Aug 6, 2015 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-mid...ource=twitter&ns_linkname=news_centralcentral A suicide bomb attack on a mosque in Saudi Arabia has left 15 people dead. A senior Saudi official told the BBC the bombing targeted a mosque used by security forces in Abha, close to the Yemeni border.
Aug 6, 2015 Something more needs to be done about ISIS, I'm sick of seeing s--- like this in the news.
Aug 6, 2015 Unfortunately unless the U.S. or another military super power takes the initiative & puts boots on the ground, ISIS is going to be around for a while.
Aug 6, 2015 I agree with you 100%. The U.S. has adopted an isolationist approach to their foreign policy, so we most likely won't put any boots on the ground. I haven't heard anything about any European superpowers taking more initiative. I believe a combined ground offensive by U.S. and Kurdish forces would be very effective.
Aug 6, 2015 Yeah, I really can't blame us for not wanting to put boots on the ground again. We always seem to make the situation worse anyway. Fact of the matter is, the Iraqi Security Force along with the Kurds, Sunni's etc. out number ISIS. Not to mention all the weaponry & training the U.S. gives the Iraq Security Force (& the constant air support we provide with air strike/intelligence) there's no reason why they can't be defeated without US boots on the ground.
Aug 6, 2015 I think if we gave the Kurds more funding and weapons, they'd be able to clean shop easily. They are the only ones who have really been taking the fight to ISIS. The Iraqi forces are a joke, plain and simple. They bailed on offensives how many times? 2? 3? Some of those were when they were attempting to retake Mosul if I'm not mistaken. As far as sunni opposition goes, the Saudis, Egyptians, the Turks, and the Syrain Army have conducted airstrikes to try and cripple ISIS, but that isn't working. The Saudis, Egyptians, and Turks are hesitant to put boots on the ground because that'll start an even bigger Sunni vs Shiite conflict in the Middle East. The Syrain Army has its hands full with the Syrian Civil War, so they can't be much help. The best time for the U.S. to have put boots on the ground would have been when ISIS was smaller and in its infancy. For the longest time we sat on the sidelines during WW2, and look at what the Nazi's accomplished. When the Nazi's were defeated, Patton wanted to march on to Moscow, because he knew the Russians would be a problem. Look at what happened during the decades that followed. During the first Gulf War, we were supposed to march all the way to Sadaam's palace and remove him from power, but we never did. If we had done that, the Iraq war in the early 2000s wouldn't have started. History shows that time after time, unless a problem is stopped in the beginning, it grows into an even bigger problem that requires more boots on the ground than when we should've taken care of it.
Aug 6, 2015 Arming militia's never works though. The only time the United States has armed a militia/rebel group & they've been able to successfully defeat the opposition is when we armed/trained the Afghan Mujahideen who successfully fought off the soviets & who did they later become to be? The Taliban. Also im not so sure the WW2 comparison is so accurate considering the United States was in a completely different situation in the 30's (The Great Depression) than it is currently. Anyways though, the biggest mistake we made I think was over throwing Sadam in 2003. Sadam may have been a bad person but he ruled that region with an iron fist & kept all the more radical Islamic groups in check. Over throwing him just turned the Middle East into a frenzy.
Aug 6, 2015 The Kurds are different though. They are a persecuted minority who for decades have been asking for a separate kurdish country and are a peaceful group of people. They are only fighting to defend themselves. Arming them wouldn't end badly for us. Only way it would is if our weapon shipments to them ended up in the wrong hands. The WW2 comparison is accurate. Yeah, America was different then, but that doesn't mean the comparison is inaccurate. The Nazis were a growing international problem that we did nothing about until it was completely out of hand. ISIS is a growing international problem we have done almost nothing about, and each day they are getting worse and worse. You do have a point about Sadaam ruling with an iron fist, but overthrowing him did not singlehandedly cause the frenzy in the middle east that we see today.
Aug 6, 2015 It would've happened even if Saddam wasn't overthrown, he was sectarian and favored Sunni muslims while oppressing Kurds, Shia and any other minority.
Aug 6, 2015 I just don't like the idea of continuing to throw more weapons in the Middle East. We've tried that for what? 20-30 years now? We armed Sadam's Ba'thist regime in the 80's to fight off the Iranians then spent the 90's helping Kuwait fight off that same Ba'thist regime we armed in the 80's with a coalition of other nations. Now we're fighting the same personnel left over from the Ba'thist regime which have now renamed themselves as ISIS. Was the 2003 invasion of Iraq the only reason ISIS became as powerful as it is now? No. But ISIS directly spawned from the overthrowing of Sadam's regime, that's pretty much fact. Also, the reason the U.S. Stayed out of WW2 as long as they did is because of the troubles that were occurring at home. The United States economically was abysmal, getting involved in a gigantic war that was taking place all the way across the Atlantic just didn't seem like a good idea. It wasn't until Japan attacked Pearl Harbor & essentially forced us to join the war that we got involved. The reason we're reluctant to put boots back on the ground now is because we've had boots on the ground in the Middle East for 10+ years. We fight off a rebel force, another will just spawn up & attempt to take control once the U.S. withdraws again. Soldiers can't be stationed there forever, there comes a point where the people have to fight for their own home land. Also, let's get one thing clear, as bad as ISIS is, they're no Nazi regime. They don't have the strength, man power, technology, etc. That's why I think the comparison is off base as well. There's no doubt he oppressed Kurds, Shia & other minorities & he likely would have been over thrown eventually but it wouldn't have happened at such a fast pace. United States over threw Sadam's regime in months & really had no set plan of what to do with the country after which allowed insurgencies to step up. Like I said, as bad as Sadam was he created a sense of stability in the region, removing him as quickly as the U.S. did wasn't a good idea.
Aug 6, 2015 I understand that our past efforts to arm rebellions have backfired, but it's the Kurds. It doesn't make sense to say that a peaceful and persecuted minority shouldn't be given the necessary tools to defend themselves just because other situations have gone south. The Kurds have been apart of a genocide for decades now. They were gassed by Sadaam, and they're being gassed by Asaad. Now ISIS is killing their men, raping their women and young girls and using them as sex slaves, and kidnapping their boys and forcing them to adopt radical Islam and fight with ISIS. Just recently Turkey has began taking Kurdish fighters as prisoners for no justifiable reason. On top of that, Turkey has also started to conduct airstrikes on the Kurds, limiting their manpower and crippling their resources. So now, the Kurds have to defend themselves from the Turkish government, along with ISIS. I know you are thinking "Oh, but 10 years from now they will turn on us". No, they will not. Kurds are a minority of moderate Sunni Muslims, with a smaller portion being Yazidis. They are not radicals, and they have enough problems to deal with without trying to pick a fight with us. Also, I NEVER said that ISIS was even close to the Nazis. I used the Nazis as a comparison because like ISIS, the Nazis were a international problem. They too, like ISIS, committed genocide against several groups. Also, ISIS spawned from our horrible management of the aftermath of Sadaam's overthrowing. The Nazis and Hitler's rise to power spawned from our (along with Britain and France's) poor decisions at the Paris Peace conference. I understand that the Nazis were much much worse, but the situation of handling them is the same. In regards to Sadaam being overthrown, overthrowing him was not the problem. he needed to be removed from power. He was gassing his own people, committing public executions, and throwing people in industrial metal recycling machines with the help of his sons. So no, overthrowing him was not a bad move. It was how we handled things afterward that allowed for chaos to grow in Iraq.
Aug 6, 2015 Temporarily, yes. This was bound to happen and would happen either way. The oppressed minorities would rather have ISIS in the region rather than being oppressed, killed and silenced. Why does that matter? The faster the better. Better to get it over with. Nope, ISIS has been here since 1999 or so. USA might've fuelled the rise of the group, but they didn't spawn them.
Aug 6, 2015 My bad, spawned was a bad term to use. I meant that our horrible management of post-sadaam iraq was what allowed isis to grow bigger.
