US campaigns to enlist Australia and other allies to attack Islamic State in Syria

[utkb]

These "terrorists" were created by the US secret service agencies.

The bankers and military industrial complex are behind all of these shenanigans.

One only has to look at 9/11 to know that if it wasn't an inside job it was blow-back due to incessant provocation by the agencies run by the central bank globalists.

Of course it was ...

Al Qaeda was created by the US in '79. They were hired to go into Libya, then into Syria. You deny that fact? France and the US were also openly funding them. Suddenly 'ISIS' pops up out of no where to divide into two a similar religion...see the big picture?

Al-Qaeda was founded by Osama Bin Laden who was in college in 1979. It wasn't until the 80's when he went to Afganistan, that he honed his terrorist ways. From wikipedia (which has listed sources to back its information. They probable did have connections to the U.S. during the Soviet-Afghan war, but they did not exist before 1988.

al-Qaeda (/ælˈkaɪdə/ al-ky-də; Arabic: القاعدة‎ al-qāʿidah, Arabic: [ælqɑːʕɪdɐ], translation: "The Base" and alternatively spelled al-Qaida and sometimes al-Qa'ida) is a global militant Islamist and Wahhabist organization founded by Osama bin Laden, Abdullah Azzam,^[25][26]and several other militants,^[27] at some point between August 1988^[28] and late 1989,^[27]with origins traceable to the Soviet war in Afghanistan.^[29][30]

Do you have references to support your statement that they were created in 1979. If so, please share.

[Publicus]

Putin remains convinced he pulled off a coup against Prez Obama when O called off announced but unexecuted strikes against Syrian forces and the ISIS fighters they support in Syria a year or so ago.

This misconception has helped to fuel Putin's aggressions in Ukraine and in Syria.

The UN, the EU and most governments round the world support the U. S. in its decision to decimate IS over the long term, initially by acting pretty much alone but now with the support of the UN and EU as well as other key governments north and south to build a purpose specific coalition alliance.

The CCP Boyz in Beijing are especially watching Australia in its willingness and commitment to join the U.S. and other democratic allies to militarily smash the primitive barbarism of the IS sooner rather than later. Indeed, the Anglosphere of the US, Canada, UK, Australia and eventually NZ are again taking the global lead in protecting civilization from the barbarians at the gates of Iran, Syria and beyond. .

Stopping Russia starts in Syria

The solution to the crisis in Ukraine lies in part in Syria. It is time for US President Barack Obama to demonstrate that he can order the offensive use of force in circumstances other than secret drone attacks or covert operations.

The result will change the strategic calculus not only in Damascus, but also in Moscow, not to mention Beijing and Tokyo.

It is time to change Putin's calculations, and Syria is the place to do it.

.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101605835

Edited August 28, 2014 by Publicus

[Publicus]

There's a fundamental and great difference between the internal struggle for power that had been occurring in Syria and the new barbarism of IS in the ME supported by Assad. Dictators will be dictators meaning they will sooner or later want it all.

Putin needs to be challenged and burned in Syria and the Mediterrainan in many ways and for many legit reasons, but especially because of his buildup of Russian forces off the coast of Syria in the MED.

When Syria agreed to give up its chemical weapons, Russia installed four S-355S/GM Area Defense Missile Systems in Syria. These systems are capable of linking with both the Russian MED Fleet's Defense Systems and the 36 Satellites of Moscow's Defense Network.

The Russian MED Fleet is off Syria's west coast. Their role and purpose is to "Prevent U.S. cruise missile and air attacks against the Syrian Government, the Russian fleet and the Russian land bases in Syria by the United States".

The Russian eastern MED naval armada off Syria has its own cruise missiles aboard 4 heavy ballistic missile cruisers, 3 medium guided missile cruisers and 4 ballistic missile subs. There also are ICBMs and bombers in Russia that are easily capable of use in Syria or the MED.

As noted in the link above, after the U.S. led coalition of global allies hits hard at IS and Assad, it can go to the Security Council for approval of its military "enforcement" actions on the basis of UNSC Resolution 2139 which requires that "...all parties immediately cease all attacks against civilians, as well as the indiscriminate employment of weapons in populated areas, including shelling and aerial bombardment, such as the use of barrel bombs."

Putin can veto such a resolution but only if he'd decided he wants to put his MED naval armada to the test. Prez Obama and the world know Putin is only slightly less a barbarian than Assad and IS so it will be necessary to deal with him and them directly and forthrightly if the time and circumstance should come.

If there is conflict it will be a naval and air battle in the MED not in the Ukraine or in Eurasia.

Edited August 28, 2014 by Publicus

[tpazzi]

Putin remains convinced he pulled off a coup against Prez Obama when O called off announced but unexecuted strikes against Syrian forces and the ISIS fighters they support in Syria a year or so ago.

This misconception has helped to fuel Putin's aggressions in Ukraine and in Syria.

The UN, the EU and most governments round the world support the U. S. in its decision to decimate IS over the long term, initially by acting pretty much alone but now with the support of the UN and EU as well as other key governments north and south to build a purpose specific coalition alliance.

The CCP Boyz in Beijing are especially watching Australia in its willingness and commitment to join the U.S. and other democratic allies to militarily smash the primitive barbarism of the IS sooner rather than later. Indeed, the Anglosphere of the US, Canada, UK, Australia and eventually NZ are again taking the global lead in protecting civilization from the barbarians at the gates of Iran, Syria and beyond. .

Stopping Russia starts in Syria

The solution to the crisis in Ukraine lies in part in Syria. It is time for US President Barack Obama to demonstrate that he can order the offensive use of force in circumstances other than secret drone attacks or covert operations.

The result will change the strategic calculus not only in Damascus, but also in Moscow, not to mention Beijing and Tokyo.

It is time to change Putin's calculations, and Syria is the place to do it.

.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101605835

If you are cutting and pasting someone else's intellectual property word for word, you really ought to put it in quotations.

[Publicus]

Putin remains convinced he pulled off a coup against Prez Obama when O called off announced but unexecuted strikes against Syrian forces and the ISIS fighters they support in Syria a year or so ago.

This misconception has helped to fuel Putin's aggressions in Ukraine and in Syria.

The UN, the EU and most governments round the world support the U. S. in its decision to decimate IS over the long term, initially by acting pretty much alone but now with the support of the UN and EU as well as other key governments north and south to build a purpose specific coalition alliance.

The CCP Boyz in Beijing are especially watching Australia in its willingness and commitment to join the U.S. and other democratic allies to militarily smash the primitive barbarism of the IS sooner rather than later. Indeed, the Anglosphere of the US, Canada, UK, Australia and eventually NZ are again taking the global lead in protecting civilization from the barbarians at the gates of Iran, Syria and beyond. .

Stopping Russia starts in Syria

The solution to the crisis in Ukraine lies in part in Syria. It is time for US President Barack Obama to demonstrate that he can order the offensive use of force in circumstances other than secret drone attacks or covert operations.

The result will change the strategic calculus not only in Damascus, but also in Moscow, not to mention Beijing and Tokyo.

It is time to change Putin's calculations, and Syria is the place to do it.

.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101605835

If you are cutting and pasting someone else's intellectual property word for word, you really ought to put it in quotations.

Specifically?

[Benmart]

I say go for it,this is fighting true barbarism for humanities sake. The good people of Australia can always be relied upon to do whats right,they supported the UK with tremendous losses in two world wars and supported America in a badly thought out war in Vietnam,but they were there when they were needed.

Being an Australian Vietnam vet I can attest to how badly thought out this "conflict" was and I for one would never want to follow the lead of the US again. But my countrymen will no doubt be there when they are called upon.

Thank you for your service, Sir.

1968-1988 US Army

[hawker9000]

Putin remains convinced he pulled off a coup against Prez Obama when O called off announced but unexecuted strikes against Syrian forces and the ISIS fighters they support in Syria a year or so ago.

This misconception has helped to fuel Putin's aggressions in Ukraine and in Syria.

The UN, the EU and most governments round the world support the U. S. in its decision to decimate IS over the long term, initially by acting pretty much alone but now with the support of the UN and EU as well as other key governments north and south to build a purpose specific coalition alliance.

The CCP Boyz in Beijing are especially watching Australia in its willingness and commitment to join the U.S. and other democratic allies to militarily smash the primitive barbarism of the IS sooner rather than later. Indeed, the Anglosphere of the US, Canada, UK, Australia and eventually NZ are again taking the global lead in protecting civilization from the barbarians at the gates of Iran, Syria and beyond. .

Stopping Russia starts in Syria

The solution to the crisis in Ukraine lies in part in Syria. It is time for US President Barack Obama to demonstrate that he can order the offensive use of force in circumstances other than secret drone attacks or covert operations.

The result will change the strategic calculus not only in Damascus, but also in Moscow, not to mention Beijing and Tokyo.

It is time to change Putin's calculations, and Syria is the place to do it.

.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101605835

Obama find a spine?! Not in this lifetime. Hillary must be itching to take this on, but she doesn't really want to take on the Obama machine openly. At least not yet. And maybe not until after she gets elected. And that's a ways off. (Hopefully, a LONG ways off...)

[coma]

Really starting to go to $hit in the region now.

Islamic State jihadists have boasted they have executed scores of Syrian troops after capturing a key air base, the latest in a string of abuses that have shocked the world.

Al-Nusra Front seized 43 UN peacekeepers on the Golan Heights, part of a mission that has monitored an armistice between Syrian and Israeli troops on the strategic plateau for decades.

The 43 peacekeepers from Fiji were forced to surrender their weapons and taken hostage, but 81 Filipino blue helmets "held their ground" and refused to disarm, the Filipino defence department said.

Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/world/2014/08/29/02/26/jihadists-post-grisly-video-of-captives#AAc1vMcuyv6eCPK4.99

[MJP]

IS "fighters" have been beheading Christian women and even little girls in Iraq.

I mean what's it going to take to action the defence of people against this evil?

[chuckd]

It weill be difficult for Obama to form a coalition if he keeps making statements like the one he made yesterday.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

QUESTION: Do you need Congress’s approval to go into Syria?

OBAMA: You know, I have consulted with Congress throughout this process. I am confident that as commander in chief I have the authorities to engage in the acts that we are conducting currently. As our strategy develops, we will continue to consult with Congress, and I do think that it’ll be important for Congress to weigh in and we’re – that our consultations with Congress continue to develop so that the American people are part of the debate.

But I don’t want to put the cart before the horse. We don’t have a strategy yet.

http://personalliberty.com/obama-dont-strategy-yet-move-islamic-state/

--------------------------------------------------------------------

If they don't have a strategy yet, what in the world have they been doing for the past six months?

[CBR250]

I want to see an end to the barbarism of IS. But before everyone gets all gung-ho, we need to be clear about targets and strategies.

Targets: Some people - including a few on TV - hate all Muslims, so are happy to see any of them killed. Some are less prejudiced about religion and just hate all Arabs - Muslim, Christian, Jewish, atheist, doesn't matter what type of Arab - they don't know enough to discriminate between groups, just want them all dead. But if it's IS that we want to stop, then to be successful we probably need to work with Arab/Muslims who also oppose IS. If it's a war against Islam that people want, that is altogether another matter from a war against IS. So, what exactly is the target?

Strategies: One earlier poster noted his time in Vietnam. My utmost respect to him for risking his life in that terrible war. It was a wasted and wasteful war, for what is now an obsolete and ludicrous ideology (stopping the spread of communism and invasion by Chinese hordes). We only appreciate the errors of this war in retrospect. At the time, the USA and Australia were both keen as mustard on sending our young men to fight the North Vietnamese, so as to prop up a corrupt puppet government in the south. I would hate to see Australia or any other nation in the same situation again, fighting an un-winnable war while sending home body-bags and young men so damaged physically and psychologically that the rest of their lives will be an endless challenge.

So before we start sending more troops to the Middle East, some rational analysis, not bloodlust, is needed. And what strategies do we use to deal with the growth of Islamic fundamentalism at home? The London bombings, Lee Rigby's brutal murder, and the recent similarly barbaric murder of James Foley by what seems to be an English citizen show the risks of allowing Islamic fundamentalism to take hold within western countries. I doubt anyone will seriously contemplate sending citizens who happen to be Muslims to countries in the Middle East where they no longer have any connections. So what do we do with the reality of Islam in western countries? We can't turn back the clock to days before the lax immigration of the late 20th century. But we do need realistic solutions to what could become an even greater problem if left ignored. Or dealt with by dithering politicians while the fascists among us engage in vilification and alienation of immigrants, thereby creating even greater risks.

[Publicus]

Putin remains convinced he pulled off a coup against Prez Obama when O called off announced but unexecuted strikes against Syrian forces and the ISIS fighters they support in Syria a year or so ago.

This misconception has helped to fuel Putin's aggressions in Ukraine and in Syria.

The UN, the EU and most governments round the world support the U. S. in its decision to decimate IS over the long term, initially by acting pretty much alone but now with the support of the UN and EU as well as other key governments north and south to build a purpose specific coalition alliance.

The CCP Boyz in Beijing are especially watching Australia in its willingness and commitment to join the U.S. and other democratic allies to militarily smash the primitive barbarism of the IS sooner rather than later. Indeed, the Anglosphere of the US, Canada, UK, Australia and eventually NZ are again taking the global lead in protecting civilization from the barbarians at the gates of Iran, Syria and beyond. .

Stopping Russia starts in Syria

The solution to the crisis in Ukraine lies in part in Syria. It is time for US President Barack Obama to demonstrate that he can order the offensive use of force in circumstances other than secret drone attacks or covert operations.

The result will change the strategic calculus not only in Damascus, but also in Moscow, not to mention Beijing and Tokyo.

It is time to change Putin's calculations, and Syria is the place to do it.

.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101605835

Obama find a spine?! Not in this lifetime. Hillary must be itching to take this on, but she doesn't really want to take on the Obama machine openly. At least not yet. And maybe not until after she gets elected. And that's a ways off. (Hopefully, a LONG ways off...)

Prez Obama must accommodate the severely anti-war Democratic party far left to which he owes his 2008 primary campaign close victory over Hillary Clinton. Recall that the then Sen Obama had voted against G.W. Bush going in to Iraq while the very hawkish and then Sen Clinton voted for it. This came back during the 2008 Democratic party primaries to burn Hillary and to propel O to the nomination for president.

Barack Obama was nominated for Prez by the D party to get out of the wars the U.S. was in, not to continue them or to start new ones and he was in large part elected president on this basis. O was reelected in 2012, again in large part, because he was accomplishing these purposes, intents, goals.

As president and commander in chief, Obama has seen a necessity to act militarily from time to time but he has done so in self-limited and self-restrained ways, as in supporting the removal of Khadaffi in Lybia, a process in which he and the U.S. were described as leading from the background.

I think now Prez Obama has decided it will be necessary for the U.S. to engage Putin in a shooting Air-Sea battle in Syria but primarily off the coast of Syria in the MED where Putin has placed a naval armada of a considerable force. Putin has also installed formidable Russian air defense systems in Syria.

A couple of days of a U.S. - Russia Air-Sea battle in the MED and in Syria will seriously set back Putin in Ukraine, Euraisa, Syria / the ME. It will also send a strong message to the CCP Boyz in Beijing to compel them to abandon their plans to seize by military force territories of Japan and of other countries in the South China Sea where energy supplies transit to SE Asia, Taiwan, S Korea, Japan and to the CCP-PRC itself.

The new integrated Air-Sea Battle Doctrine of the U.S. armed forces, adopted by Prez Obama in 2010 as the central war plan of the United States, is aggressive in the extreme, integrated, devastating as tested successfully in Lybia to terminate Quaddafy and his regime.

On day one of Air-Sea Battle combat operations against Lybia, cruise missiles launched from submarines and surface ships destroyed Libya’s lethal air and missile defenses thereby enabling coalition forces to conduct unfettered follow-on strikes to destroy the Libyan Air Force and control the air domain.

The Libyan Regime's Order of Battle, which included 800 main battle tanks, 2500 artillery pieces, 2000 armored personnel carriers and 360 fixed wing fighters and 85 transport aircraft was either disabled or destroyed. Not one American boot set foot on the ground; no Americans were killed in combat operations. Muammar Quaddafy was captured and killed by Libyan rebels in October. 2011.

Rear Adm James G. Foggo III

Assistant Deputy Chief of Naval Operations Testimony To Congress October 10, 2013

http://navylive.dodlive.mil/2013/10/10/rear-adm-foggo-discusses-air-sea-battle-concept/

[simple1]

I want to see an end to the barbarism of IS. But before everyone gets all gung-ho, we need to be clear about targets and strategies.

Targets: Some people - including a few on TV - hate all Muslims, so are happy to see any of them killed. Some are less prejudiced about religion and just hate all Arabs - Muslim, Christian, Jewish, atheist, doesn't matter what type of Arab - they don't know enough to discriminate between groups, just want them all dead. But if it's IS that we want to stop, then to be successful we probably need to work with Arab/Muslims who also oppose IS. If it's a war against Islam that people want, that is altogether another matter from a war against IS. So, what exactly is the target?

Strategies: One earlier poster noted his time in Vietnam. My utmost respect to him for risking his life in that terrible war. It was a wasted and wasteful war, for what is now an obsolete and ludicrous ideology (stopping the spread of communism and invasion by Chinese hordes). We only appreciate the errors of this war in retrospect. At the time, the USA and Australia were both keen as mustard on sending our young men to fight the North Vietnamese, so as to prop up a corrupt puppet government in the south. I would hate to see Australia or any other nation in the same situation again, fighting an un-winnable war while sending home body-bags and young men so damaged physically and psychologically that the rest of their lives will be an endless challenge.

So before we start sending more troops to the Middle East, some rational analysis, not bloodlust, is needed. And what strategies do we use to deal with the growth of Islamic fundamentalism at home? The London bombings, Lee Rigby's brutal murder, and the recent similarly barbaric murder of James Foley by what seems to be an English citizen show the risks of allowing Islamic fundamentalism to take hold within western countries. I doubt anyone will seriously contemplate sending citizens who happen to be Muslims to countries in the Middle East where they no longer have any connections. So what do we do with the reality of Islam in western countries? We can't turn back the clock to days before the lax immigration of the late 20th century. But we do need realistic solutions to what could become an even greater problem if left ignored. Or dealt with by dithering politicians while the fascists among us engage in vilification and alienation of immigrants, thereby creating even greater risks.

Some of the points raised by you have in the past few days been publically presented by Abbott. Claimed not fighting a war against Islam, but the armed extremists. As you highlight some will claim there is no seperation. He has said that so far, upon official request by the US, would be willing to send six F/A 18s and up to 100 special forces. SP would be tasked for target acquistion to minimise 'collateral damage' I suppose other activites he will not discuss in the public domain. He has also said that he would need clear understanding on what the outcomes would be for Oz military, albeit relatively small, engagement with IS.

Funding will be made available for Muslim community groups , who the Director of ASIO has said have been making a positive contribution, to further address attempts to radicalise Oz Muslim Australians.

[simple1]

Putin remains convinced he pulled off a coup against Prez Obama when O called off announced but unexecuted strikes against Syrian forces and the ISIS fighters they support in Syria a year or so ago.

This misconception has helped to fuel Putin's aggressions in Ukraine and in Syria.

The UN, the EU and most governments round the world support the U. S. in its decision to decimate IS over the long term, initially by acting pretty much alone but now with the support of the UN and EU as well as other key governments north and south to build a purpose specific coalition alliance.

The CCP Boyz in Beijing are especially watching Australia in its willingness and commitment to join the U.S. and other democratic allies to militarily smash the primitive barbarism of the IS sooner rather than later. Indeed, the Anglosphere of the US, Canada, UK, Australia and eventually NZ are again taking the global lead in protecting civilization from the barbarians at the gates of Iran, Syria and beyond. .

Stopping Russia starts in Syria

The solution to the crisis in Ukraine lies in part in Syria. It is time for US President Barack Obama to demonstrate that he can order the offensive use of force in circumstances other than secret drone attacks or covert operations.

The result will change the strategic calculus not only in Damascus, but also in Moscow, not to mention Beijing and Tokyo.

It is time to change Putin's calculations, and Syria is the place to do it.

.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101605835

Obama find a spine?! Not in this lifetime. Hillary must be itching to take this on, but she doesn't really want to take on the Obama machine openly. At least not yet. And maybe not until after she gets elected. And that's a ways off. (Hopefully, a LONG ways off...)

Prez Obama must accommodate the severely anti-war Democratic party far left to which he owes his 2008 primary campaign close victory over Hillary Clinton. Recall that the then Sen Obama had voted against G.W. Bush going in to Iraq while the very hawkish and then Sen Clinton voted for it. This came back during the 2008 Democratic party primaries to burn Hillary and to propel O to the nomination for president.

Barack Obama was nominated for Prez by the D party to get out of the wars the U.S. was in, not to continue them or to start new ones and he was in large part elected president on this basis. O was reelected in 2012, again in large part, because he was accomplishing these purposes, intents, goals.

As president and commander in chief, Obama has seen a necessity to act militarily from time to time but he has done so in self-limited and self-restrained ways, as in supporting the removal of Khadaffi in Lybia, a process in which he and the U.S. were described as leading from the background.

I think now Prez Obama has decided it will be necessary for the U.S. to engage Putin in a shooting Air-Sea battle in Syria but primarily off the coast of Syria in the MED where Putin has placed a naval armada of a considerable force. Putin has also installed formidable Russian air defense systems in Syria.

A couple of days of a U.S. - Russia Air-Sea battle in the MED and in Syria will seriously set back Putin in Ukraine, Euraisa, Syria / the ME. It will also send a strong message to the CCP Boyz in Beijing to compel them to abandon their plans to seize by military force territories of Japan and of other countries in the South China Sea where energy supplies transit to SE Asia, Taiwan, S Korea, Japan and to the CCP-PRC itself.

The new integrated Air-Sea Battle Doctrine of the U.S. armed forces, adopted by Prez Obama in 2010 as the central war plan of the United States, is aggressive in the extreme, integrated, devastating as tested successfully in Lybia to terminate Quaddafy and his regime.

On day one of Air-Sea Battle combat operations against Lybia, cruise missiles launched from submarines and surface ships destroyed Libya’s lethal air and missile defenses thereby enabling coalition forces to conduct unfettered follow-on strikes to destroy the Libyan Air Force and control the air domain.

The Libyan Regime's Order of Battle, which included 800 main battle tanks, 2500 artillery pieces, 2000 armored personnel carriers and 360 fixed wing fighters and 85 transport aircraft was either disabled or destroyed. Not one American boot set foot on the ground; no Americans were killed in combat operations. Muammar Quaddafy was captured and killed by Libyan rebels in October. 2011.

Rear Adm James G. Foggo III

Assistant Deputy Chief of Naval Operations Testimony To Congress October 10, 2013

http://navylive.dodlive.mil/2013/10/10/rear-adm-foggo-discusses-air-sea-battle-concept/

You use Libya as an example. It took seven months to acheive the destruction presented by Foggo in support of the Libyan rebel forces. In addition, at a minimum there were UK, French and Qatar SP on the ground. Libya is struggling to this day to acheive national unity with 350 militias having taken the place of the national army and police force.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28948948

What are your thoughts on how to avoid a similar outcome in Syria and potentially Iraq?

Edited August 29, 2014 by simple1

[chuckd]

<snipped for brevity's sake>

Prez Obama must accommodate the severely anti-war Democratic party far left to which he owes his 2008 primary campaign close victory over Hillary Clinton. Recall that the then Sen Obama had voted against G.W. Bush going in to Iraq while the very hawkish and then Sen Clinton voted for it.

You always seem to dwell on established fact or facts in dispute. Let me provide you with some examples of established facts.

1. The Iraq War Resolution was voted on in the US Senate in October 2002

2. In October 2002 Barack Hussein Obama was a Senator representing the 13th District in the Illinois State Senate.

3. Hillary Rodham Clinton was a US Senator who voted for the Iraq War Resolution, along with other Democratic Senators.

4. Obama did NOT vote against the Iraq War Resolution. He had no vote since he was not yet a member of the US Senate.

[Credo]

I want to see an end to the barbarism of IS. But before everyone gets all gung-ho, we need to be clear about targets and strategies.

Targets: Some people - including a few on TV - hate all Muslims, so are happy to see any of them killed. Some are less prejudiced about religion and just hate all Arabs - Muslim, Christian, Jewish, atheist, doesn't matter what type of Arab - they don't know enough to discriminate between groups, just want them all dead. But if it's IS that we want to stop, then to be successful we probably need to work with Arab/Muslims who also oppose IS. If it's a war against Islam that people want, that is altogether another matter from a war against IS. So, what exactly is the target?

Strategies: One earlier poster noted his time in Vietnam. My utmost respect to him for risking his life in that terrible war. It was a wasted and wasteful war, for what is now an obsolete and ludicrous ideology (stopping the spread of communism and invasion by Chinese hordes). We only appreciate the errors of this war in retrospect. At the time, the USA and Australia were both keen as mustard on sending our young men to fight the North Vietnamese, so as to prop up a corrupt puppet government in the south. I would hate to see Australia or any other nation in the same situation again, fighting an un-winnable war while sending home body-bags and young men so damaged physically and psychologically that the rest of their lives will be an endless challenge.

So before we start sending more troops to the Middle East, some rational analysis, not bloodlust, is needed. And what strategies do we use to deal with the growth of Islamic fundamentalism at home? The London bombings, Lee Rigby's brutal murder, and the recent similarly barbaric murder of James Foley by what seems to be an English citizen show the risks of allowing Islamic fundamentalism to take hold within western countries. I doubt anyone will seriously contemplate sending citizens who happen to be Muslims to countries in the Middle East where they no longer have any connections. So what do we do with the reality of Islam in western countries? We can't turn back the clock to days before the lax immigration of the late 20th century. But we do need realistic solutions to what could become an even greater problem if left ignored. Or dealt with by dithering politicians while the fascists among us engage in vilification and alienation of immigrants, thereby creating even greater risks.

The point that you seem to missing is not about those who are against IS, or Arabs or all of Islam, the point is do we stop when we have neutralized IS, or do we keep fighting until we have eliminated Arabs and Islam?

I'm pretty sure there is broad support for the destruction of IS, sadly, there is more support than is necessary for the other groups as well.

[soalbundy]

you can't eliminate Arabs and Muslims,they are all over the world now,looking for a better future and a nicer place to live and when they have found it on go the white night gowns,up go the veils and they make a bee line for the nearest mosque and attempt to turn the neighbourhood into the same shit hole that they were so anxious to leave.

[Publicus]

Obama find a spine?! Not in this lifetime. Hillary must be itching to take this on, but she doesn't really want to take on the Obama machine openly. At least not yet. And maybe not until after she gets elected. And that's a ways off. (Hopefully, a LONG ways off...)

<<sinp>>

On day one of Air-Sea Battle combat operations against Lybia, cruise missiles launched from submarines and surface ships destroyed Libya’s lethal air and missile defenses thereby enabling coalition forces to conduct unfettered follow-on strikes to destroy the Libyan Air Force and control the air domain.

The Libyan Regime's Order of Battle, which included 800 main battle tanks, 2500 artillery pieces, 2000 armored personnel carriers and 360 fixed wing fighters and 85 transport aircraft was either disabled or destroyed. Not one American boot set foot on the ground; no Americans were killed in combat operations. Muammar Quaddafy was captured and killed by Libyan rebels in October. 2011.

Rear Adm James G. Foggo III

Assistant Deputy Chief of Naval Operations Testimony To Congress October 10, 2013

http://navylive.dodlive.mil/2013/10/10/rear-adm-foggo-discusses-air-sea-battle-concept/

You use Libya as an example. It took seven months to acheive the destruction presented by Foggo in support of the Libyan rebel forces. In addition, at a minimum there were UK, French and Qatar SP on the ground. Libya is struggling to this day to acheive national unity with 350 militias having taken the place of the national army and police force.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28948948

What are your thoughts on how to avoid a similar outcome in Syria and potentially Iraq?

Hate to be the one to break the news to some around here, but the ME has been a cauldron of chaos since the end of WWII and the collapse of the Great Powers' empires there.

In fact, the ME over the long term of history hasn't exactly been a beacon or haven of peace and prosperity. Hell, the unarmed Jesus Christ was executed there by the Roman state for nothing more than his attempts to deliver its embroiled local humanity to an eternal desert paradise.

The ME post the U.S. 2003 invasion of Iraq has been compared to Europe's Thirty Year's War between Catholics and Protestants that devastated the continent (1618-1648). The Sunni - Shia' combat has no end in sight so perhaps hoping that within the next 30 years the two sides reach an accommodation could sound good.

The contorted Arab Spring has made its own contribution to the newest anarchy that consists of coups, failed elections, new factions, new interventions such as the one in Lybia.

So what is to prevent Syria becoming Lybia after the U.S. organizes a coalition of allies to blast IS, Assad, Putin, then goes home?

I said a couple of years ago the world will not miss Syria. A disarmed and inward looking tribalized Syria with a weak central government could be a quiet place impacting no one in the region. Thirty years of marking time there would be good. .

[Publicus]

<snipped for brevity's sake>

Prez Obama must accommodate the severely anti-war Democratic party far left to which he owes his 2008 primary campaign close victory over Hillary Clinton. Recall that the then Sen Obama had voted against G.W. Bush going in to Iraq while the very hawkish and then Sen Clinton voted for it.

You always seem to dwell on established fact or facts in dispute. Let me provide you with some examples of established facts.

1. The Iraq War Resolution was voted on in the US Senate in October 2002

2. In October 2002 Barack Hussein Obama was a Senator representing the 13th District in the Illinois State Senate.

3. Hillary Rodham Clinton was a US Senator who voted for the Iraq War Resolution, along with other Democratic Senators.

4. Obama did NOT vote against the Iraq War Resolution. He had no vote since he was not yet a member of the US Senate.

Because your post is incomplete here are a few more established facts....

October. 2, 2002 Illinois state Sen. Barack Obama gives speech opposing war in Iraq.

November 3, 2003 the Senate approves $87 billion package for military operations and reconstruction in Iraq on a voice vote.

Nov. 16, 2003. Obama tells Chicago community activists that he would have voted against the $87 billion package, explaining, "At a certain point, we have to say no to George Bush." See video here.

April 13, 2005. U.S. Sen Obama opposes Sense of Senate amendment not to delay vote on providing military funding for Iraq because of a concurrent debate on immigration reform.

Nov. 22. 2005 In speech to Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, U.S. Sen Obama calls for "gradual" withdrawal from Iraq in 2006 and criticizes Bush administration for trying to stifle dissent on the war..

June 21.2006: In Senate floor speech, U.S. Sen Obama calls for a "blueprint for an expeditious yet responsible exit from Iraq," but opposes a "date certain for the total withdrawal of U.S. troops."

From June 2006 forward to the end of the D party primaries in mid 2008 Sens Clinton and Obama voted identically on Iraq war measures considered by the Senate save a perhaps related one - Sen Obama voted against the Iraq commander Gen Casey to be advanced to Army chief of staff, Sen Clinton voted for.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/01/clinton_vs_obama_on_iraq.html

Edited August 29, 2014 by Publicus

[chuckd]

<snipped for brevity's sake>

Prez Obama must accommodate the severely anti-war Democratic party far left to which he owes his 2008 primary campaign close victory over Hillary Clinton. Recall that the then Sen Obama had voted against G.W. Bush going in to Iraq while the very hawkish and then Sen Clinton voted for it.

You always seem to dwell on established fact or facts in dispute. Let me provide you with some examples of established facts.

1. The Iraq War Resolution was voted on in the US Senate in October 2002

2. In October 2002 Barack Hussein Obama was a Senator representing the 13th District in the Illinois State Senate.

3. Hillary Rodham Clinton was a US Senator who voted for the Iraq War Resolution, along with other Democratic Senators.

4. Obama did NOT vote against the Iraq War Resolution. He had no vote since he was not yet a member of the US Senate.

Because your post is incomplete here are a few more established facts....

October. 2, 2002 Illinois state Sen. Barack Obama gives speech opposing war in Iraq.

November 3, 2003 the Senate approves $87 billion package for military operations and reconstruction in Iraq on a voice vote.

Nov. 16, 2003. Obama tells Chicago community activists that he would have voted against the $87 billion package, explaining, "At a certain point, we have to say no to George Bush." See video here.

April 13, 2005. U.S. Sen Obama opposes Sense of Senate amendment not to delay vote on providing military funding for Iraq because of a concurrent debate on immigration reform.

Nov. 22. 2005 In speech to Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, U.S. Sen Obama calls for "gradual" withdrawal from Iraq in 2006 and criticizes Bush administration for trying to stifle dissent on the war..

June 21.2006: In Senate floor speech, U.S. Sen Obama calls for a "blueprint for an expeditious yet responsible exit from Iraq," but opposes a "date certain for the total withdrawal of U.S. troops."

From June 2006 forward to the end of the D party primaries in mid 2008 Sens Clinton and Obama voted identically on Iraq war measures considered by the Senate save a perhaps related one - Sen Obama voted against the Iraq commander Gen Casey to be advanced to Army chief of staff, Sen Clinton voted for.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/01/clinton_vs_obama_on_iraq.html

My post wasn't incomplete. It addressed exactly that item that needed addressing.

Having said that, does all this smoke you are blowing somehow prove your statement was truthful when you claimed Obama voted against the Iraq War Resolution?

He was sworn in as a US Senator on January 3, 2005. The vote happened in October 2002 which predated his membership in the Senate.

His giving speeches after the fact saying what he wouda, couda, shouda done ain't the same thing as casting a vote, and you know it.

As long as you keep bringing it up, you will only look sillier than you appear with this last post trying to defend the indefensible.

What you claimed was wrong and most people would simply say...oops...and move on.

Not you, it seems.

[Publicus]

My post wasn't incomplete. It addressed exactly that item that needed addressing.

Having said that, does all this smoke you are blowing somehow prove your statement was truthful when you claimed Obama voted against the Iraq War Resolution?

He was sworn in as a US Senator on January 3, 2005. The vote happened in October 2002 which predated his membership in the Senate.

His giving speeches after the fact saying what he wouda, couda, shouda done ain't the same thing as casting a vote, and you know it.

As long as you keep bringing it up, you will only look sillier than you appear with this last post trying to defend the indefensible.

What you claimed was wrong and most people would simply say...oops...and move on.

Not you, it seems.

Okay officer.

My hands are up.

Don't shoot.

[jpinx]

My post wasn't incomplete. It addressed exactly that item that needed addressing.

Having said that, does all this smoke you are blowing somehow prove your statement was truthful when you claimed Obama voted against the Iraq War Resolution?

He was sworn in as a US Senator on January 3, 2005. The vote happened in October 2002 which predated his membership in the Senate.

His giving speeches after the fact saying what he wouda, couda, shouda done ain't the same thing as casting a vote, and you know it.

As long as you keep bringing it up, you will only look sillier than you appear with this last post trying to defend the indefensible.

What you claimed was wrong and most people would simply say...oops...and move on.

Not you, it seems.

Okay officer.

My hands are up.

Don't shoot.

Hands up in USA doesn't seem to save your bacon anymore

[simple1]

On day one of Air-Sea Battle combat operations against Lybia, cruise missiles launched from submarines and surface ships destroyed Libya’s lethal air and missile defenses thereby enabling coalition forces to conduct unfettered follow-on strikes to destroy the Libyan Air Force and control the air domain.

The Libyan Regime's Order of Battle, which included 800 main battle tanks, 2500 artillery pieces, 2000 armored personnel carriers and 360 fixed wing fighters and 85 transport aircraft was either disabled or destroyed. Not one American boot set foot on the ground; no Americans were killed in combat operations. Muammar Quaddafy was captured and killed by Libyan rebels in October. 2011.

Rear Adm James G. Foggo III

Assistant Deputy Chief of Naval Operations Testimony To Congress October 10, 2013

http://navylive.dodlive.mil/2013/10/10/rear-adm-foggo-discusses-air-sea-battle-concept/

You use Libya as an example. It took seven months to acheive the destruction presented by Foggo in support of the Libyan rebel forces. In addition, at a minimum there were UK, French and Qatar SP on the ground. Libya is struggling to this day to acheive national unity with 350 militias having taken the place of the national army and police force.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28948948

What are your thoughts on how to avoid a similar outcome in Syria and potentially Iraq?

Hate to be the one to break the news to some around here, but the ME has been a cauldron of chaos since the end of WWII and the collapse of the Great Powers' empires there.

In fact, the ME over the long term of history hasn't exactly been a beacon or haven of peace and prosperity. Hell, the unarmed Jesus Christ was executed there by the Roman state for nothing more than his attempts to deliver its embroiled local humanity to an eternal desert paradise.

The ME post the U.S. 2003 invasion of Iraq has been compared to Europe's Thirty Year's War between Catholics and Protestants that devastated the continent (1618-1648). The Sunni - Shia' combat has no end in sight so perhaps hoping that within the next 30 years the two sides reach an accommodation could sound good.

The contorted Arab Spring has made its own contribution to the newest anarchy that consists of coups, failed elections, new factions, new interventions such as the one in Lybia.

So what is to prevent Syria becoming Lybia after the U.S. organizes a coalition of allies to blast IS, Assad, Putin, then goes home?

I said a couple of years ago the world will not miss Syria. A disarmed and inward looking tribalized Syria with a weak central government could be a quiet place impacting no one in the region. Thirty years of marking time there would be good. .

Post removed to enable reply.

Who do you suggest would contribute ground forces to disarm Islamic State and other Islamic extremist groups, as well as the Assad military and militias?

Are you alone in your thinking that walking away & leaving a weak central government inplace would create a "quite place". Everything I've read suggests this would be the ideal environment for extremists to recoup & create a great deal of noise, both domestically and externally.

[jpinx]

Hate to be the one to break the news to some around here, but the ME has been a cauldron of chaos since the end of WWII and the collapse of the Great Powers' empires there.

In fact, the ME over the long term of history hasn't exactly been a beacon or haven of peace and prosperity. Hell, the unarmed Jesus Christ was executed there by the Roman state for nothing more than his attempts to deliver its embroiled local humanity to an eternal desert paradise.

The ME post the U.S. 2003 invasion of Iraq has been compared to Europe's Thirty Year's War between Catholics and Protestants that devastated the continent (1618-1648). The Sunni - Shia' combat has no end in sight so perhaps hoping that within the next 30 years the two sides reach an accommodation could sound good.

The contorted Arab Spring has made its own contribution to the newest anarchy that consists of coups, failed elections, new factions, new interventions such as the one in Lybia.

So what is to prevent Syria becoming Lybia after the U.S. organizes a coalition of allies to blast IS, Assad, Putin, then goes home?

I said a couple of years ago the world will not miss Syria. A disarmed and inward looking tribalized Syria with a weak central government could be a quiet place impacting no one in the region. Thirty years of marking time there would be good. .

==================== >>

I like your presentation If politicans were not narrow-minded, corrupt bigots, always chasing down the "main chance", they might benefit from being forced to recite your posting by heart !

Who was it that said that if you don't learn from the mistakes of history, you are doomed to repeat them ?

Sadly humanity is controlled by testosterone so macho man will always rule by either the sword or the dollar - it matters little. For the rest of us mere mortals who recognise our vulnerability to our hormones, the best we can do is refuse to serve as puppets or cannon-fodder. Education bears a heavy responsibility to instill humane and co-operative standards in our behaviour, of which we have less than the members of a colony of bees -- who will never attack.

Edited to type what *I* want to say .--. Not my dumb mobiles "auto-complete"

Edited August 30, 2014 by jpinx

[CBR250]

==================== >>

Sadly humanity is controlled by testosterone so macho man will always rule by either the sword or the dollar - it matters little.

I quite liked 90% of jpinx's post too. BUT, I must take issue with this one sentence - why does testosterone always get such bad press? Sure, it underlies male pattern baldness. A crime! But other than that, its pretty useful stuff. For example, women's sexual drive is dependent on testosterone. Take it away and you'll be very sorry!

And don't blame the y chromosome for all of the trouble either - remember: Margaret Thatcher (Falklands War), Indira Ghandi (led war against Pakistan, 1971); Queen "Bloody" Mary (plenty of Irish remember her taste for killing from the 16th Century); Queen LIz the First (gave refuge to Mary Queen of Scots, then locked her up for 20 years and finally murdered her). Queen Isabella of Spain (kick started the Inquisition in 15th C); Countess Elizabeth Bathory (believed to be one of the worst serial killers of all time, with over 600 victims); And course, Golda Meir ('nuff said).

But back to jpinx excellent post - I agree that we may be waiting decades for this particular tableau of power grabbing, vengeance and tribal loyalties to be played out in the ME. We in the west should do what we can to minimise the damage there - so as to avoid the inevitable spillover effects on ourselves if not for humanitarian reasons.

But we sure should not be trying to fan the flames into a worldwide battle between religions!

Edited August 30, 2014 by CBR250

[Publicus]

You use Libya as an example. It took seven months to acheive the destruction presented by Foggo in support of the Libyan rebel forces. In addition, at a minimum there were UK, French and Qatar SP on the ground. Libya is struggling to this day to acheive national unity with 350 militias having taken the place of the national army and police force.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28948948

What are your thoughts on how to avoid a similar outcome in Syria and potentially Iraq?

Hate to be the one to break the news to some around here, but the ME has been a cauldron of chaos since the end of WWII and the collapse of the Great Powers' empires there.

In fact, the ME over the long term of history hasn't exactly been a beacon or haven of peace and prosperity. Hell, the unarmed Jesus Christ was executed there by the Roman state for nothing more than his attempts to deliver its embroiled local humanity to an eternal desert paradise.

The ME post the U.S. 2003 invasion of Iraq has been compared to Europe's Thirty Year's War between Catholics and Protestants that devastated the continent (1618-1648). The Sunni - Shia' combat has no end in sight so perhaps hoping that within the next 30 years the two sides reach an accommodation could sound good.

The contorted Arab Spring has made its own contribution to the newest anarchy that consists of coups, failed elections, new factions, new interventions such as the one in Lybia.

So what is to prevent Syria becoming Lybia after the U.S. organizes a coalition of allies to blast IS, Assad, Putin, then goes home?

I said a couple of years ago the world will not miss Syria. A disarmed and inward looking tribalized Syria with a weak central government could be a quiet place impacting no one in the region. Thirty years of marking time there would be good. .

Post removed to enable reply.

Who do you suggest would contribute ground forces to disarm Islamic State and other Islamic extremist groups, as well as the Assad military and militias?

Are you alone in your thinking that walking away & leaving a weak central government inplace would create a "quite place". Everything I've read suggests this would be the ideal environment for extremists to recoup & create a great deal of noise, both domestically and externally.

Yes I use Lybia as an example of the U.S decisive new war doctrine of Air-Sea Battle adopted by Congress in 2010 on the recommendation of the commander in chief and his chief serving military advisor the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff..

In fact if the U.S. had done the inconceivable in Lybia - a full scale Order of Battle invasion and conquest as in Iraq - the seven months of measured warfare utilized to destroy systematically the Lybian armed forces would have been accomplished in a couple of weeks at the most. (The ASB War Plan and Doctrine implicitly declasses the Army to a minor role, marking the end of the U.S. Army as the nation's premier war fighting force.)

No more U.S. ground wars. Yes boots on the ground are still needed but not as the U.S.' main and decisive fighting force. The times of Operation Desert Storm and the conquest of Iraq by Army generals strategizing and commanding divisions of infantry armor and artillery are now in the history books. From here on out the U.S. Army will follow on subsequent to Air-Sea Battle, conducted by integrated Naval and Air Forces, to clean up, occupy, administer.

Beyond all of that, the current proposition is that the U.S. and coalition allies would destroy the IS, subdue Putin, show Iran who remains the force majeure (superior) and indeed to make that clear throughout the entire region and to the world at large.

In short, most if not all of the military forces of radical Islam would be decimated thereby enabling some stability and calm to be introduced to the region. It is within that framework that some period of military calm might become enabling and religious conflict might subside.

As to the coalition allies, the Arab states vested in having peace and stability throughout the region must necessarily be a central part of it. That would be the starting point because without states such as Saudi Arabia, Nato ally and ME next door neighbor Turkey, the Gulf States, other small but major players such as Jordan the starting gates just don't open.

Now I'm hearing the U.S., the UK, EU, traditionally friendly Arab governments are exploring Machiavellian means, i.e., a purpose specific rapproachment with Assad to join in the sought after fight to destroy IS and other extreme religious forces and hopefully sooner rather than later to end the civil war.

So all in all if anyone is in the market looking for guarantees I'd suggest they buy a toaster.

Needless to say this is extremely complex and complicated, sensitive stuff. I therefore decline your appointment of me as Secretary of State.