IMO they will attack the US in a major way in the coming months' date=' I actually wouldn't be shocked any day to see that there had been an attack.[/quote']

I agree! Chaney predicted within 10 years, if it takes them 10 years we would be lucky. Sadly I too see it coming soon.

It is and they just want the chance to kill as many Americans as possible.

 

If what you're saying is true, sending troops seems like the dumbest idea.

 

 

So far, we have inadvertently supplied them weapons, ammunition and equipment. Now you wish to give them a powerful recruiting tool. They'd be emboldened to recruit more heavily with our presence, as you stated above and our military would potentially face costs much like we saw with Iraq an Afghanistan. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are't there more recorded deaths in Iraq alone than what happened on 9/11?

 

If stopping another 9/11 is your stated goal, why are you so eager to give them what they want?

 

There are other ways to destroy them. And I'd venture to say it would be much easier if we stopped giving them :poop:

Question: Why does ISIS want us to actively engage them in war?

 

Is it a good recruiting technique?

It's only a good recruiting technique if potential recruits perceive the war as being won by ISIS. ISIS is at war and they are currently winning that war. Recruiting is easy for them at this time.

What if we asked Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and others to stop funding ISIS? Economic sanctions are often used on Iran and other countries right? So can we start asking some of our allies to stop funding them?

Have our actions in Iraq (both when we helped Saddam against Iran and when we went to war with them) furthered human rights? Have they in Afghanistan? Libya? Egypt?

 

One of my favorite quotes:

 

"What do [nations] lack to be free? What? The very desire to be so. Do not ask me to analyze this sublime desire, it must be felt… One must give up on making this comprehensible to mediocre souls who have never felt it."

– Alexis de Tocqueville

 

I really do believe that no matter how hard you try to make a country "free," you cannot until the people of that country have a burning desire. Iraq's people are deserting their country.

 

I want the sadistic, murderous dictators and tyrants wiped off the face of the earth. I really do. But our interventionist policies have arguably caused more instability in the middle east, which prolongs our stay. With that means we spend more of our money (which we clearly don't have) on a perpetual, never-ending fight.

 

My main opposition to unnecessary war are the costs. Both in money, lives and resources on our side, but also on the other.

 

 

 

Do you think most Iraqis would agree or disagree that there was more stability and "betterment" during the years of Saddam or what they currently see?

 

What about Libya? What about Egypt? I would venture to say most say they are worse off. I have a feeling a lot of them blame us, and then become against us.

 

If Assad was taken out, like the US was trying to a year ago, would Syria's people be better off? After all, I think it's clear that ISIS would have taken that country over if we had taken Assad out.

 

These are good points and questions you make. I can't answer all due to time constraints, and maybe no one can answer some of them definitively, but quickly one I would respond to: are most Iraqi's better off?.....I would guess the answer is unclear because the dissidents and minorities were killed off or fled. The others...if part of the ruling party...had little to worry about. And, there is no doubt an autocracy is the simplest and most effective form of government by definition. On the other hand, many worked for the betterment of a few. That is not a human condition the educated will accept for a long period of time. But, maybe they didn't have to work real hard to receive basic needs benefits, and they had no ambition for greater?? I don't really know. It is hard for me to believe a country is a nice place to live when other countries are full of their refugees.

IMO they will attack the US in a major way in the coming months' date=' I actually wouldn't be shocked any day to see that there had been an attack.[/quote']

 

With their Air Force or Navy?

With their Air Force or Navy?

 

I forgot about the huge Air Force/Navy Al-Qaida had. Don't think for a minute that if ISIS has the means to make a dirty bomb that they would not use it.

 

Then what do we do? Do we use are nuclear arsenal? Do we send ground troops? Or do we stop them now before they are capable?

I forgot about the huge Air Force/Navy Al-Qaida had. Don't think for a minute that if ISIS has the means to make a dirty bomb that they would not use it.

 

Then what do we do? Do we use are nuclear arsenal? Do we send ground troops? Or do we stop them now before they are capable?

 

Where do we use our nuclear arsenal? On what location?

With their Air Force or Navy?

Did al-Qaeda need an air force or navy? Somewhere there are 11 missing jumbo jets just waiting for flight plans and a load of hostages and uranium. If just one of them finds it way over a population center, our military will have no options that will spare hundreds, if not thousands, of American lives.

Did al-Qaeda need an air force or navy? Somewhere there are 11 missing jumbo jets just waiting for flight plans and a load of hostages and uranium. If just one of them finds it way over a population center' date=' our military will have no options that will spare hundreds, if not thousands, of American lives.[/quote']

 

Yes and after that any unknown plane in the sky we be blown to pieces. Al Q got one sucker punch in and the US had intel they just didn't act on it.

 

You all act like ISIS is gonna have a full scale 1980 Red Dawn invasion.

 

With their Air Force or Navy?

 

Probably with a couple of backpacks left sitting in a Walmart, mall or subway station.

 

If what you're saying is true, sending troops seems like the dumbest idea.

 

So far, we have inadvertently supplied them weapons, ammunition and equipment. Now you wish to give them a powerful recruiting tool. They'd be emboldened to recruit more heavily with our presence, as you stated above and our military would potentially face costs much like we saw with Iraq an Afghanistan. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are't there more recorded deaths in Iraq alone than what happened on 9/11?

 

If stopping another 9/11 is your stated goal, why are you so eager to give them what they want?

 

There are other ways to destroy them. And I'd venture to say it would be much easier if we stopped giving them :poop:

Where did I say any of the stuff you are attributing to me in this thread?

 

You all act like ISIS is gonna have a full scale 1980 Red Dawn invasion.

 

No one has said anything close to that... I think we all expect more sucker punches being thrown at our country.

 

If you want to put your head in the sand and ignore that they have the same capability as Alqueda that's fine.

No one has said anything close to that... I think we all expect more sucker punches being thrown at our country. If you want to put your head in the sand and ignore that they have the same capability as Alqueda that's fine.

 

I probably have more weaponry in my house than most of the site. But I'm not sitting around waiting for ISIS to show up.

 

Little attacks have always happened well before ISIS.