Real World Event Discussions

So, when I hear Iraq is being taken over by I.S.I.S. ...

POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Sunday, March 8, 2026 16:42
VIEWED: 15997
PAGE 5 of 15

THGRRI

Sunday, June 15, 2014 9:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
Please do not beat me with a big stick but……..

They did the same thing to Bush as he golfed during both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. It too goes with the job.

si shen

One GINORMOUS difference... Bush stopped playing golf, while Obama has played more golf than any President - ever.

And he's teeing it up again this weekend. Again.

You know I think I remember that? Still, I felt the pressure he was under demanded a few rounds of golf. I also liked his father and what better advisor, so being out there with him would be a good thing.

si shen

SIGNYM

Sunday, June 15, 2014 11:34 PM

Quote:
I have a small forum grudge against smart people who have wonky ideas.

Tant pis

Quote:
I did see you qualify your idea. I thought that was a hedge though, that over under [???] you believed it more than not. I know what we did in Afghanistan. I believe we'll go to some very extreme lengths to foil Russia. But all this [just] to depose Maliki? Wild idea.

Maliki isn't the sum total of the Iraq government. There is the Parliament, the army, the judiciary which are dominated by Shias. By sending in a new (Sunni) army, Saudi Arabia gets a whole new do-over. It makes sense from the Saudi POV. And all of those Saudi and Qatari arms shipments to al Qaida in Libya and al Qaida in Syria are real, consequential events. Did ISIS (funded and armed by Saudi Arabia and Qatar) wind up in Iraq on purpose, or was this accidental? This is an idea that bears further observation.

Just a comment here:

The USA government is a master of creating set-pieces, and the people are masters of being fooled. I thought the Gulf of Tonkin incident smelled fishy, even back then. The first invasion of Iraq... another set-piece. The second invasion of Iraq... clearly another set-piece: the ridiculous assertions, the moving goalposts, the ever-increasing demands (by the west), the whipping up of the population into a frenzy of fear. Panama- according to that set-piece, Noriega was a major drug runner. Well, Noriega was deposed, and the flow of drugs... from Colombia, where they'd always been coming from... never slowed down. So much for that! Grenada- another set-piece. Libya- yet another set piece, this one about the Arab Spring and how Qaddafi was brutally killing freedom-loving people and small children. It was all fake. Ukraine- yet another set-piece about how those horrible Russians are attempting a land-grab.

People don't seem to realize that our government .. yours too, and Russia, and China... think nothing of making shit up whole cloth. In response to the first thought that comes to mind for most people ...But... but.. they wouldn't DO that! the answer is... Oh yes they will. They already have.

It never fails- pure fiction is being pushed and swallowed as "credible ideas". It seems that people would rather swallow familiar poison than be free thinkers. And when they hear an idea that doesn't fit in with the official narrative, they call it "wonky" and dismiss it.

THGRRI

Monday, June 16, 2014 12:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
I have a small forum grudge against smart people who have wonky ideas.
Tant pis

Quote:
I did see you qualify your idea. I thought that was a hedge though, that over under [???] you believed it more than not. I know what we did in Afghanistan. I believe we'll go to some very extreme lengths to foil Russia. But all this [just] to depose Maliki? Wild idea.
Maliki isn't the sum total of the Iraq government. There is the Parliament, the army, the judiciary which are dominated by Shias. By sending in a new (Sunni) army, Saudi Arabia gets a whole new do-over. It makes sense from the Saudi POV. And all of those Saudi and Qatari arms shipments to al Qaida in Libya and al Qaida in Syria are real, consequential events. Did ISIS (funded and armed by Saudi Arabia and Qatar) wind up in Iraq on purpose, or was this accidental? This is an idea that bears further observation.

Just a comment here:

The USA government is a master of creating set-pieces, and the people are masters of being fooled. I thought the Gulf of Tonkin incident smelled fishy, even back then. The first invasion of Iraq... another set-piece. The second invasion of Iraq... clearly another set-piece: the ridiculous assertions, the moving goalposts, the ever-increasing demands (by the west), the whipping up of the population into a frenzy of fear. Panama- according to that set-piece, Noriega was a major drug runner. Well, Noriega was deposed, and the flow of drugs... from Colombia, where they'd always been coming from... never slowed down. So much for that! Grenada- another set-piece. Libya- yet another set piece, this one about the Arab Spring and how Qaddafi was brutally killing freedom-loving people and small children. It was all fake. Ukraine- yet another set-piece about how those horrible Russians are attempting a land-grab.

People don't seem to realize that our government .. yours too, and Russia, and China... think nothing of making shit up whole cloth. In response to the first thought that comes to mind for most people ...But... but.. they wouldn't DO that! the answer is... Oh yes they will. They already have.

It never fails- pure fiction is being pushed and swallowed as "credible ideas". It seems that people would rather swallow familiar poison than be free thinkers. And when they hear an idea that doesn't fit in with the official narrative, they call it "wonky" and dismiss it.

A. What are you suggesting signym Saudi Arabia is behind this? That is what it looks like.

Quote:

By sending in a new (Sunni) army, Saudi Arabia gets a whole new do-over. It makes sense from the Saudi POV.

B. You suggest here Saudi and Qatari arms shipments are purposely being given to Al Qaeda in Libya and Syria. I would like some proof of that please. Or is this just conjecture.

Quote:

And all of those Saudi and Qatari arms shipments to al Qaeda in Libya and al Qaeda in Syria are real, consequential events.

C. You seem to be implying something, what? Reading you’re other posts with this one I know what it is but I would like to hear it from you.

Quote:

Did ISIS (funded and armed by Saudi Arabia and Qatar) wind up in Iraq on purpose, or was this accidental? This is an idea that bears further observation.

D. Please explain what it is you are saying and what the Gulf of Tonkin has to do with any of this.

Quote:

The USA government is a master of creating set-pieces, and the people are masters of being fooled. I thought the Gulf of Tonkin incident smelled fishy, even back then.

E. What again does this have to do with what is going on in Iraq?

Quote:

Panama- according to that set-piece, Noriega was a major drug runner.

F. You are pulling incidents now from everywhere with no context and interjecting them into a discussion about Iraq and terrorists.

Quote:

Panama- accor

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

SIGNYM

Monday, June 16, 2014 1:39 AM

Quote:
A. What are you suggesting Saudi Arabia is behind this? That is what it looks like.

What I'm suggesting is that Saudi Arabia might be partially behind this, or at least reacting postively. Saudi Arabia does have regional ambitions, yes.

Quote:
B. You suggest here Saudi and Qatari arms shipments are purposely being given to Al Qaeda in Libya and Syria. I would like some proof of that please. Or is this just conjecture.

I posted link to the articles when I first brought this up several months ago, as the other posters here should remember. I just posted more links yesterday, in this very thread, right under the picture of Osama bin Laden fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. I'm not going to keep posting links ad infinitum. Look it up yourself.

Quote:
C. You seem to be implying something, what? Reading you’re other posts with this one I know what it is but I would like to hear it from you.

What I'm saying is that Qatar and Saudi Arabia shipped weapons... I don't mean a few AK-47s here and there, but literally dozens of plane loads and tons of arms shipped on boats. That's what I'm saying.

As far as the remainder of my post, where I reference the whoppers that various administrations foisted on people ... I thought my point was rather clear- don't accept ideas just because they're commonly-held and found in mainstream media, and don't dismiss them because they're out of the mainstream. Just try and fit ideas to facts.

In other words, I'm making the same point that you are

Quote:
In stories, newspapers, and the spoken word, people all over the world are trying to convince you to think as they do. They are bombarding you with facts and figures, opinions and projections. It is up to you to create order within this chaos and find the patterns that will help you to understand what is true, what could be true, and what is outright false.

The difference between you and me is that I reference facts while you like to get personal.

THGRRI

Monday, June 16, 2014 2:18 AM

BEIRUT, Lebanon — "The fevered struggle between Saudi Arabia and Iran for regional dominance has for years aggravated nearly every conflict across the Middle East as the two nations armed, funded and encouraged each other’s adversaries". I agree with this. I am not familiar with your link so here is mine.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/07/world/middleeast/as-iran-gains-influ
ence-

What I do not agree with is your assertions about what is being done, by who and why. You come off as making things up to suit your purpose.

You say Qatar and Saudi Arabia shipped weapons into Syria. Yes, they have and still are. It is what you imply about them giving them to Al Qaeda at our behest that I contest. You posted a comment about Al Maliki that was dead on. Then you also suggested this was why we may behind the terrorists going into Iraq, and that is what disillusions me. When you know you are being outrageous you include the word “maybe”. You always go a thought to far and betray yourself as biased.

Quote:

As far as the remainder of my post, the own where I reference the whoppers that various administrations foisted on people

I could post facts and then take them out of context as well. I choose not to do so. You do it all the time. I could go back through your old posts and show how you do this constantly. I choose not to. I will just use the burning of the Royal Chinese Fleet as an example and leave it at that. All you had to do was come back and say bad example, but instead you and your friend doubled down.

As I said. I think you are a very sharp person. Perhaps smarter or even much smarter than I am. It is your preconceived opinions that distorts your truths and leaves you wide open to criticism.

si shen

1KIKI

Monday, June 16, 2014 3:02 AM

The US has a repeated and well-known history of faking reasons to get into undeclared wars it was already determined to engage in. I'm not sure how those historical facts are not relevant to this particular situation. Unless you can show why THIS TIME it's different, having done it multiple times in the past, it must be a consideration that it's doing it now.

OONJERAH - We are too dumb to live and smart enough to wipe ourselves out.

"You, who live in any kind of comfort or convenience, do not know how these people can survive these things, do you? They will endure because there is no immediate escape from endurance. Some will die, the rest must live."

THGRRI

Monday, June 16, 2014 3:05 AM

Exactly what you always do. Talk to the hand I'm not interested in debating nonsense with you.

“1kiki, you magnificent bastard! I read your book! ”

si shen

SIGNYM

Monday, June 16, 2014 7:23 PM

Quote:
is that you seem to totally dismiss that ISIS could be just what it looks like it is, that the only way to explain them is to look for a hidden agenda, or a US agenda, that they can't just be what there have been for thousands of years in the Middle East - sectarian violence.

It could be just what it appears to be. How many times do I have to repeat that? Are you unused to people tossing out ideas for discussion without necessarily being 100% for them? That would be unusual for this forum- most people here are 100% behind whatever they post. But that's not the case in this thread. So do you suppose you could get off the topic of how I "seem" to you, and perhaps on to the topic of how we could demonstrate this one way or another?

Whatever it is we're looking at, it has to be big enough not to hide- we can't depend on WILKILEAKS to cough up secret communiques for us!

So I came up with two possible ideas... that if ISIS doesn't attack Israel or Saudi Arabia itself- then it is still following the underlying rules of al Qaida. Another potential piece of evidence is how the USA responds... if our government does not engage in robust pushback, and/or does not ask Iran for help... then perhaps this is another piece of evidence that ISIS is not entirely unwelcome.

But whatever ISIS is, it got a big boost directly from Saudi Arabia, and a boost from the USA either directly (assistance with shipping arms from Libya to Syria) or indirectly in the form of tacit approval. Those tons of weapons propelled ISIS into much greater effectiveness than they would have had otherwise. They could be like the mujahideen in Afghanistan, biting the hands that fed them

JONGSSTRAW

Monday, June 16, 2014 8:18 PM

Muslims killing Muslims ... does it get any better than this? And with thousands of them being summarily machine-gunned, and hundreds of 'em getting their heads chopped off, it's almost as good as the years of Syrian carnage or the season 4 finale of Game Of Thrones. Can't wait for the Iranians to start killing the Sunni ISIS so we'll at least have a little balance to the glorious spectacle.

Hey Obama, good plan ... Thanks! But don't you dare go all Nobel Prize humanitarian mushy now and interfere with this. Stay on the golf course.

THGRRI

Monday, June 16, 2014 10:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

But whatever ISIS is, it got a big boost directly from Saudi Arabia, and a boost from the USA either directly (assistance with shipping arms from Libya to Syria) or indirectly in the form of tacit approval. Those tons of weapons propelled ISIS into much greater effectiveness than they would have had otherwise. They could be like the mujahideen in Afghanistan, biting the hands that fed them

To think that ISIS is sanctioned by the United States is nuts plain and simple. Don’t give me this I said maybe bullshit. They are an offshoot of Al Qaeda. An offshoot of the worst kind. Why then not go right after them? Because they are aligned with the Sunnis in the area who have been mistreated by the Maliki government. If we just start killing them it will create more enemies for us. We need to think long term. What Obama is saying to Malaki is too fix this. Get the Sunni’s, Shiites and Kurds together and make a more representative government. We wish to help but you must fix what started this in the first place or going after them will do little more than start a civil war. (We may be stuck with that)

You in your ultimate wisdom suggest Obama is using this to somehow get the Malaki government to do his bidding. Maybe? Again, asinine because you imply that, that bidding is different from what Obama speaks of. Again, he wants the Malaki government to bring the Sunni’s into discussions and give them more representation. Your suggesting anything else is nuts.

You say we are supplying ISIS with weapons. (either directly or indirectly) Haven’t you heard all the criticisms of Obama holding back too much with Syria? Haven’t you heard the press conferences where he suggests he is doing so because he can’t guarantee the weapons won’t fall into the wrong hands? This is an incredibly hard situation to navigate. What are you reading that gives you such a distorted reality? Or are you not reading but just browsing for cut and paste ideas that fit your narrative?

Something else to consider. Going after ISIS without discrimination and not confronting Maliki will be seen by the Sunni as an attack against all Sunni. They will see it as us taking the side of the Shiites, in what is happening currently all around the Middle East; a Sunni, Shiites war. Being perceived by either side as picking a side would be disastrous.

You need to look up at the bigger picture signym or you will miss what is really going on. Again what you speak of is maybe’s, what if’s, and could be’s. Your focus is on a blade of grass in a field of wheat. The rest comes from your imagination.

si shen