quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
I still haven't worked out who ISIS are let alone DAESH or whatever they're called - never heard of 'em.

ISIS=Islamic State in Iraq and Syria
ISIL=Islamic State in Iraq and Levant
IS=Islamic State
Daesh=not exactly sure what it is, but....

ISIS=ISIL=IS=Daesh

quote:

What we do is start a war on abbreviations.
Although there that many wars going on on this and that, it'd probably only last a day before we moved onto a war on something else.
The devil finds work for idle hands.

I think the first thing we should do is figure out why "abbreviation" is such a long fucking word!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

quote:

ISIS=Islamic State in Iraq and Syria
ISIL=Islamic State in Iraq and Levant
IS=Islamic State
Daesh=not exactly sure what it is, but....

ISIS=ISIL=IS=Daesh

They are not abbreviations, they are initialisms.

quote:

Only IS is an initialism, the rest are acronyms.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

Only IS is an initialism, the rest are acronyms.

That's what I thought. I'm happy to go with 'Daesh', though I still don't know how to pronounce it.

As for what to do about them - the answer is quite clear to me: Cut their goolies off.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
I still haven't worked out who ISIS are let alone DAESH or whatever they're called - never heard of 'em.

ISIS=Islamic State in Iraq and Syria
ISIL=Islamic State in Iraq and Levant
IS=Islamic State
Daesh=not exactly sure what it is, but....

ISIS=ISIL=IS=Daesh

quote:

What we do is start a war on abbreviations.
Although there that many wars going on on this and that, it'd probably only last a day before we moved onto a war on something else.
The devil finds work for idle hands.

I think the first thing we should do is figure out why "abbreviation" is such a long fucking word!

They are not abbreviations, they are initialisms.

quote:


It's a strange thing in this world that people with a good heart who are different in some way are seen as outsiders and the idiots proposing war on things are seen as people to follow.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

That is in response to your post and tell it to the families and nice and collateral damage. Horseshit. We have to kill people to take it for people dead for no cause? I posted long and hard before this war began, about this, this is not new stuff that is 'developing' it all was set in concrete with the nutsuckers invasion under knowingly false intel and their ensuing and continuing propaganda.

If you go in and slaughter these people, you will cause untold havoc in the middle east, and will create terrorists and suffer your childrens childrens childrens children with this stupidity. The kurds will break out. That is not something that has no different solution, not ever, now. Thats gonna be a done deal.


We are fucked, we are up to our necks in it, and all that we can do is arm Kurds and ignore Turkey when Daesh is gone.

Because they are going to come.

Then you should have put it as if that was what you were responding to.
Until we are willing to do that sort of thing they will assume we are soft and weak and that if they just keep fighting we will quit.
So you favor sacrificing Americans over doing the job completly, forget saying we shouldn't have been there, we were and it was up to our leaders to win with a minimum loss of American life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

That is in response to your post and tell it to the families and nice and collateral damage. Horseshit. We have to kill people to take it for people dead for no cause? I posted long and hard before this war began, about this, this is not new stuff that is 'developing' it all was set in concrete with the nutsuckers invasion under knowingly false intel and their ensuing and continuing propaganda.

If you go in and slaughter these people, you will cause untold havoc in the middle east, and will create terrorists and suffer your childrens childrens childrens children with this stupidity. The kurds will break out. That is not something that has no different solution, not ever, now. Thats gonna be a done deal.


We are fucked, we are up to our necks in it, and all that we can do is arm Kurds and ignore Turkey when Daesh is gone.

Because they are going to come.

Then you should have put it as if that was what you were responding to.
Until we are willing to do that sort of thing they will assume we are soft and weak and that if they just keep fighting we will quit.
So you favor sacrificing Americans over doing the job completly, forget saying we shouldn't have been there, we were and it was up to our leaders to win with a minimum loss of American life.

They already know you are soft and weak. So, you favor sacrificing
Americans because of some fucked up we have to take that town or or men will have died in vain. Well they died in vain the first time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle


Can I commend you for recognising the need to develop a political strategy before seeking to deal with Daesh militarily? While it is so obvious that any anti-Deash strategy must be primarily political to have any chance of success, it is astonishing how many commentators fail to realise this.

While I agree that if we develop appropriate strategies to deal with Daesh it could be eliminated as an effective force within a short time frame, unfortunately I cannot share your optimism that agreement on a set of political goals and a strategy to obtain those goals will be easy to achieve. All the major players have differing and often conflicting goals interests and strategies. For a more detailed examination of these conflicting goals see here.

A successful anti-Deash coalition would need to include all the active players, not just NATO. This is not a situation where the West can unilaterally impose its idea of a solution - if there's anything to be learnt from the Iraq disaster, it is surely this. Another example of the problems inherent in coalition building is the position of Syrian President Assad. Some players - the US the Syrian opposition to name just two - insist that Assad cannot be part of the solution, that he must go as part of the solution. Other players - Iran, Russia, Hezbollah etc - take the precisely opposite view and insist he remain in power. So achieving a political consensus isn't going to be easy, even though all parties agree that Deash needs to destroyed. It may be possible to build a coalition around a single goal - the destruction of Deash - though whether the US would be prepared to enter into a formal agreement with the likes of Hezbollah, or the al-Nusra Front (an AQ affiliate) is unclear.

Even if we grant that this political consensus can be reached, and that a military campaign succeeds in its task of destroying Deash as an effective organisation, is this the end of the problem? Sadly the answer is no. Daesh is a representation of an idea, just as Al Quada was. Destroying the organisation doesn't destroy the idea that gives birth to the organisation.

So on top of developing potentially successful strategies to defeat Daesh politically and militarily, there is also a need to develop coalitions and strategies to (a) defeat the underlying ideology, and (b) deal with the social and political problems that cause some to see Islamism as a solution. This will require a radical reshaping of the political and social make-up of the entire region, a shake-up that will be opposed tooth and nail by every vested interest. It is difficult to see a consensus emerging to achieve this. Failure to achieve this consensus will mean the re-emergence of Islamist ideology just as Daesh emerged from the shell of Al Quada following AQ's military defeat.

So I for one am far from optimistic that there is going to be a solution, that it is far more likely that we will see more of the same. The same politicians whom we trust to develop a successful anti-Daesh strategy are those who must also develop strategies to win the ideological war with Islamic fundamentalism, and to re-shape the social and political conditions of the region. There is simply no way that, for example, the Saudis will ever agree to such a strategy. From their perspective it would be suicidal.

I wish I could be more optimistic but there are no realistic reasons to be more optimistic IMHO

quote:


Pure BS the soldiers did not mess uo the first time they took it. But since we did bot post a large number of soldiers there permanantly they came back.
You, not me, said that they had to go back and do it the hard and costly way. I said that they should do it the easiest, least costly and most devestating way avaliable. Keep throwing infantry in there so they won't get mad at us and they think we don't have the guts to fight them. Char everything within ten miles of the city and they will see we mean business.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:


Pure BS the soldiers did not mess uo the first time they took it. But since we did bot post a large number of soldiers there permanantly they came back.
You, not me, said that they had to go back and do it the hard and costly way. I said that they should do it the easiest, least costly and most devestating way avaliable. Keep throwing infantry in there so they won't get mad at us and they think we don't have the guts to fight them. Char everything within ten miles of the city and they will see we mean business.

No I did not say we had to go back and do it the hard costly way. I said that has been done by the ineptitude of the nutsuckers and they advocate more of it.

Arm the Kurds ignore Turkey. Done.