Fighters from the terror group ISIL, which is so atrocious it was kicked out of the Al-Qaida network due to its brutality, just captured Tikrit after recently capturing Mosul. Iraq seems poised to be split into three parts, a Kurdish state in the north, an Iranian puppet in the east, and a salafist terror state in the west - in fact, you could very well argue that is already the case.

In 2007 there were less than 30 terror groups like Al-Qaida, now that number has risen to around 50. In 2007 there were 18-42.000 terror incidents, last year it was 44-105.000. Deaths from terror attacks has risen from around 7.500 in 2007 to almost 18.000 in 2013, and this doesn't even count the Syrians which has been killed by the terrorist actors, ISIL among them, in the civil war there.

Safe to say, the mission hasn't been accomplished and the war on terror has been going badly lately, if not outright lost.

So, any good ideas..?

Views: 1243

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Erock, I just remembered what the publisher of a weekly newspaper told me years ago, moments after I had opined on First Amendment rights:

Freedom of the press belongs to people who own presses.

I had said something about the Newspaper Protection Act, which was being criticized by political activists because it allowed federal attorneys-general to give owners who cooperated with the government the economic advantages of joint operations, such as the actual printing.

During the war in Viet Nam, the government objected to what some newspapers were telling readers about the war. Phoenix had two newspapers and they were benefiting from the joint operations the anti-monopoly laws would have banned.

...this is the one country with a free press, adversarial political parties each eager to get the dirt on the other....the GOP won't let go of Benghazi or Obamacare

At best U is ignorant of politics. At worst he is unable to stop his devil's advocacy.

The press: too few own too many presses and the 1960s-era Newspaper Preservation Act rewards cooperative publishers by allowing more economical joint operations.

The parties: both accept bribes and extort donations from the same people/companies.

The GOP: which part of the bitterly-divided GOP?

The press: too few own too many presses and the 1960s-era Newspaper Preservation Act rewards cooperative publishers by allowing more economical joint operations.

So, you're stuck in the age of print journalism? Most people get their news off the net anymore, or to a lesser extent TV. The newspapers were far more diverse in their points of view than the TV networks and one was often forced to be exposed to contrary and conflicting points of view, but the net is the Wild West. The tendency in both TV and more especially the net is for people to limit themselves to sources that feed their particular prejudices. Hence, we end up with people who think the way things are is a lot less complicated and complex than it actually is. This just reinforces conspiratorial thinking.

The parties: both accept bribes and extort donations from the same people/companies.

Can you blame the Democrats for taking whatever money they can get? or should they let the Republicans get all the money? I don't think any corporation expects the Dems to line up with the GOP to any great extent.

The GOP: which part of the bitterly-divided GOP?

If they're all that divided, then you're describing a party that isn't a factor.

U, your ignorance is showing.

Sorry,  I didn't wade through all of that.  I did however notice how you carefully omitted your linking to a right-wing evangelical site as "evidence".  Truly humorous.

To set your mind at ease, I have never engaged in a "debate" here, with you or with anyone else.  Productive debate requires shared epistemological frameworks.  I'm clearly not an atheist, and you're clearly not a Christian or a scientist, so productive debate isn't possible.  All that's possible is a sharing of perspectives.  I can comment on Christianity or science from the perspective of a member of those communities, and share when your comments don't accurately reflect what each of those communities believe or practice, but that's about it. 

In this case, though, I think a number of people were just trying to give you personal feedback.  Keep it shorter, and engage with more quality, less quantity, and with much less personal stuff (either denigrating others or extolling your own virtues).   Avoid posts like this one where "a legend in your own mind" does seem apropos.

Feedback from others is a gift, but it is not one that you have to accept.

Feedback functions best when its subject assumes its truth long enough to evaluate it and then accepts or rejects it partly or wholly.

Bob, I've seen you only ignore or deny.


So, if someone (maybe a mod) calls someone a "liar"...?

"Personal" feedback that amounts to personal attack or defamation is not "a gift", Bob. It's against site policy.

It may not be defamation, but how can it not be a personal attack. Shall we put it to the other mods?

So, your "defense" is a tu quoque fallacy ("You do it, too, nyah nyah")? I'm not a mod, whose job it should be to be exemplary, not mimic the bad behavior of those one is moderating. 

Done? We'll see. Typically you seem helpless to let someone you're in a contentious discussion with have the last word.  At least, that's the way it's worked with me.

Maybe it's the old Libertarian in me, but why doesn't the US reset the border back to the 50 States and stop getting involved in the affairs of foreign countries?  The only reason we get into these messes is to protect "American interests"...meaning the far reaching tentacles of American Capitalism around the world.

Hell, if we want to invade a foreign country I would opine that Mexico makes a more logical choice than Iraq.  Send an 'expeditionary force' South of the Border and kill these bastard pumping poison into the US and being paid off with guns and ammo. 


© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service