- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
So, A Few Questions About ISIS(L)
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:12 am
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:12 am
Request: As hard as it may be for some, I would like for this thread to be as close to an adult conversation as possible for the PT Board.
1. When Obama says that they want to organize Arab nations to help fight ISIS or ISIL, what exactly does he mean and what are the chances that the US can successfully pull this off?
2. When Obama speaks of organizing these nations, which I can only assume would also include some European nations as well like England, is he essentially stating that he wants to form a coalition, like Bush attempted to do with Iraq?
3. What is the acceptable number of partners for this coalition (it seems that Bush was blasted for never having enough in his "Coalition of the Willing...or whatever stupid name they gave it)?
4. What are the chances of a major attack by ISIS on US Soil (Think 9/11)?
5. What are the chances of multiple smaller attacks by ISIS on US Soil (Think car bombs)?
6. Finally, if either (4) or (5) above happen, what should the US response be and what will it be?
1. When Obama says that they want to organize Arab nations to help fight ISIS or ISIL, what exactly does he mean and what are the chances that the US can successfully pull this off?
2. When Obama speaks of organizing these nations, which I can only assume would also include some European nations as well like England, is he essentially stating that he wants to form a coalition, like Bush attempted to do with Iraq?
3. What is the acceptable number of partners for this coalition (it seems that Bush was blasted for never having enough in his "Coalition of the Willing...or whatever stupid name they gave it)?
4. What are the chances of a major attack by ISIS on US Soil (Think 9/11)?
5. What are the chances of multiple smaller attacks by ISIS on US Soil (Think car bombs)?
6. Finally, if either (4) or (5) above happen, what should the US response be and what will it be?
7
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:15 am to DeltaDoc
1. I think Obama is trying to tap into the "it's better for fellow Muslims to kill this extreme faction than for the Crusading Western powers to do it, because if the Crusading Western powers do it we've seen what happens. It makes for more terrorists b/c of the resentment.
2. I guess - sure.
3. Don't think it really matters but would be nice to get some Muslim nations involved.
4. 0
5. 10% in USA, 50% in Europe
6. Same as it has been to the beheadings.
2. I guess - sure.
3. Don't think it really matters but would be nice to get some Muslim nations involved.
4. 0
5. 10% in USA, 50% in Europe
6. Same as it has been to the beheadings.
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:17 am to DeltaDoc
quote:
1. When Obama says that they want to organize Arab nations to help fight ISIS or ISIL, what exactly does he mean and what are the chances that the US can successfully pull this off?
I would say extremely low.
quote:
2. When Obama speaks of organizing these nations, which I can only assume would also include some European nations as well like England, is he essentially stating that he wants to form a coalition, like Bush attempted to do with Iraq?
Yes. A coalition of the willing.
quote:
3. What is the acceptable number of partners for this coalition (it seems that Bush was blasted for never having enough in his "Coalition of the Willing...or whatever stupid name they gave it)?
I guess more than 1?
quote:
4. What are the chances of a major attack by ISIS on US Soil (Think 9/11)?
Small
quote:
5. What are the chances of multiple smaller attacks by ISIS on US Soil (Think car bombs)?
Moderate although Britain will get hit first
quote:
6. Finally, if either (4) or (5) above happen, what should the US response be and what will it be?
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:17 am to DeltaDoc
Iran is USAs best ally to fight ISIS.
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:18 am to Ghazi
quote:
Iran is USAs best ally to fight ISIS
ISIS would love for sunnis to see it this way
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:19 am to SirWinston
quote:
1. I think Obama is trying to tap into the "it's better for fellow Muslims to kill this extreme faction than for the Crusading Western powers to do it, because if the Crusading Western powers do it we've seen what happens. It makes for more terrorists b/c of the resentment.
Oh, I agree. My concern (and I admittedly don't know the answer otherwise), is becoming strange bed fellows with what is otherwise an enemy, like Iran and Syria.
So, that leaves us with the unenviable choice of going at it alone, or only with the help of other non-arab countries, or going at it with what are otherwise our enemies. It is hard to prevent Iran from getting nukes when you are fighting shoulder to shoulder with them against this group.
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:19 am to SirWinston
The middle eastern nations won't touch this and you can take that to the bank. They've seen what's gone on with the whole arab spring deal and know they are just one pissed off mob away from becoming either dead or common folk again.
I absolutely agree with the premise that this is a muslim problem and can only be fixed by muslims but the sad fact is they won't touch it.
I absolutely agree with the premise that this is a muslim problem and can only be fixed by muslims but the sad fact is they won't touch it.
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:23 am to jamboybarry
Iran has a genuine disdain for ISIS and will destroy it with or without US assistance. Americans are more politically motivated considering ISIS serves their agenda in Syria but conflicted with it in Iraq after threat to Kurdish oil
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:25 am to Ghazi
quote:I would like to think that the US's agenda has changed, since it is painfully obvious that all Muslim Nations NEED dictators to control the savages.
Iran has a genuine disdain for ISIS and will destroy it with or without US assistance. Americans are more politically motivated considering ISIS serves their agenda in Syria but conflicted with it in Iraq after threat to Kurdish oil
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:25 am to DeltaDoc
The best thing the US can do is ignore ISIS and let the powers in the region deal with them, make it clear that it is their problem and they have to deal with it. The chances of them pulling off a major event in the US is slim because they do not want to. Going on youtube and claiming you want to do something is very different than actually carrying it out. The US response would and should be total destruction of the group and they are keenly aware of this. People need to stop taking recruiting and fundraising rhetoric so seriously. If they truly wanted to set of a car bomb in the US they would have already done so, it aint that difficult.
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:26 am to cave canem
Congrats on contradicting your own post. Well done!
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:26 am to Cincinnati Bowtie
Its painfully obvious Western imperialism has contributed to the development of brutal terrorism that doesnt reflect the views of the average person in the ME.
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:27 am to Ghazi
quote:
Iran has a genuine disdain for ISIS and will destroy it with or without US assistance. Americans are more politically motivated considering ISIS serves their agenda in Syria but conflicted with it in Iraq after threat to Kurdish oil
this double standard and lack of actual policy here has made the situation worse
how can we support the "rebels" in syria, but oppose the same "terrorists" in Iraq
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:27 am to Cincinnati Bowtie
quote:
I would like to think that the US's agenda has changed, since it is painfully obvious that all Muslim Nations NEED dictators to control the savages.
It's really true. These people can literally only flourish with their male dominated oppressive culture. They just take to it somehow and have this weird oil/water thing with cultured, liberal lifestyles.
I used to think that secularization was the key - but these dumb fricks have access to Paris and London and the wealth to enjoy a live that less than .05% of the earth has access to and they VOLUNTARILY leave to go behead frickers in the desert.
Islam is just horrible.
This post was edited on 9/3/14 at 8:28 am
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:28 am to cave canem
I would hope ISIS is an American problem considering theyre now beheading Americans, are not quiet about their desire to kill americans, and well... USA created this mess with a decade of lousy policies in iraq
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:29 am to SirWinston
Iran had a democratically elected govt in the 50s until the CIA/Britain imposed a dictatorial regime... Its not that the Me needs dictators, its that thats what serves imperialist agenda.. (Shah/SAddam/monarchies)
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:31 am to Ghazi
Yeah that was something. Too bad that Muslims have somehow DEVOLVED over the past 50 or 60 years.
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:31 am to bamarep
quote:
Congrats on contradicting your own post. Well done!
Would you point out the contradiction?
Posted on 9/3/14 at 8:33 am to Ghazi
If an Imperialist Agenda means Terrorists held in check by oppressive regimes, count me as in favor of the Imperialist Agenda.
Posted on 9/3/14 at 9:41 am to cave canem
quote:
Congrats on contradicting your own post. Well done!
Would you point out the contradiction?
Still waiting
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News