Islamic State battle could take years, Pentagon says

[lovetotravel]

there is no evidence in the historic record that leaving islamic jihad alone leaves them to their own ends- none!

What? Europe and the west had be under no threat from Islamists of any kind for like a thousand years. Until every recently we didn't know jihadists even existed, they didn't know it themselves.

Modern jihad is reactionary, it was born as opposition to creation of Israel, Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, and Americans taking over Saudi Arabia, that got the ball rolling.

Now that these dudes exist AND attract significant following something needs to be done, sure, but IS is not a uniform state, ideologists are only a front riding on the back of military success of non-religious pragmatists. Until this summer the US had control over them via financing so ISIL was declared a JV league but once they took over Mosul and oil fields they got out of (American and Saudi) control.

These pragmatists probably don't want a war with the whole world over stupid things Islamist hot heads say, they'd rather make deals, not war. They ostensibly fight Kurds, for example, but at the same time use Kurds' channels to smuggle their oil out of IS territories. Business and politics have no permanent enemies, and their appetite is reasonable - they just want what was taken from them after the fall of Saddam.

They probably would not think twice about slaughtering their jihadi "brothers" if they think it would serve them better just like they would slaughter Shias or Syrians.

"Divide and conquer" rule is still as valid as ever, the West should be relying on that rather than on uniting all jihadis of the world under IS banner, unless they plan to kill them all in one strike, that is.

You might want to read this for a good description of the history of these crazies:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/world/middleeast/isis-abu-bakr-baghdadi-caliph-wahhabi.html

People love to blame the west, but that's not the right response. These guys even hate other muslims!

[dexterm]

And it will take years for IS to plan fresh 911s too. When the new western mantra will then be "What did we do to deserve this?"

If Iraq's main export were asparagus this would not be happening.

This war is all about oil, arms sales, and protecting Israel and US stooge monarchs and dictators in the Gulf and Egypt.

Assad of Syria must be rubbing his hands together with glee so that he can carry on committing atrocities against his own citizens. Last year we were threatening to bomb him; now we are kindly bombing his enemies for him.

And there's that photo in today's papers of Cameron sitting down with no less than yesterday's leader of the Axis of Evil Rouhani of Iran asking for help. Weren't we going to bomb him last year too?

It's a funny old game this Middle Eastern geopolitics business.

Edited September 25, 2014 by dexterm

[Publicus]

This is a very low level military operation that yesterday got the unanimous approval of the United Nations Security Council, which means China and Russia inclusively. Anyone contesting the viability of the coalition campaign against ISIS needs to account for the rare and remarkable unanimity of the UNSC. If it's such a stinko operation then why is the world virtually unanimous in support of it.

Someone threw his own bomb in a post here of $67 billion which is a sum I'd though was presented somewhat carelessly. This sum in no way represents any cost that might be associated with the IS bombing campaign. The Pentagon figures the projected cost of the bombing campaign against ISIS will be something in the neighborhood of $10 billion, which to corporations that produce armaments is peanuts..

The Nato 1999 comprehensive bombing campaign against Serbia to break its genocide in Kosovo lasted more than 90 days, which did not distinguish it as an overnight success but it was a timely success with hardly any Nato casualties and almost no civilian casualties. Arms manufacturers didn't rake in the bucks due to that campaign either.

A lot of the anguished hand wringers around here seem not to have studied or learned much history. The tortured opponents of this low scale limited air campaign sound as if human history has been tranquil, orderly, peaceful, clear and easily defined, choices between only black or white, rational, made by reasonable people, absent outrages and much more that the doomsayers fantasize over. The current generation of hand wringers seem to think evil, war, outrage, human slaughter, profiteering, cynicism and the like suddenly came on and from nowhere at the beginning of the present century, and that the ISIS along with the bombing campaign marks the decline and demise of all that is good and of civilization itself..

[Publicus]

The armaments are precise and devastatingly powerful, effective even over such a vast and barren area as the ME where terrorists can hole up in many locations across a wide area. With their vehicles targeted for destruction and being destroyed in almost every attack to date it becomes a long walk for IS to go anywhere, to include to expand their holdings or to scatter, retreat, hide.

Obama's estimate was most optimistic - 70 militants, no civilians. Others put the number of 30-40 fighters and maybe 10 civilians. That's for 40 cruise missiles and untold number of bombs.

Yes, they are devastatingly powerful - one cruise missile followed by one or two precision bombs will certainly kill one militant on average.

The rhetoric misses the realities, completely.

How true.

That is a completely failed post.

Trying to put words into someone's mouth is presumptuous arrogance that fails every time simply because it is an eccentric tactic used by people who haven't anything real to say or advocate..

The post It is 100% rhetorical.

It is intellectual and cultural masturbation that has nothing to do with my position, my views, my arguments, the issues I advocate or oppose.

Try stating your own views or try directly to address the views of others. Trying to have me say the opposite of my views and positions is a child's play.

[sustento]

Just think of all that lovely cash that will be sloshing around the arms industry in the near future!

Sadly, it will not be enough to get even. Losers in a poker game always want to raise the stakes before the game breaks up.

I was thinking more of those who actually benefit from yet another war. It certainly won't be those who are fighting it.

[Jingthing]

The title could read: Barbarism Versus Stupidism

In my lifetime, the USA has not blundered into a more incoherent, feckless, and unfavorable foreign policy quandary than we see today.

Does any tattoo-free American adult outside the Kardashian-NFL mass hypnosis matrix feel confident about the trajectory of US policy regarding the so-called Islamic State (ISIS, ISIL)? First, there is the astonishing humiliation that this ragtag band of psychopaths managed to undo ten years, 4,500 US battle deaths, and $1+ trillion worth of nation-building effort in Iraq in a matter of a few weeks this summer. The US public does not seem to have groked the damage to our honor, self-confidence, and international standing in this debacle.

We’ll look back on these weirdly placid years after the 2008 train wreck with amazement. These are the rudderless years of no leadership, of cowardly dissimulating midgets. A people can only take so much of that.

The author is a certain Mr. Kunstler.

Not "HaleySabai"

http://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/barbarism-versus-stupidism/

[craigt3365]

A few troll posts have been removed from view.

[Publicus]

According to Bloomberg 200 munitions were dropped on IS in addition to 47 Tomahawks, bringing the ratio to about five hi-tech precision bombs and a cruise missile to kill one militant.

Strategy is simple here:

1. Pick a fight somewhere

2. Make it a US problem

3. Bomb the sand out of desert

4. Profit

"Led by Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT), the biggest U.S. defense companies are trading at record prices as shareholders reap rewards from escalating military conflicts around the world." - that's the real, measurable effect, not the number of killed jihadis.

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-25/syria-to-ukraine-wars-send-u-s-defense-stocks-to-records.html

Putin is in full retreat as the ruble becomes a rubble, oil prices plunge, foreign capital continues to flee Russia to the tune of $70 billion this year alone, the capital markets of both the U.S. and the EU are closed to Russia, Western energy technology Russia can't produce is included in the latest sanctions, no leaders stand up for Putin or with Putin.

Meanwhile Putin cries out against Obama's air strikes in Syria. Yet Russia this week joined the other members of the UN Security Council to produce a unanimous vote concerning the iSIS and the US led coalition campaign of air strikes.

It could look like Putin finally realized he needs to start to play chess with someone who doesn't always have to let him win.

[sustento]

Gosh it's all Putin's fault

[Pakboong]

I open my regular sites this AM and notice that the MSM offered how the Iraqi PM believes that ISIS plans to target Paris or New York. I am not saying they won't but they have so many much softer targets, why would they try and attack what could be the hardest targets around? ISIS has only existed 10 minutes and now they plan to attack Paris. Now, I do get the PR benefit from bringing down the statue of liberty or the eiffel tower. But, this seems to be a joke.

The mortal enemy of the Arab is the Jew. They may enter into convenient treaties in the Middle East but the mortal enemy that trumps all others as far as the Arab goes, is the Jew first and the American 2nd. Their tribal squabbles are a distant 3rd. ISIS has no current interest in Israel, the Jews in the diaspora or aiding the Palestinian struggle. That alone suggests something is amiss.

Any simple risk assessment would list much softer targets that are readily available. Now we have these 26 muslims who fund themselves like Bonnie and Clyde by robbing banks along the way and have developed the ability to enter the US via Mexico and pose a threat to New York. The best part is they are really only killing other muslims and a few journalists. These beheadings look staged and are a reminder of early days of Al Queda.

A real risk profile would likely include the 7 million muslims already in the US. A jihad by radical Islam would involve agents already on US soil There would be no need to enter via Mexico. The stories of 72 virgins and martyrdom apply to the American muslims just as they do to those in the middle east. They are generally watched but the US does not have the assets to constantly keep 7 million muslims under surveillance.

What is to stop them from attacking a Bar Mitzvah of the rich and famous and killing a hundred Jews in a place like Boca Raton, Florida.. They are going to be martyred anyway so why not pick softer targets which have very light or no security? A coordinated strike like the Tet offensive in 1968 could do a lot of damage and according to many, they have no fear of dying. But, those pesky US muslims seem to have no interest in Jihad.

I am finding the current version of what is going on with ISIS quite laughable. After all, most people actually believe that Bin Laden held the USA at bay for 10 years and spent less for that 10 year period than the US spent in one day. If you can actually fight the most powerful opponent in World History for 10 years with a bank roll of around $250,000,000, nobody can beat you. Bin Laden on his richest day, had control of $250,000,000.

The picture painted by the Mainstream Media is silly to me and I simply cannot buy anything that silly.

[simple1]

From my reading the greatest threat to the Muslim population in Iraq /Syria is from their fellow Muslims, whether they are Shiites or Sunnis. A few days ago the US military person who was previously responsible for training the Iraqi forces said 50% of the battalions are unusable for deployment in the current conflict as they are Shiite sectarians, the remaining 50% need to be reequipped, retrained and motivated to act in the Iraqi national interest.

Now that Malaki is gone, the buy-in from the Arab Sunni tribal leadership is essential, as was the case in Western Iraq during the US occupation. Currently the unknown is which groups' forces will re-occupy territory recaptured from IS without leading to another round of conflict.

IS has announced they plan to attack Western countries and have had a few individual failed attacks. All they need is one 'spectacular' for their social media propaganda machine to go into overdrive. It is claimed IS already has a presence in Gaza and I would assume the West Bank. Also of concern is IS claims of establishing a presence in India that could quickly destabilise relations with Pakistan thereby underlying the OP assertion

[ClutchClark]

"Years" as in "never." We're going to have to just keep killing as many of them as we can, where we find them, try to keep them out of our countries, and hold it down as much as we can.

They are rabid about killing all infidels and having a world that is only Muslim.

How do we fight someone who doesn't care if he dies and therefore will never surrender? I don't know that we've ever had that before.

I remember when the same thing was said of the Japanese.

All I know is its time to buy Halliburton stock again.

[Matej]

Islamic state can be ultimately defeated only by ground forces. The question is, who will do that?

[Thorgal]

Islamic state can be ultimately defeated only by ground forces. The question is, who will do that?

Wrong, you wille enter into a second Stalingrad.

Coalition forces are well aware of that...

[Publicus]

Gosh it's all Putin's fault alt=cheesy.gif width=32 height=20>

His supporters and defenders - his apologists - have gone from laughably portraying Putin as a chess master geostrategic genius to some sort of beat up on innocent victim and convenient whipping boy.

The fact is Putin is in retreat and his many serious wounds are self-inflicted.

From Syria to Pussy Riot to the Lavender Threat and on to the Ukraine Putin is out of it, not in contact with the real world.

Russia is more than welcome as a responsible member of the international community and order. It's accurate to say the world needs Russia, is truly interested to welcome Russia as a responsible partner The real bottom line however is that Russia does not need Putin.

I open my regular sites this AM and notice that the MSM offered how the Iraqi PM believes that ISIS plans to target Paris or New York. I am not saying they won't but they have so many much softer targets, why would they try and attack what could be the hardest targets around? ISIS has only existed 10 minutes and now they plan to attack Paris. Now, I do get the PR benefit from bringing down the statue of liberty or the eiffel tower. But, this seems to be a joke.

The mortal enemy of the Arab is the Jew. They may enter into convenient treaties in the Middle East but the mortal enemy that trumps all others as far as the Arab goes, is the Jew first and the American 2nd. Their tribal squabbles are a distant 3rd. ISIS has no current interest in Israel, the Jews in the diaspora or aiding the Palestinian struggle. That alone suggests something is amiss.

Any simple risk assessment would list much softer targets that are readily available. Now we have these 26 muslims who fund themselves like Bonnie and Clyde by robbing banks along the way and have developed the ability to enter the US via Mexico and pose a threat to New York. The best part is they are really only killing other muslims and a few journalists. These beheadings look staged and are a reminder of early days of Al Queda.

A real risk profile would likely include the 7 million muslims already in the US. A jihad by radical Islam would involve agents already on US soil There would be no need to enter via Mexico. The stories of 72 virgins and martyrdom apply to the American muslims just as they do to those in the middle east. They are generally watched but the US does not have the assets to constantly keep 7 million muslims under surveillance.

What is to stop them from attacking a Bar Mitzvah of the rich and famous and killing a hundred Jews in a place like Boca Raton, Florida.. They are going to be martyred anyway so why not pick softer targets which have very light or no security? A coordinated strike like the Tet offensive in 1968 could do a lot of damage and according to many, they have no fear of dying. But, those pesky US muslims seem to have no interest in Jihad.

I am finding the current version of what is going on with ISIS quite laughable. After all, most people actually believe that Bin Laden held the USA at bay for 10 years and spent less for that 10 year period than the US spent in one day. If you can actually fight the most powerful opponent in World History for 10 years with a bank roll of around $250,000,000, nobody can beat you. Bin Laden on his richest day, had control of $250,000,000.

The picture painted by the Mainstream Media is silly to me and I simply cannot buy anything that silly.

At first glance I'd thought I'd be reading a serious discussion of the issues.

I wuz wrong.

Flat out wrong.

Bin Laden for instance spent 10 years in hiding from the United States not ten years fighting the United States all the while spending a thick wad of other people's money.

Edited September 26, 2014 by Publicus

[Matej]

Islamic state can be ultimately defeated only by ground forces. The question is, who will do that?

Wrong, you wille enter into a second Stalingrad.

Coalition forces are well aware of that...

Look at Libya. Only deployment of aviation almost saved Muammar Gaddafi's regime, at the end it was ground forces, which defeated him ...

and air forces only help with that. I'm not saying bombing is not effective ... I'm saying bombing is not enough to defeated this kind of regime/win 'war'. Also, another important thing to realize is: Aviation is the most effective against regular/modern armies.

[BATHIK]

According to Bloomberg 200 munitions were dropped on IS in addition to 47 Tomahawks, bringing the ratio to about five hi-tech precision bombs and a cruise missile to kill one militant.

Strategy is simple here:

1. Pick a fight somewhere

2. Make it a US problem

3. Bomb the sand out of desert

4. Profit

"Led by Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT), the biggest U.S. defense companies are trading at record prices as shareholders reap rewards from escalating military conflicts around the world." - that's the real, measurable effect, not the number of killed jihadis.

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-25/syria-to-ukraine-wars-send-u-s-defense-stocks-to-records.html

Putin is in full retreat as the ruble becomes a rubble, oil prices plunge, foreign capital continues to flee Russia to the tune of $70 billion this year alone, the capital markets of both the U.S. and the EU are closed to Russia, Western energy technology Russia can't produce is included in the latest sanctions, no leaders stand up for Putin or with Putin.

Meanwhile Putin cries out against Obama's air strikes in Syria. Yet Russia this week joined the other members of the UN Security Council to produce a unanimous vote concerning the iSIS and the US led coalition campaign of air strikes.

It could look like Putin finally realized he needs to start to play chess with someone who doesn't always have to let him win.

Deja vu?

Didn't you say exactly the same stuff elsewhere already?

Putin here, Putin there,

Putin Putin everywhere.

In every thread, on every corner,

Putin gives some folks a boner:

From another thread:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/760767-us-and-nato-troops-begin-ukraine-military-exercise/page-2#entry8438803

Putin is in full retreat as the ruble becomes a rubble, oil prices plunge, foreign capital continues to flee Russia to the tune of $70 billion this year alone, the capital markets of both the U.S. and the EU are closed, Western energy technology Russia can't produce is included in the latest sanctions, no leaders stand up for Putin or with Putin, while Putin cries out against Obama's air strikes in Syria.

Putin is now shriveled up in a corner of his office in the Kremlin experiencing only present traumatic stress conniptions as his grandiose designs collapse and crash down around him, not the least of which is the Russian economy and its financial sectors.

Putin needs to start to play chess with someone who doesn't always let him

Russians are [wisely] sitting this one out. Let the West draw a large red circle on their backs, Russians don't want any more of global jihad than they already have on their plate.

AFAIK, mission to retake Chechnya was the only threat to countries outside their borders IS ever made. Feel free to correct if they threatened any other country specifically.

[Pakboong]

Gosh it's all Putin's fault alt=cheesy.gif width=32 height=20>

His supporters and defenders - his apologists - have gone from laughably portraying Putin as a chess master geostrategic genius to some sort of beat up on innocent victim and convenient whipping boy.

The fact is Putin is in retreat and his many serious wounds are self-inflicted.

From Syria to Pussy Riot to the Lavender Threat and on to the Ukraine Putin is out of it, not in contact with the real world.

Russia is more than welcome as a responsible member of the international community and order. It's accurate to say the world needs Russia, is truly interested to welcome Russia as a responsible partner The real bottom line however is that Russia does not need Putin.

I open my regular sites this AM and notice that the MSM offered how the Iraqi PM believes that ISIS plans to target Paris or New York. I am not saying they won't but they have so many much softer targets, why would they try and attack what could be the hardest targets around? ISIS has only existed 10 minutes and now they plan to attack Paris. Now, I do get the PR benefit from bringing down the statue of liberty or the eiffel tower. But, this seems to be a joke.

The mortal enemy of the Arab is the Jew. They may enter into convenient treaties in the Middle East but the mortal enemy that trumps all others as far as the Arab goes, is the Jew first and the American 2nd. Their tribal squabbles are a distant 3rd. ISIS has no current interest in Israel, the Jews in the diaspora or aiding the Palestinian struggle. That alone suggests something is amiss.

Any simple risk assessment would list much softer targets that are readily available. Now we have these 26 muslims who fund themselves like Bonnie and Clyde by robbing banks along the way and have developed the ability to enter the US via Mexico and pose a threat to New York. The best part is they are really only killing other muslims and a few journalists. These beheadings look staged and are a reminder of early days of Al Queda.

A real risk profile would likely include the 7 million muslims already in the US. A jihad by radical Islam would involve agents already on US soil There would be no need to enter via Mexico. The stories of 72 virgins and martyrdom apply to the American muslims just as they do to those in the middle east. They are generally watched but the US does not have the assets to constantly keep 7 million muslims under surveillance.

What is to stop them from attacking a Bar Mitzvah of the rich and famous and killing a hundred Jews in a place like Boca Raton, Florida.. They are going to be martyred anyway so why not pick softer targets which have very light or no security? A coordinated strike like the Tet offensive in 1968 could do a lot of damage and according to many, they have no fear of dying. But, those pesky US muslims seem to have no interest in Jihad.

I am finding the current version of what is going on with ISIS quite laughable. After all, most people actually believe that Bin Laden held the USA at bay for 10 years and spent less for that 10 year period than the US spent in one day. If you can actually fight the most powerful opponent in World History for 10 years with a bank roll of around $250,000,000, nobody can beat you. Bin Laden on his richest day, had control of $250,000,000.

The picture painted by the Mainstream Media is silly to me and I simply cannot buy anything that silly.

At first glance I'd thought I'd be reading a serious discussion of the issues.

I wuz wrong.

Flat out wrong.

Bin Laden for instance spent 10 years in hiding from the United States not ten years fighting the United States all the while spending a thick wad of other people's money.

There certainly is little risk and almost no point in repeating the Fox news summary.

[Publicus]

Gosh it's all Putin's fault alt=cheesy.gif width=32 height=20>

His supporters and defenders - his apologists - have gone from laughably portraying Putin as a chess master geostrategic genius to some sort of beat up on innocent victim and convenient whipping boy.

The fact is Putin is in retreat and his many serious wounds are self-inflicted.

From Syria to Pussy Riot to the Lavender Threat and on to the Ukraine Putin is out of it, not in contact with the real world.

Russia is more than welcome as a responsible member of the international community and order. It's accurate to say the world needs Russia, is truly interested to welcome Russia as a responsible partner The real bottom line however is that Russia does not need Putin.

I open my regular sites this AM and notice that the MSM offered how the Iraqi PM believes that ISIS plans to target Paris or New York. I am not saying they won't but they have so many much softer targets, why would they try and attack what could be the hardest targets around? ISIS has only existed 10 minutes and now they plan to attack Paris. Now, I do get the PR benefit from bringing down the statue of liberty or the eiffel tower. But, this seems to be a joke.

The mortal enemy of the Arab is the Jew. They may enter into convenient treaties in the Middle East but the mortal enemy that trumps all others as far as the Arab goes, is the Jew first and the American 2nd. Their tribal squabbles are a distant 3rd. ISIS has no current interest in Israel, the Jews in the diaspora or aiding the Palestinian struggle. That alone suggests something is amiss.

Any simple risk assessment would list much softer targets that are readily available. Now we have these 26 muslims who fund themselves like Bonnie and Clyde by robbing banks along the way and have developed the ability to enter the US via Mexico and pose a threat to New York. The best part is they are really only killing other muslims and a few journalists. These beheadings look staged and are a reminder of early days of Al Queda.

A real risk profile would likely include the 7 million muslims already in the US. A jihad by radical Islam would involve agents already on US soil There would be no need to enter via Mexico. The stories of 72 virgins and martyrdom apply to the American muslims just as they do to those in the middle east. They are generally watched but the US does not have the assets to constantly keep 7 million muslims under surveillance.

What is to stop them from attacking a Bar Mitzvah of the rich and famous and killing a hundred Jews in a place like Boca Raton, Florida.. They are going to be martyred anyway so why not pick softer targets which have very light or no security? A coordinated strike like the Tet offensive in 1968 could do a lot of damage and according to many, they have no fear of dying. But, those pesky US muslims seem to have no interest in Jihad.

I am finding the current version of what is going on with ISIS quite laughable. After all, most people actually believe that Bin Laden held the USA at bay for 10 years and spent less for that 10 year period than the US spent in one day. If you can actually fight the most powerful opponent in World History for 10 years with a bank roll of around $250,000,000, nobody can beat you. Bin Laden on his richest day, had control of $250,000,000.

The picture painted by the Mainstream Media is silly to me and I simply cannot buy anything that silly.

At first glance I'd thought I'd be reading a serious discussion of the issues.

I wuz wrong.

Flat out wrong.

Bin Laden for instance spent 10 years in hiding from the United States not ten years fighting the United States all the while spending a thick wad of other people's money.

There certainly is little risk and almost no point in repeating the Fox news summary.

Easily agreed.

[Jingthing]

I remain suspicious as always. In my experience, there are no Arabs who hate other Arabs more than they hate Jews. If this bunch ignores Israel, they are probably not for real. I can't help but notice the Israeli absence in this struggle. They don't get the martyr button for killing other Arabs.

Suspicious again?

Another global Jewish conspiracy, is it?

Oy vey.

Authorities said he was in possession of firearms, large quantity of ammunition and a video claiming responsibility for the attack that shocked Europe's Jewish community.

One of the weapons was wrapped up in a white sheet scrawled with the name of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis).

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/france-isis-jihadist-mehdi-nemmouche-be-extradited-over-brussels-jewish-museum-attack-1454356

Actually I have seen reports of Muslims speaking of martyrdom in dying fighting other Muslims.

I am not the expert as you claim to be on the point level of the hatred compared to hatred of Jews.

Edited September 26, 2014 by Jingthing

[cloudhopper]

Muslims, communists, whatever. The business plan of the USA is perpetual war.

[NeverSure]

Muslims, communists, whatever. The business plan of the USA is perpetual war.

Same ole same ole. Where do you guys get this misinformation? There are usually many countries involved and in support but the USA gets ALL of the blame or credit, depending on your point of view.

This time what is interesting is that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and Jordan are all participating in this bombing in Syria. Muslims on Muslims.

The USA has the most equipment, but to call it a business plan when it will cost so little as a benefit to the huge hardware manufacturers that they won't even notice it is ludicrous.

I can't understand the ignorance or the prejudice.

[cloudhopper]

Muslims, communists, whatever. The business plan of the USA is perpetual war.

Same ole same ole. Where do you guys get this misinformation? There are usually many countries involved and in support but the USA gets ALL of the blame or credit, depending on your point of view.

This time what is interesting is that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and Jordan are all participating in this bombing in Syria. Muslims on Muslims.

The USA has the most equipment, but to call it a business plan when it will cost so little as a benefit to the huge hardware manufacturers that they won't even notice it is ludicrous.

I can't understand the ignorance or the prejudice.

It isn't information, mis- or otherwise, it's a personal opinion of a US citizen who has studied economics and history since the Korean "conflict' (still ongoing). It was also the personal conclusion of one of the most decorated officers in US military history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler

[sustento]

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.pdf

[cloudhopper]

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.pdf

Thanks it should be obvious that nothing has changed since this classic was written. Was it Baron Rothschild who advised "buy to the roar of the cannons"? I see the US stock market and defense firms are at an all time high. Gear up for another long war boys, your stock market country needs you.