Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member Seitse
    Doug Stanhope
    10 Aug '14 15:27
    Somebody draws a cartoon of a dude... outrage.

    IS rapes, kills, starves, and marries children... silence.

    Much tolerance, very peace, wow.
  2. 10 Aug '14 15:36
    Pretty loud silence.
  3. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    10 Aug '14 19:38 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Pretty loud silence.
    When President Obama announced US airstrikes in Iraq, most observers understood that the US would be bombing members of ISIS. What many did not know was that, in a twist of such bitterly symbolic irony that it could only occur in the Middle East, the US would also be bombing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of American military equipment.

    Here's why: in the decade since the 2003 US-led Iraq invasion, the US has spent a fortune training and arming the Iraqi army in the hopes of readying it to secure the country once America left. That meant arming the Iraqi army with high-tech and extremely expensive American-made guns, tanks, jeeps, artillery, and more.

    But the Iraqi army has been largely a failure. When ISIS invaded northern Iraq from Syria in June, the Iraqi forces deserted or retreated en masse. Many of them abandoned their American equipment. ISIS scooped it up themselves and are now using it to rampage across Iraq, seizing whole cities, terrorizing minorities, and finally pushing into even once-secure Kurdish territory. All with shiny American military equipment.

    So the US air strikes against ISIS are in part to destroy US military equipment, such as the artillery ISIS has been using against Kurdish forces.

    The absurdity runs deep: America is using American military equipment to bomb other pieces of American military equipment halfway around the world. The reason the American military equipment got there in the first place was because, in 2003, the US had to use its military to rebuild the Iraqi army, which it just finished destroying with the American military. The American weapons the US gave the Iraqi army totally failed at making Iraq secure and have become tools of terror used by an offshoot of al-Qaeda to terrorize the Iraqis that the US supposedly liberated a decade ago. And so now the US has to use American weaponry to destroy the American weaponry it gave Iraqis to make Iraqis safer, in order to make Iraqis safer.

    It keeps going: the US is intervening on behalf of Iraqi Kurds, our ally, because their military has old Russian-made weapons, whereas ISIS, which is America's enemy, has higher-quality American weapons. "[Kurdish forces] are literally outgunned by an ISIS that is fighting with hundreds of millions of dollars of U.S. military equipment seized from the Iraqi Army who abandoned it," Ali Khedery, a former American official in Iraq, told the New York Times.

    More: One reason that ISIS has been so successful at conquering northern Iraq is that it has a huge base of operations in Syria, where it had exploited the civil war to overtake huge swathes of Syrian territory. One reason that ISIS was so successful in Syria is that the US refused to arm moderate Syrian rebels, for fear that the weapons would fall into ISIS's hands. So that made it easier for ISIS to overpower the under-funded moderate rebels, and now ISIS has seized, in Iraq, much better versions of the weapons that we were so worried they might acquire in Syria. So now we're bombing the guns that we didn't mean to give ISIS because we didn't give guns to their enemies because then ISIS might get guns.

    It's not just ironic; it's a symbol of how disastrous the last 15 years of US Iraq policy have been, how circuitous and self-perpetuating the violence, that we are now bombing our own guns. Welcome to American grand strategy in the Middle East.
    http://www.vox.com/2014/8/8/5982501/the-us-is-now-bombing-its-own-military-equipment-in-iraq
  4. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    10 Aug '14 19:40
    The States giveth, the States taketh away.
  5. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    10 Aug '14 19:43
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    The States giveth, the States taketh away.
    The problem in Iraq is the lack of an effective state. The Americans destroyed what was there, incited sectarian violence, and walked out.

    Failed states - we already know they are the cause of chaos, because failed states were the justification for intervention in (e.g.) Afghanistan. How do you rebuild a failed state? Not with Americans, for sure.
  6. 11 Aug '14 01:37
    Originally posted by finnegan
    The problem in Iraq is the lack of an effective state. The Americans destroyed what was there, incited sectarian violence, and walked out.

    Failed states - we already know they are the cause of chaos, because failed states were the justification for intervention in (e.g.) Afghanistan. How do you rebuild a failed state? Not with Americans, for sure.
    This is why you simply kill them when they start up. This may include wiping out entire towns. That's how it works in the Middle East. It is sad but true.
  7. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    11 Aug '14 07:08
    Originally posted by finnegan
    [quote]When President Obama announced US airstrikes in Iraq, most observers understood that the US would be bombing members of ISIS. What many did not know was that, in a twist of such bitterly symbolic irony that it could only occur in the Middle East, the US would also be bombing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of American military equipment.

    Her ...[text shortened]... te] http://www.vox.com/2014/8/8/5982501/the-us-is-now-bombing-its-own-military-equipment-in-iraq
    I blame our Muslim President for moving out of Iraq before the job was completed in contradiction to the advice of the US Military Leaders.
  8. 11 Aug '14 08:05
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I blame our Muslim President for moving out of Iraq before the job was completed in contradiction to the advice of the US Military Leaders.
    hey, glenn beck, when did you escape arkham?
  9. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    12 Aug '14 16:42 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by finnegan
    Failed states - we already know they are the cause of chaos, because failed states were the justification for intervention in (e.g.) Afghanistan. How do you rebuild a failed state? Not with Americans, for sure.
    Okay, how would you suggest we re-build the failed state of Iraq?
  10. 12 Aug '14 16:43
    Originally posted by sh76
    Okay, how would you suggest we re-build the failed state of Iraq?
    How did failed states get rebuilt in the past?
  11. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    12 Aug '14 16:44
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    How did failed states get rebuilt in the past?
    Some of them did not get re-built for centuries.
  12. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    12 Aug '14 18:03
    Originally posted by sh76
    Okay, how would you suggest we re-build the failed state of Iraq?
    If you keep doing what you have done before then you will keep getting what you got before.

    I would suggest giving leadership to the United Nations and operating on a basis of cooperation instead of US nationalism and support for Israel. A lot of hard problems need airing and resolving and no other forum has the authority or the capacity for the job.

    The UN is as good as its members. Time the USA joined in.
  13. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    12 Aug '14 20:31
    Originally posted by finnegan
    If you keep doing what you have done before then you will keep getting what you got before.

    I would suggest giving leadership to the United Nations and operating on a basis of cooperation instead of US nationalism and support for Israel. A lot of hard problems need airing and resolving and no other forum has the authority or the capacity for the job.

    The UN is as good as its members. Time the USA joined in.
    What would or could the UN do about ISIS and Iraq?
  14. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    12 Aug '14 20:41
    Originally posted by sh76
    What would or could the UN do about ISIS and Iraq?
    Between 1950 and 1953 the UN took the lead in the Korean War - it is perfectly capable of taking the lead in Iraq. It is even capable of recognising and moderating the conflicting interests of different powers in the region. What it requires is the political backing necessary to do its job. What the UN can do depends on the Security Council as much as anything.
  15. 17 Aug '14 22:46
    Originally posted by finnegan
    The problem in Iraq is the lack of an effective state. The Americans destroyed what was there, incited sectarian violence, and walked out.

    Failed states - we already know they are the cause of chaos, because failed states were the justification for intervention in (e.g.) Afghanistan. How do you rebuild a failed state? Not with Americans, for sure.
    what exactly was in Iraq before the states destroyed it? A ruler who gassed his own people, attacked his neighbors on both sides of him.. Seem to remember him saying he would walk into Tehran in 2 days,, years later he was getting his ass handed to him.. ya he defiantly was good for his country and his people.... should we discuss
    his sadistic sons now?