Now, the truth starts to emerge from some of the veterans..

[*bfine32*]

(09-22-2015, 01:55 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: No doubt that Afghanistan is a much more unpleasant place to live. Wanna address the actual content of the post now? Extra points if you can manage to not somehow bring up immigration.

I did address the content of the post. You stated we don't need to be over there because we are needed over here (you used bolded words and all); I simply said go spend a month over there and see where we are needed most.

"I have a small cut on my toe, my neighbor has an amputated foot; somebody get me a BandAid"

I'm sorry you feel it is silly to address immigration in a thread about the living conditions in other countries and our desire to leave it status quo; my apologies. 

I'm just surprised that those that usually bang the huperson rights drum are pretty much saying "F' em"

[SteelCitySouth]

(09-22-2015, 01:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Actually it would be a point of relocating them to a more needed region.

But you said something about Israel. 

I don't disagree completely with the idea of a larger US presence in the middle east.  Nothing in my OP indicated that.  The issue is, however, what do you intend to get out of it.  If you are looking for it to provide or promote long term stability and extend US interests in the region beyond the length of time of "occupation", history has not been kind to that thought.  If you are looking to occupy for a very long time to inhibit groups of people from causing issues, yo will find that the cost will create problems for you as well.

The removal of our presence in Germany, Japan and Korea is not where we should be looking to fill this void.  We have over a Million soldiers at home.

I did say something about Israel.

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-22-2015, 01:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: No it isn't.  I said its not a black and white situation.

It doesn't have to be either / or.

Well, that's your mistake right there. You're seeing a complex world fraught with moral difficulties and challenges. Bfine is convinced that the world is a very simple place, with simple solutions to everything. It goes something like this:

Government=bad
Corporations=good
Muslims and immigrants=bad
Christians=good
Gays=bad
Straights=good
Science=bad
Creationism=good

etc. etc.

No doubt Bfine is deeply confused as to why a world with such simple distinctions is so dysfunctional; but Republicans=good, and he believes as long as one wins the Presidency, they will apply these simple equations to restore humanity for all.

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-22-2015, 01:59 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I did address the content of the post. You stated we don't need to be over there because we are needed over here (you used bolded words and all); I simply said go spend a month over there and see where we are needed most.

"I have a small cut on my toe, my neighbor has an amputated foot; somebody get me a BandAid"

I'm sorry you feel it is silly to address immigration in a thread about the living conditions in other countries and our desire to leave it status quo; my apologies. 

I'm just surprised that those that usually bang the huperson rights drum are pretty much saying "F' em"

Not only did you not address the content of the post, you didn't even understand it because I didn't say that. Did you honestly think I was saying we need to bring the military over here to deal with child molestors?

Try reading again. I said

Quote:If we can't fix this sort of our problem in our own country, what in the world makes you think we have the means to solve it in another?

I've never endorsed the idea of allowing desperate, impoverished human beings to sneak over the border so that they can then be exploited by business. You're confused as usual.

[*bfine32*]

(09-22-2015, 02:02 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Well, that's your mistake right there. You're seeing a complex world fraught with moral difficulties and challenges. Bfine is convinced that the world is a very simple place, with simple solutions to everything. It goes something like this:

Government=bad
Corporations=good
Muslims and immigrants=bad
Christians=good
Gays=bad
Straights=good
Science=bad
Creationism=good

etc. etc.

No doubt Bfine is deeply confused as to why a world with such simple distinctions is so dysfunctional; but Republicans=good, and he believes as long as one wins the Presidency, they will apply these simple equations to restore humanity for all.

Typical

[*bfine32*]

(09-22-2015, 02:06 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Not only did you not address the content of the post, you didn't even understand it because I didn't say that. Did you honestly think I was saying we need to bring the military over here to deal with child molestors?

Try reading again. I said
I've never endorsed the idea of allowing desperate, impoverished human beings to sneak over the border so that they can then be exploited by business. You're confused as usual.

Nope it seemed like you said we don't need to be over there because we need to fix things over here. So you are now admitting you drew no connection between our being over there and our problems over here? If that is the case then I have no idea why you brought them up together. 

Apologies for my confusion. 

[*bfine32*]

(09-22-2015, 01:39 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It's not the world that's different, the scenarios are completely different.  Germany was a first world nation with a long history of adherence to authority.  They were hijacked by a fringe movement fueled by resentment and the erroneous idea that the German people had been betrayed at the moment of triumph.  Some of the most positive national traits of the German people, their industriousness, their discipline and their already mentioned adherence to authority were perverted by a very unfortunate set of circumstances.  Somewhat ironically it were these exact traits that made the occupation so painless once the Germans were fully exposed to the weight of the crimes committed by the Nazi government.   One could make a very similar argument for the Japanese as well, although their cooperation was at least equally fueled by the call from their emperor to comply with the occupiers.

None of this applies to the areas of the middle east for several reasons.  They have no history of long stable governance.  They are a mish mash of different tribal and ethnic groups with very little in the way of national identity and what little cohesion as a group they do have is fueled by a religion that is currently being used to justify some of the worst atrocities mankind has witnessed in the modern age.  A religion that itself is experiencing a civil war between two major factions.  Quite simply it's a shit show and the only thing holding it together in the past was iron fisted tyranny, whether in the form of a strong man or a brutal theocracy.

So what do you recommend as an End Game?

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-22-2015, 02:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Nope it seemed like you said we don't need to be over there because we need to fix things over here. So you are now admitting you drew no connection between our being over there and our problems over here? If that is the case then I have no idea why you brought them up together. 

Apologies for my confusion. 

Well it's certainly a warranted apology, but in addition to being sorry, you should also try to solve this recurring problem.

At no time did I say "we don't need to be over there because we need to fix things over here", as the quote I provided demonstrated. That is called a strawman argument. As for you having "no idea" why I brought it up, interestingly enough, in that same exact quote, I make it crystal clear to any thinking human being why I brought them up together.

So let's try this one last time... "If we can't fix this sort of our problem in our own country, what in the world makes you think we have the means to solve it in another?" In other words, we cannot apparently end child molestation here, yet it seems some want us to end it there; so the question is what are the means by which we can end it there when we apparently cannot end it here.

Feel free to read this several dozen times if necessary. Remember: the bolded words are key.

[*bfine32*]

(09-22-2015, 02:24 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Well it's certainly a warranted apology, but in addition to being sorry, you should also try to solve this recurring problem.

At no time did I say "we don't need to be over there because we need to fix things over here", as the quote I provided demonstrated. That is called a strawman argument. As for you having "no idea" why I brought it up, interestingly enough, in that same exact quote, I make it crystal clear to any thinking human being why I brought them up together.

So let's try this one last time... "If we can't fix this sort of our problem in our own country, what in the world makes you think we have the means to solve it in another?" In other words, we cannot apparently end child molestation here, yet it seems some want us to end it there; so the question is what are the means by which we can end it there when we apparently cannot end it here.

Feel free to read this several dozen times if necessary. Remember: the bolded words are key.

Got it. Thanks

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-22-2015, 02:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So what do you recommend as an End Game?

This answer would take up pages.  First you have to come to the obvious conclusion that the problems in this region are not fixable by outsiders, at least not in ways we'd be willing to fix them.  First, realize that Iraq is not a viable state and plan accordingly.  The Kurds are the only US allies in the region, give them what they've wanted forever, a free Kurdistan.  Of course doing this will require a lot of finessing of the Turks, who would certainly oppose this.  You could get this by getting both the Turks and the Kurds on the same page with what to do with the PKK.  The best solution would be to convince them that a free Kurdistan is worth giving up claims to lands currently owned by Turkey.  This solution not only gives Turkey a solid, reliable neighbor on much of their southern border it also give the Kurds as a whole exactly what they want.  The Kurds hate Daesh and willingly fight them, quite well I might add.  So arm them, prop them up as a power in the region.  The are secularists, they believe in democracy, let people in that region start being the agents of change. 

Of course, the above would allow Iran to expand its influence, and possibly it's territory, further west.  I think this is an unfortunate inevitability so get ahead of it.  Further accordance with Iran is possible if we can get Israel serious about the two state solution that virtually everyone on Earth agrees is the only fair way to solve that issue.  To get that you have to play hardball with Israel, something only Obama has even begun to do.  It would require the political will to weather the predictable charges of antisemitism that would result but the bottom line is that Israel has no friends outside the US and cannot afford to lose us.  We have the upper hand in that relationship, let's finally stop pretending otherwise.  While a solution in this area will not, in itself, bring peace it removes one of the major rallying cries for extremists in that area and will make radicalization of future generations much more difficult.


I could absolutely go on, but that would be a nice start.

[Benton]

(09-22-2015, 12:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It's not a "system", it's a religious belief. 

So do you think that those that come here should be forced to assimilate? 

It's one of the 25ish countries where by law the heads of state have to be Muslim. It's as much a system as it is a religion.

And if by "forced to assimilate" you mean follow the laws here, yes. If you mean convert their religion, no. If that had been the case, we'd still be burning those suspected of witchcraft.

[*bfine32*]

(09-22-2015, 02:45 PM)Benton Wrote: It's one of the 25ish countries where by law the heads of state have to be Muslim. It's as much a system as it is a religion.

And if by "forced to assimilate" you mean follow the laws here, yes. If you mean convert their religion, no. If that had been the case, we'd still be burning those suspected of witchcraft.

How many of those 25 countries give women equal rights?

[Rotobeast]

(09-22-2015, 01:54 PM)GMDino Wrote: He knows them by name!  

He probably does.
I'd wager the "grey" list is a touch longer.
The longest list is probably that of the PMCs, but we're not directly responsible (on paper) for them.

5.....

[SteelCitySouth]

(09-22-2015, 03:36 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: He probably does.
I'd wager the "grey" list is a touch longer.
The longest list is probably that of the PMCs, but we're not directly responsible (on paper) for them.

5.....

So maybe 15...20?  

[Rotobeast]

(09-22-2015, 03:37 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: So maybe 15...20?  

I honestly don't know.
But, what I do know is that it is damn well more than 5.

[Belsnickel]

(09-22-2015, 01:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: But it does refute the suggestion that we should turn a blind eye while there. I'm surprised you would suggest we stand by while peoples' huperson rights were being destroyed.

Except that is not my argument. My argument was that we should not have been there in the first place. That our actions caused this problem. But hey, keeping on stuffing that straw man.

(09-22-2015, 01:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Do you think we should try to correct wrongs we see in other countries while there? We didn't join WWII because Germany was killing Jews.

I'm against being an occupying force anywhere. I'm against military solutions. I'm for advocating for change through organic, internal means because that is the only way real change for cultural, social, political, etc., issues will stick. I do not think we should look the other way if we are there, but my position is that we should not be there in the first place.

[*bfine32*]

(09-22-2015, 03:46 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Except that is not my argument. My argument was that we should not have been there in the first place. That our actions caused this problem. But hey, keeping on stuffing that straw man.


I'm against being an occupying force anywhere. I'm against military solutions. I'm for advocating for change through organic, internal means because that is the only way real change for cultural, social, political, etc., issues will stick. I do not think we should look the other way if we are there, but my position is that we should not be there in the first place.

How many building do you suggest we let them bomb and Americans kill before we go hunt them out?

Regardless, we are there so you agree we should work to correct the atrocities we witness? Because that is the point of the OP

We most likely had no business in Iraq the 2nd time, but we definitely should have went to the breeding ground of terrorism. 

[Rotobeast]

(09-22-2015, 03:46 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Except that is not my argument. My argument was that we should not have been there in the first place. That our actions caused this problem. But hey, keeping on stuffing that straw man.


I'm against being an occupying force anywhere. I'm against military solutions. I'm for advocating for change through organic, internal means because that is the only way real change for cultural, social, political, etc., issues will stick. I do not think we should look the other way if we are there, but my position is that we should not be there in the first place.

This....
We basically groom leaders within their communities that already have a strong social position.
I'm not totally sure how that would be accomplished, apart from espionage, but it would seem more logical in this situation.

[*bfine32*]

(09-22-2015, 03:45 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: I honestly don't know.
But, what I do know is that it is damn well more than 5.

I'm surprised folks got caught up on the number given rather than the point that it is a very small presence when compared to the forces we left in Asia and Europe.


No I'm not. 


 

[Belsnickel]

(09-22-2015, 03:52 PM)bfine32 Wrote: How many building do you suggest we let them bomb and Americans kill before we go hunt them out?

We could nitpick this to death, but it wasn't a country that did that, it was a terrorist organization. We trampled on the sovereignty of a few countries to get to that organization. I freely admit ignorance in what could/should have been done, though. I just don't see the issue as clearly as you apparently do.