It doesn't matter if their military expenditure is less than the one of Romania, which by the way isn't exactly non-existent. It's still the fucking national army of a country. And also you have the problem that even if Turkey and Saudi Arabia would cut their funding, which we all know they won't, the rebels would keep fighting. They'd slowly lose ground and run and they'd slowly bleed into surrounding areas where war and acts of terror would be perpetuated. They need to die. They need to be struck swiftly with overwhelming force.
Point being that the effort required to do that is dramatically less than the all-encompassing fist-of-God shit that you would like to pull. Again, the reason it hasn't happened is that nobody really gives a shit. It isn't their priority. They prefer to stay friendly with the Saudi's, and to fuck the Iranians.
So all this whining and arguing basically boils down to you disagreeing about how many people, how many tanks, how many planes and how many guns will be needed to smash these cunts into smithereens, not about the need to do it? Fine, I can live with that. But my point being, the quicker the better. You don't achieve that kind of result with forty Sukhoi jets and a few assault helicopters.
Ah, but someone did fight back. You're probably not hearing too much about him because if he went on the talk show rounds and was saying "if I'd only been allowed to be carrying my gun..." , well, that screws up the whole Guns are Evil narrative.
There will always be more. That doesn't mean you don't kill them when they're a problem. I've got an older house and it's easy to get under the house, so around once a year I get a mouse or two. I find out when I hear them in the wall or I notice that a hole's been gnawed in the dogfood bag. I don't just shrug and go "oh well, now I've got mice." I kill them. I put out traps and in a day or two I don't have mice for another year or so. The alternative is to allow them to build a nest under my house and infest the place. Every summer I battle ants. Between having foods that contain lots of sugar and pets that eat from bowls on the floor and leave crumbs all over the place, ants love to get in. One time I had them set up a nest in my DSL power supply. It was on the wall, sheltered and warm. I don't just say "oh well, now I've got ants." They'd ruin all my food and take down my Internet. I kill them. By the thousands. I hunt out where they're getting in and kill them outside the house. I kill them as long as they keep trying to get in. Now I don't seek out mice or ants outside my house, but when they are a threat to me and my way of life, I kill them. That is what you do with vermin.
I agree that is the way it will typically go down yet it just feels so wrong to have people lay down on the floor and wait to be executed.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/paris-a...her-military-intervention-on-syria-1447499860 Calls to invade Syria and Iraq are already in the headlines.
Reports now coming in that Greece officials have identified one terrorist as a Syrian refugee. Oh my, what will the bleeding hearts do now?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...rorist-attack-french-victims-latest-news.html Found one. One of the dead terrorists was a Syrian "refugee" who entered Europe through Greece. I told you this would happen.
Really? How about that "ragtag group of irregulars" decides to do a repeat of Paris in Dublin? Wait, bad example - you guys are used to the whole "KABOOM" scene already.
Or more accurately, one of the dead attackers was carrying a passport that was previously used to apply for asylum in Greece.
The attacks on Paris qualify as Article V attacks on a NATO ally. Just like early on France had the 2nd largest contingent of troops in Afghanistan, we should return the favor, in force, including sending ground troops. HOWEVER we should go into this with a clear wind down strategy in mind. While we should supply some regular infantry, it shouldn't be the majority of the ground forces. Our NATO allies can shoulder a large portion of those duties. They have the infantry. We should help provide coordination, air support, logistics (we have the best FOBbits in the world!) and Special Operations, things we have singular expertise in. So go in, kick ass, shoot some terrorists in the face, but make sure we aren't the ones left holding the bag when it's all over.
You are one single minded fuck. You think these are soldiers of an opposing army, and you have absolutely no understanding of who they are or why they are fighting. That is where you are missing the point. These "terrorists" don't just spring up from the earth. They are the people in the communities you are fighting. That means in order for your plan to work we need to wipe out all the people because they do not want to be what the rest of the world is. You can attempt to occupy and enforce law. That will lead to rebellions and more death over time. You cannot stamp out their desire to rule themselves. It won't happen because they will always go underground and your violence will create the anger that will fuel each new fighter. You are a fucking idiot. You would make a great grunt, but strategy and winning are not your skills. You need to shut the fuck up and let better minds decide what to do mr. stupid. When we need you to charge over a hill we will give you a call, until then go play with some blocks or something.
Yeah, you clearly don't understand one single fucking thing I say. You don't have an ounce of the skill at debate needed to "shut me up". I am not claiming that destroying the power base of the Islamic State in Syria and the Levant is the only thing needed. I am claiming it is one of the things that are needed. Perhaps you should learn to understand nuance before assuming none exists. The people in Syria are not generally positive to the Islamic State. They don't like the Islamic State. The Islamic State and indeed the Al-Nusra Front does not represent the will of the Syrian people. It's possible to attack and destroy the Islamic State in Syria and in Iraq. It's the same thing as how it was completely possible to destroy the Baath party in Iraq, which, by the way, I did not agree with, because this secular regime served as a counterweight to religious fanatics in the area, and things turned out even worse. Curse me out all you want, you cunt. I've had to deal with a lot scarier people than you.
I'm sort of wondering about the final death toll. I'm expecting it to rise to something approaching 200.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/14/natos-turn-to-attack-paris-terrorist-isis/ Even fairly respectable magazines that are tied to the political elites like Foreign Policy are now openly saying it is time for NATO to invade Syria and Iraq. If they do then I hope they have the stomach to do what needs to be done and stick it out for the long haul. It will be messy and the regular rules of engagement will need to go out the window or else there is no point in going at all. I am not sure the west has the will to do what needs to be done. Anyway, if France calls for an article 4 consultations then we will know the shit is about to hit the fan because they must do thst before invoking article 5.
Report now in that at least one of the terrorists had a ticket and tried to get into the soccer stadium where Holland was present. He was stopped by stadium security that discovered his explosive vest. This wasn't just terror - it was an attempt to assassinate the French President. Round them up at home, then incinerate them from the skies. Any leftovers get a bullet between the eyes. http://www.wsj.com/articles/attacker-tried-to-enter-paris-stadium-but-was-turned-away-1447520571
I guess all of those people are "single minded fucks" as well. I knew that the events of 9/11 would be used as a propaganda piece to justify American imperialist activity, such as the invasion of Iraq which had absolutely nothing to do with terrorism. But... This is not the case here. The right move is to strike hard against the power base of this enemy of civilization. What I fear is that this will not be the result. That events will be unintentionally or deliberately mishandled in order to perpetuate the cycle of conflict. However that does not mean I am claiming there are never examples of legitimate use of violence or that violence can never be effective.
We're going to need a real President of the United States then. Not the timid one who just claimed that ISIS was under control hours before this attack.
