France Bombs ISIS In Raqqa, Syria

[Patrick Chewing]

Oh wow, someone call the generals of the United States, Russia, France, Iraq, Syria, Kurdistan, etc... Any country basically bombing the shit out of IS 24/7 and with boots already on the ground... Patrick Chewing just gave you the blueprint to beating ISIS easily.

Shock and Awe.



So raiding the mosques in Syria and Iraq territories controlled by IS... with the boots on the ground... that should clear up that ideological problem. Sounds feasible.



When Ric Flair... I mean Donald Trump becomes president, you better believe those moderates will help the boots on the ground rid the Middle East of an ideology.

How old are you? I refuse to believe a grown man can be this stupid.

[DonDadda59]

How old are you? I refuse to believe a grown man can be this stupid.

The irony.

Boots on the ground.

Can you be any more specific than that? Where are you sending these boots? How many boots? What would their specific duties be? If ISIS were somehow completely eradicated... to whom would you transfer governance? How would Assad and Russia fit into the final political configuration? What about the Kurds and the Yazidi?

Remember the last time We had boots on the ground? ISIS grew out of that after the region was completely destabilized by our pointless and costly meddling.

[KevinNYC]

Soooo we should not attack ISIS?? It would just be an overreaction as you mentioned, right? Why don't you ever provide solutions? You talk as if this is some master plan for ISIS.

The only plan they have is death and destruction. The only way to defeat that is to kill them and anyone in league with them first.

Why don't I ever provide solutions?

It's because I don't see an easy option. The US Army is not set up for decades long colonial wars and occupations. A military draft is a non-starter in this country. So that means the same boots keep getting sent to the same ground over and over. It's obvious that is something the administration wants to keep to a minimum.

So that leaves locals. However, there are no local troops to work with that are A. reliable and B. strong enough to achieve our desired goals. The closest we have come are the Kurds and even that has its own complications.

I guess because I see this a real thorny issue with bad options on all sides and where the gut instinct answer might be the wrong answer. This is a case where if you can fit it on a bumper sticker you're probably going to turn out to be wrong.

Someone said my response was smart. Well it's not my response, I just follow some smart people who track this stuff.

Attacking ISIS is not an overreaction and I never said it was. But you can attack ISIS without saying Kill 'em and Let God Sort "em out. You can go after ISIS without going after "Muslims.

One of the smartest things Bush did after 9/11 was not immediately react, but carefully plan the invasion of Afghanistan. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were already arguing for Iraq. Douglas Feith arguing for bombing South America (Cuz they wouldn't see it coming!)

[DonDadda59]

Why don't I ever provide solutions?

It's because I don't see an easy option. The US Army is not set up for decades long colonial wars and occupations with a draft which is a non-starter. There are no local troops to work with that are A. reliable and B. strong enough to achieve our desired goals. The closest we have come are the Kurds.

I guess because I see this a real thorny issue with bad options on all sides and where the gut instinct answer might be the wrong answer. This is a case where if you can fit it on a bumper sticker you're probably going to turn out to be wrong.

Attacking ISIS is not an overreaction and I never said it was. But you can attack ISIS without saying Kill 'em and Let God Sort "em out. You can go after ISIS without going after "Muslims.

One of the smartest things Bush did after 9/11 was not immediately react, but carefully plan the invasion of Afghanistan. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were already arguing for Iraq. Douglas Feith arguing for bombing South America (Cuz they wouldn't see it coming!)

Haven't you been paying attention?

It is easy- boots on the ground. Raid mosques and tell the moderates to start acting right.

Few weeks after that, Syria will be like another California. A democratic paradise.

[fiddy]

Why don't I ever provide solutions?

It's because I don't see an easy option. The US Army is not set up for decades long colonial wars and occupations with a draft which is a non-starter. There are no local troops to work with that are A. reliable and B. strong enough to achieve our desired goals. The closest we have come are the Kurds and even that has its own complications.

What about the legitimate government of Syria?

[Smook B]

What about the legitimate government of Syria?

According to the US there illegitimate and the US not the Syrian people should decide who the next Syrian president should be.

[Smook B]

Syrian Army putting in work in Southern Aleppo.

[KevinNYC]

There are folks who think that if the US was not involved in Syria in any way, there would be no civil war. I don't believe that. Syria fell into civil war in 2011 because of reasons within Syria and within the region. If the US had done nothing over the past 4 years, I still think a civil war would be raging in Syria. The contours of the war might be different, but I think fighting would still be going on.

It was in the second half of 2012 that the US got involved in any meaningful way and even then, the biggest dynamics of the war were outside of what the US was doing. That is, the situation on the ground was driven much more by other actors than the US.

[DonDadda59]

According to the US there illegitimate and the US not the Syrian people should decide who the next Syrian president should be.

We also weren't really feeling the Taliban and Saddam's legitimate reigns either. Sent hundreds of thousands of boots on the ground and countless bombs to make sure things were more to our liking.

Worked like gangbusters.

It's So Simple

[Smook B]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=df8_1447624150

ISIS getting hunted down like rats.

[Smook B]

There are folks who think that if the US was not involved in Syria in any way, there would be no civil war. I don't believe that. Syria fell into civil war in 2011 because of reasons within Syria and within the region. If the US had done nothing over the past 4 years, I still think a civil war would be raging in Syria. The contours of the war might be different, but I think fighting would still be going on.

It was in the second half of 2012 that the US got involved in any meaningful way and even then, the biggest dynamics of the war were outside of what the US was doing. That is, the situation on the ground was driven much more by other actors than the US.

Please the war would have ended much sooner without US involvement.

[KevinNYC]

What about the legitimate government of Syria?

If by that you mean Assad, he lost legitimacy in 2011.

His pursuit of this war has involved mass killing of civilians

He basically fought this war to preserve his family's own power as opposed to negotiating a new government.

We'll see if the new talks in Vienna lead anywhere.

[Smook B]

If by that you mean Assad, he lost legitimacy in 2011.

His pursuit of this war has involved mass killing of civilians

He basically fought this war to preserve his family's own power as opposed to negotiating a new government.

We'll see if the new talks in Vienna lead anywhere.

[fiddy]

If by that you mean Assad, he lost legitimacy in 2011.

His pursuit of this war has involved mass killing of civilians

He basically fought this war to preserve his family's own power as opposed to negotiating a new government.

We'll see if the new talks in Vienna lead anywhere.

Disgusting propaganda.

[KevinNYC]

In terms of what is easy somebody mentioned it should be easy to infiltrate ISIS.

If you've seen Zero Dark Thirty you'll remember the part about the double-agent we though was infiltrating Al Qaeda for us, but turned out to be a triple agent. He killed 9 people on a CIA base during a suicide attack.