? Someone responding to the affirmative should have sufficient knowledge to offer more than a simple yes. [/quote]

Army, Marines, & Air Force. I’ll let the Pentagon handle the strategy.

[/quote]

So throw force at ISIS without understanding its nature? You had no such hesitations when recommending policy in Syria.

607

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
to quote myself:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Should America and other nations wage war with it or should they wait until they are threatened to do so? [/quote]

they threatened the world:

So you are in favor of US forces being deployed in offensive operations against ISIS in Iraq?[/quote]

Yes.[/quote]

What forces, and in what capacity? Someone responding to the affirmative should have sufficient knowledge to offer more than a simple yes. [/quote]

Army, Marines, & Air Force. I’ll let the Pentagon handle the strategy.

[/quote]

So throw force at ISIS without understanding its nature? You had no such hesitations when recommending policy in Syria.
[/quote]

I first thought Isis would be a good way to keep the Iranians’ hands full, since, if Isis were to take the middle of Iraq, Iran would be surrounded by extremist Sunni terrorist states. But since the threat against the west and the call to arms to international Jihadists, I think Isis should be crushed before it can dig in and become powerful as Hezbollah.

The US should help the Iraqi forces with air support and boots on the ground if needed. They should crush Isis the same way they liberated Falujah and kicked Sadr’s ass in the past. That would be the model for action.

What’s to understand about the nature of Isis? They would fight and react like all Islamic terrorist armies throughout the world. When faced with force, they will blend in to the civilian population, even if it means cross dressing as women. They will retaliate with car bombs, suicide bombs and kidnappings and beheadings. if you want to understand the nature of Isis, look at the tactics of the P.L.O.in the 70’s, Hezbollah in Lebanon in the 80’s, Hamas in the 90’s and the Taliban/al-Qaeda in the 00’s and Boko Harum. Throw in the Chechen rebels and the Albanians in Kosovo and I think you’ve got a pretty good picture as to how things will go down once the fighting starts.

And Syria was a totally different story. You could look to the United State’s and Nato’s action in Libya as an example of how to wage war against Assad, not to mention Gulf War I and Gulf War II against Saddam.

You of all people should recognize that a war against a dictator with a conventional army would be fought differently than a war against unconventional terrorists.

608

[quote]Bismark wrote:
I believe that poverty is the swamp that must be drained for terrorism to be curtailed. If Chistians and Jews were as equally disenfranchised we would likely observe a comparable ratio of extremists within such societies. I believe contemporary terrorism to be more indicative of socio-economic conditions rather than purely religious.[/quote]

Ummmm. Okay.

I guess that explains the radical terrorism of mostly catholic Latin America with their high poverty rate. Those Guatemalan terrorist are sure worse than AQ and ISIS, right?

609

[quote]Bismark wrote:

I believe that poverty is the swamp that must be drained for terrorism to be curtailed. If Chistians and Jews were as equally disenfranchised we would likely observe a comparable ratio of extremists within such societies. I believe contemporary terrorism to be more indicative of socio-economic conditions rather than purely religious.[/quote]
This is just plain ignorant.

610

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Do rabbis believe in genital mutilation? [/quote]

If a clitoral hood is analogous to a foreskin (it is), and the cutting of either is to be considered “mutilation”, then yes. [/quote]

They don’t cut the clitoral hood, they cut the clitoris. I had the misfortune of seeing this done on European TV, they showed the whole ceremony and it was horrific. The obvious agony of the girl to whom is was done will not soon enough leave my memory.

611

[quote]Bismark wrote:
So throw force at ISIS without understanding its nature? You had no such hesitations when recommending policy in Syria.
[/quote]
Their nature is about as complicated as a hot dog bun. They understand force. The only things we need to do is cut their money, cut off their supply chain, and identify their location so as to minimize civilian casualties.

612

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Do rabbis believe in genital mutilation? [/quote]

If a clitoral hood is analogous to a foreskin (it is), and the cutting of either is to be considered “mutilation”, then yes. [/quote]

They don’t cut the clitoral hood, they cut the clitoris. I had the misfortune of seeing this done on European TV, they showed the whole ceremony and it was horrific. The obvious agony of the girl to whom is was done will not soon enough leave my memory.[/quote]

Yep. It’s would be like the difference of circumcision vs. cutting of the head of the penis.

613

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Do rabbis believe in genital mutilation? [/quote]

If a clitoral hood is analogous to a foreskin (it is), and the cutting of either is to be considered “mutilation”, then yes. [/quote]

They don’t cut the clitoral hood, they cut the clitoris. I had the misfortune of seeing this done on European TV, they showed the whole ceremony and it was horrific. The obvious agony of the girl to whom is was done will not soon enough leave my memory.[/quote]

When you say “they”, do you mean the Egyptians or the Nigerians?

Most Muslim societies do not practice full clitordectomies, just the superficial cutting of the clitoral hood, or just a token pinprick in Indonesia. Most full clitordectomies are performed in Africa, and (as I may have mentioned either here or in another thread), in some countries (like Kenya), the Christians are the ones who are doing it, more than the Muslims.

It is a pre-Islamic custom, and according to the Grand Mufti of Egypt, who has forbidden the practice, a definitely un-Islamic one.

614

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Do rabbis believe in genital mutilation? [/quote]

If a clitoral hood is analogous to a foreskin (it is), and the cutting of either is to be considered “mutilation”, then yes. [/quote]

They don’t cut the clitoral hood, they cut the clitoris. I had the misfortune of seeing this done on European TV, they showed the whole ceremony and it was horrific. The obvious agony of the girl to whom is was done will not soon enough leave my memory.[/quote]

When you say “they”, do you mean the Egyptians or the Nigerians?

Most Muslim societies do not practice full clitordectomies, just the superficial cutting of the clitoral hood, or just a token pinprick in Indonesia. Most full clitordectomies are performed in Africa, and (as I may have mentioned either here or in another thread), in some countries (like Kenya), the Christians are the ones who are doing it, more than the Muslims.

It is a pre-Islamic custom, and according to the Grand Mufti of Egypt, who has forbidden the practice, a definitely un-Islamic one.[/quote]

That which I witnessed was Egyptian. Now if you qualified that earlier I apologize I haven’t looked that this thread in a while. I just popped into see what it has turned into.
As for whether or not it cultural or religious, my understandings on the matter is that they are culturally based. I don’t care the reason it’s a horrific act and I will never forget the blood curdling screams of the poor 10 year old girl to whom it was being done. It’s flat barbaric.

615

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Do rabbis believe in genital mutilation? [/quote]

If a clitoral hood is analogous to a foreskin (it is), and the cutting of either is to be considered “mutilation”, then yes. [/quote]

They don’t cut the clitoral hood, they cut the clitoris. I had the misfortune of seeing this done on European TV, they showed the whole ceremony and it was horrific. The obvious agony of the girl to whom is was done will not soon enough leave my memory.[/quote]

Yep. It’s would be like the difference of circumcision vs. cutting of the head of the penis. [/quote]

Slowly. There was nothing quick about it, it was a slow and deliberate cut. I felt so bad for that girl.

616

Taliban’s even unsure of whether or not to back ISIS… wow.

617

Potential outcome of this event:

Kurdish state becomes reality in what is currently Northern Iraq. They are recognized by the Turks, Israelis, and Iranians among others. The Turks welcome it because they already have energy deals in place and in general lots of cooperation. Israel welcomes it because the Kurds don’t have beef with the Israelis and also they are not radical Muslims. Iranians welcome it because it’s a solid buffer to radical Sunnis. The Kurds are much more organized and militarily capable than Iraqis are and the Iranians know it. Iranians have cut several deals with Iraqi Kurds in the recent past.

With the help of US aid and Iranian supervision the Shia’s hold Southern Iraq. Possibly the US influences a “unity government” where the non-IS Sunnis in Western Iraq are placated enough. But that’s not integral for this scenario to play out.

So, in this scenario, a new Kurdish state emerges and at least Southern Iraq is secured. IS, having nowhere to go but still as radical as ever, decides to move South to spread their ideology and maintain a mission and purpose. Militants begin their way into Saudi Arabia with a new mission to take control of the Arabian peninsula, the birth of the Arab people and Islam. To the IS extremist, Saudi Arabia is occupied by an illegal monarchy that is counter to their vision of Islam. IS begins to give SA trouble and another crisis emerges.

Thoughts? Am I crazy for even thinking this is a possible scenario?

618
619

How tough can ISIS be if the Kurds are letting their chicks handle them? Wow.

620

The way to neutralize these fools is to drop leaflets of porn down on them. Porn is our only hope to destro the Mullahs.