How to defeat political Islam

[dimreepr]

I am rather puzzled that you made no attempt to refute your argument/claim that 'America had a bad, stupid leader interested only in the oil.'

 

 

Are you serious?

 

Why would I provide a rebuttal to my own point?

Or did you quote me by mistake?

[Ten oz]

Carrock,

 

Yes, I get that argument. We wanted to go in for various reasons, which all turned out to be bogus, and therefore America had a bad, stupid leader interested only in the oil and that pulled the wool over the eyes of the world and the American people in doing the thing.

 

Except that is not what happened. And follows the anti Zionist anti American propaganda, that spins all against America. Saddam was pulling the wool over the eyes of the world, alternately allowing inspectors and foiling them, lying and shifting stuff around, while threatening the region, including Israel, with a very powerful army Years of no fly and sanctions had not reduced the threat. He would take aid and what came through the blockade for his own political benefit, starving his enemies and taking care of his friends. Meanwhile blaming the coalition blockade for starving children. When we did go in, I remember how he was publically speaking about how the mighty Iraqi forces were victorious over the advancing U.S. WHILE U.S. tanks were rolling into the city blocks away. I did not trust him a whit, while I did trust my own country and my president to do my bidding, which was to remove Saddam from power. That 20 20 hindsight showed his chemical arsenal was depleted, and he had no ties to Bin Laden, and his nuclear program was not as far along as we feared, did not change my feelings that we needed to take him down, and I am glad we were successful in doing it, and subsequently finding him and having him tried and executed by Iraqis. Now what was bad, was the Shiite, Sunni split that caused. Shiites in power, Sunnis in jail. Laid the groundwork for years of civil war and resistance against occupation. Caused inhumane slaughters of Sunnis by Shiites and retaliatory killing the other way. Laid the ground work for Iranian influence to grow against the Sunnis and resulted in the Sunni remanants of the Saddams guard, releasing Sunni political prisoners from jail and creating ISIS.

 

The U.S. wanted regime change, also in Syria. We did not invade. We did not have U.N. permission. Instead we backed the rebels, and encouraged the Arab Spring. Just as dangerous as going into Iraq. 5 and a half years of a quarter million deaths and refugees destabilizing the whole area including Europe. Yet we are scolded for going into Iraq, and thought wise to stay out of Syria. I am thinking we tried to do the right thing, in both cases and it turned out we did not do it right. 20 20 hindsight can make a fool or a hero out of anybody you want, depending on your overall philosophy and what sides you choose to take. I have chosen to take the side of the U.S. and my way of life, and I parse the world from that position.

I am not interested in striving 'til all the world is for Allah. Makes no sense. If Allah is true then the whole world is already his by definition. Being that I know for a fact, that Gabriel did not visit Mohammed in the cave and relay God's last messages to us, I have to take the thing as figurative, and therefore take Muhammed's conquests as literal. And that being said, 'til all the world is for Allah, is completely political, and there is no humanism in it, and it is reverence only to Mohammed and his successors.

 

To defeat that, you have to either tell Muslims to stop requiring children to memorize the Koran, or ask Muslims to stop requiring children to memorize the Koran.

 

Regards, TAR

You are mix and matching how you felt at the time with how you feel today. You have already stated that you believe, still believe, that Saddam had WMD and scuttled them before we invaded. So you are not using any hindsight to update your current point of view and are currently hiding behind the pretense of what was.

[Carrock]

 

I am rather puzzled that you made no attempt to refute your argument/claim that 'America had a bad, stupid leader interested only in the oil.'

Are you serious?

 

Why would I provide a rebuttal to my own point?

 

Or did you quote me by mistake?

 

One last post...

 

I did not realise you thought that 'America had a bad, stupid leader interested only in the oil.'

 

That was my mistake.

[tar]

Ten Oz,

 

Well yes I mix and match. How I felt then and how I feel now, have varying degrees of regret and pride involved. My take however is different than the take of those who would trash Bush and Elevate Obama for doing the same things.

 

In arguments about the middle east, there are at least two different battles going on. Zionist against Muslim, and Warmonger against Pacifist.

 

I frame all debates, and look at all facts as if I am a Zionist and a warmonger.

 

You can not call me a warmonger and a Zionist, as if it is going to hurt my feelings. I am 100% for me, my country and my way of life And will not pretend to be pure and uninterested in oil, as I drive my car, run my lawnmower and blower, and travel to Atlanta by car or plane. And I will not disavow my support for Israel and allow it to be OK to follow Sharia law and cut of Clitorises and throw gays off buildings and cut of the heads of apostates.

 

So I am not at all after a solution that makes everybody happy, because that is impossible, I am after a solution where the Western ideals, couched int the Judeo Christian religion, win out over whatever evil ideology has spawned ISIS, and Kim Jung-un.

 

It would be better for me to retain the good life I have, than to have it taken away because of a failed effort to improve someone else's.

 

As far as I am concerned, we , the U.S. and the coalition and the U.N. gave Iraq a chance to be a free democratic, secular, country, unencumbered by a dictator, and free to establish peace and freedom for its population, male and female, Sunni, Shiite and Kurd. That it did not happen is not the fault of Bush, or me.

 

dimreepr,

 

Tell me more about the kind of intelligence you are talking.

 

Regards, TAR

Edited September 14, 2016 by tar

[Ophiolite]

As far as I am concerned, we , the U.S. and the coalition and the U.N. gave Iraq a chance to be a free democratic, secular, country, unencumbered by a dictator, and free to establish peace and freedom for its population, male and female, Sunni, Shiite and Kurd. That it did not happen is not the fault of Bush, or me.

Brilliant war plan. No plan for peace. Many decisions made in the after math of the war led directly to the current situation.

 

The Marshall plan, in the wake of WWII, saved Europe.

 

The constitution and direction provided to the Japanese after WWII allowed a proud nation to rise again and prosper.

 

In Iraq the coalition (and I blame mainly Bush and Blair) acted like incompetent, indifferent, ignoramuses. Perhaps they acted that way because that's what they were.

[imatfaal]

Brilliant war plan. No plan for peace. Many decisions made in the after math of the war led directly to the current situation.

 

The Marshall plan, in the wake of WWII, saved Europe.

 

The constitution and direction provided to the Japanese after WWII allowed a proud nation to rise again and prosper.

 

In Iraq the coalition (and I blame mainly Bush and Blair) acted like incompetent, indifferent, ignoramuses. Perhaps they acted that way because that's what they were.

 

Agreed - alhough I might add that the Coalition allowed (either through inaction, or worse, complicity) people to take the reins of power (in government, business, restructuring, and the military) who were wholly against building a long term safe future for Iraq but dedicated to asset stripping. The plan was poorly thought out and incompentently executed and those third parties brought in were mercenary, corrupt, and completely unsuitable.

[dimreepr]

dimreepr,

 

Tell me more about the kind of intelligence you are talking.

 

Regards, TAR

 

 

The kind that understands, why force can't defeat an idea, why control is an illusion and how accurate military intelligence can foil the enemy, think enigmatically...

Edited September 15, 2016 by dimreepr

[tar]

dimreepr,

 

Perhaps, but do you think my serving in the Army in Germany helped in a small way to keep Nazi ideology from resurging and my presence as a stop against Soviet tank invasion might have, in a small way fought against the communist ideology that had hold of East Germany and allowed for the eventual coming down of the wall?

You want me to think enigmatically. Solve some mysterious puzzle, while my countrymen and allies get blown up and shot and sliced.

 

Try thinking backward. Let's say we have this ideology of peace and freedom and cooperation and economic development and mastery of disease and poverty, rule of law and human dignity and freedom. How does somebody defeat that ideology and make it so we distrust each other and go through screening processes at the airport and entering tall buildings. They do it by piloting planes into beautiful towers, cutting off heads, blowing people up and threatening to do more of the same if we do not stop being so happy and cooperative and successful and tolerant.

 

Our ideology is being challenged by force. We are being defeated by the hate and fear and derision being sown by ISIS. Terror is winning. How do we defeat that threat? By solving a puzzle? By thinking good thoughts? We already were thinking good thoughts prior the threat. The threat is not only an ideology, it is actual physical people trying to defeat ours. We can not defeat an ideology, but we can remove those that are trying to defeat ours, from power.

 

Regards, TAR

[dimreepr]

dimreepr,

 

Perhaps, but do you think my serving in the Army in Germany helped in a small way to keep Nazi ideology from resurging and my presence as a stop against Soviet tank invasion might have, in a small way fought against the communist ideology that had hold of East Germany and allowed for the eventual coming down of the wall?

 

Regards, TAR

 

 

If your action came before the re-action then of course you had an influence, otherwise WTF, stop talking bollox...

[tar]

dimreepr,

 

I am doing the best I can at confronting your thought that we can defeat a forceful threat by other than force. If you think we should attempt to not fight fire with fire, but find another way to invalidate the ideology, I am game. But you have to clearly identify the ideology that you think we should be attempting to defeat.

 

If we can't use force, and we can't defeat an ideology by other means of persuasion and education, then what are you proposing? If you do think we can defeat an ideology with the proper education and example, then it is important for you to define the ideology that we are trying to dissuade so we can get to it.

 

Regards, TAR

Edited September 15, 2016 by tar

[dimreepr]

dimreepr,

 

I am doing the best I can at confronting your thought that we can defeat a forceful threat by other than force. If you think we should attempt to not fight fire with fire, but find another way to invalidate the ideology, I am game. But you have to clearly identify the ideology that you think we should be attempting to defeat.

 

If we can't use force, and we can't defeat an ideology by other means of persuasion and education, then what are you proposing? If you do think we can defeat an ideology with the proper education and example, then it is important for you to define the ideology that we are trying to dissuade so we can get to it.

 

Regards, TAR

[tar]

If your action came before the re-action then of course you had an influence, otherwise WTF, stop talking bollox...

It took force to accomplish those two ideological victories. I was in the ARMY, with guns and tanks and some other forceful stuff, at my disposal.

dimreepr,

 

You know what you are proposing, but I have no idea.

 

Get me out of this logical bind. You say we should not use force, we should think enigmatically, but you do not provide me with the problem you think we need to solve.

 

I am an excellent problem solver. Give me the ideology you wish to defeat and I can apply smart diplomacy to it and suggest where we need talk, where we need science and technology, where we need art and music, where we need whatever we got, to apply to the problem. But you have to state the problem. Who holds this ideology we are trying to defeat, and what are the tenants of the ideology? Does it have a name? Is it bigger than a breadbox? What do you want me to solve?

 

Regards, TAR

[dimreepr]

It took force to accomplish those two ideological victories. I was in the ARMY, with guns and tanks and some other forceful stuff, at my disposal.

dimreepr,

 

You know what you are proposing, but I have no idea.

 

Regards, TAR

 

 

Causality, has to happen after the event...

[tar]

dimreepr,

 

Had an insight about 20 minutes ago, made we want to come share it.

 

We cannot give ISIS the status of an ideology, because then their usurpation of Islam would be recognized, and then if we fought them, it would be the fighting of Islam that we were doing.

 

No, I think we have to think of them in two or three ways, and fight the components thusly parsed.

 

First, as the Sunni remnants of Saddam's Guard, who are the power behind Baghdadi.

Second, as Baghdadi, the new Caliph of Islam, looking to establish an Islamic state that reaches around the Mediterranean.

Third, as an exciting, lucrative, satisfying draw for young people looking for a cause. In this case, the fighting of Jihad, linked inappropriately to the fighting of the Zionists, or World Order, or Christians, or Jews, or the establishment, or the West, or U.S. Imperialism, or the apostates or the guys that blew up your family, or persecuted you, or otherwise dissed you.

 

The first, the Sunni remnants, are a political unit, a political force, that we can either fight, or negotiate with. Yield to their power and say OK this area is yours, you won it, or fight them to take it back. Of course here is a small problem, who are you going to give it back to, it is in many cases areas that are Sunni areas, that belong to them, in the first place. But none-the-less, one component is the Sunni remnants of Saddam's guard, capable, intelligent, ruthless, and currently in charge of a criminal organization, controlling large swaths of Syria and Iraq and Libya, at least, exporting terror across the globe.

 

Second is Baghdadi, who has an ideology that is fully Islamic in origin. He is carrying on Muhammed's conquering. He like Muhammed, in the manner of the Koran, wants to show the error of taking interest(the Jews), thinking that Allah has associates(the Christians with the father, son and holy ghost) and the idol worshippers (those that worship graven images, which can be just about anything, including hypocritically the stone that is circled.) Here we have to be careful in separating Baghdadi from Islam, because you can't. If he is illegitimate then so is Islam.

 

Third, is the fighters. Drawn to the cause, by power, and excitement, and the promise of wealth and mate. Same things that draw everybody to a cause, so here the battle is against the criminal aspects of the organization, the sex slaves, the kidnapping, the extortion, the bribery, the stealing, the murdering the abuse and otherwise taking by force, that which is someone else's. Here we can absolutely fight the ideology by killing them, killing their leaders, destroying or taking back their loot, freeing their captives, or putting each in prison for specific crimes. Same way we would fight the Mafia, or any other criminal organization.

 

So fight the criminality to combat number three. Without it the movement has no power, because they will have no loot, and no sex slaves with which to entice the fighters.

 

Talk the Syrians and the Iraqis into ceding some political control to the Sunnis in the Sunni areas, underneath the umbrella of the respective governments, to address number 1.

 

Number 2 is the stickiest of wickets because you can not defeat a religion. Perhaps we might have to lose some battles for human rights, and gay rights and women's rights and let some Islamic nations run things in a manner other than our choosing, like they did 600 years ago. Maybe perhaps here, we can just hope to slowly change minds, by example, and make our societies work, without Sharia law, and let the people under sharia decide which is best for them. With or without is their choice, not ours.

 

Regards, TAR

Edited September 16, 2016 by tar

[tar]

personal note, I lost a bunch a rep points talking with you guys and gals in this politics forum over the last week or so, and I hate neg reps, so I am figuring I am not being as helpful as I think, and it would be better to let you guys figure out world problems, so I am sitting politics out for a while

[Delta1212]

personal note, I lost a bunch a rep points talking with you guys and gals in this politics forum over the last week or so, and I hate neg reps, so I am figuring I am not being as helpful as I think, and it would be better to let you guys figure out world problems, so I am sitting politics out for a while

I'm sorry you got negged, for whatever that's worth. Even when I think you are very wrong and being obstinate in your wrongness, you always come across as very calm and level-headed, which I appreciate, and it makes it enjoyable to talk to you.

[tar]

Thanks for that Delta1212,

 

I still hate neg reps, though, so I am cooling it, for a while.

 

Regards, TAR

although I do enjoy talking with you and most others here, especially those who disagree with me

[iNow]

Even when I think you are very wrong and being obstinate in your wrongness

A nice turn of phrase describing well my perception of TARs ways.

[Tampitump]

personal note, I lost a bunch a rep points talking with you guys and gals in this politics forum over the last week or so, and I hate neg reps, so I am figuring I am not being as helpful as I think, and it would be better to let you guys figure out world problems, so I am sitting politics out for a while

You're in bad company.

[iNow]

You guys have to recall what the membership here values: clear cogent arguments rooted in valid premises and foundations, supported by evidence, and logically consistent.

 

Where you're falling short specifically is on the validity of your starting premises, heavy reliance on emotion and gut feeling ("common sense"), and logical fallacy.

 

Nobody is saying you're bad people. They're saying you're making poor arguments. Grow a spine and stop taking it all so personally, as if folks are attacking your character or your tribe. They're not.

[dimreepr]

dimreepr,

 

Had an insight about 20 minutes ago, made we want to come share it.

 

We cannot give ISIS the status of an ideology, because then their usurpation of Islam would be recognized, and then if we fought them, it would be the fighting of Islam that we were doing.

 

Regards, TAR

 

 

We can't just decide their idea is invalid, it certainly won't stop them thinking it, We can and should decide to ignore the idea and them but that's not likely given the media's desire to sell itself; ISIS is only as strong as they are because of western outrage and fear.

[tar]

dimreepr,

 

But if we 'think' their idea is invalid. And we say their idea is invalid and we act like their idea is invalid. Doesn't that make it a duck?

 

If our thinking, and saying and acting, gives the impression that we are against their idea, isn't it appropriate, on their part, to think we are against their idea?

 

Reminds me of a family joke. My stepmom had spent an hour talking badly about an administrator at her school, his sexism, his bullheadedness, his cheating, his lying, his spiteful maneuvers , his selfish political aspirations, and I innocently, in an effort to give him the benefit of the doubt, asked "But how is he as a person?"

 

Regards, TAR

[dimreepr]

dimreepr,

 

But if we 'think' their idea is invalid. And we say their idea is invalid and we act like their idea is invalid. Doesn't that make it a duck?

 

If our thinking, and saying and acting, gives the impression that we are against their idea, isn't it appropriate, on their part, to think we are against their idea?

 

Reminds me of a family joke. My stepmom had spent an hour talking badly about an administrator at her school, his sexism, his bullheadedness, his cheating, his lying, his spiteful maneuvers , his selfish political aspirations, and I innocently, in an effort to give him the benefit of the doubt, asked "But how is he as a person?"

 

Regards, TAR

 

 

It doesn't matter what I think about their idea (it is invalid), even if they knew what I thought, it won't stop them thinking that way.

 

OTOH you sort of have a point, "If our thinking, and saying and acting, gives the impression that we are against indifferent to their idea".

 

I have no way, given my circumstances, to change what's happening with regards to ISIS and they have no impact on my life, other than through a sensationalist media; it's the reason terrorism works, because without it they're just a rag-tag bunch of untrained militia/nutters.

 

The only thing I can do is change the channel and that's my power over them, imagine that power if the entire world did that; their chances of success would be vanishingly small.

Imagine a world who's media didn't try to inspire fear, hate, and outrage but instead reported whats happening and explained why we don't need to worry; we wouldn't need to change channels.

Edited September 20, 2016 by dimreepr

[tar]

dimreepr,

 

I think the results of thinking of ISIS as the JV team and ignoring them has already come to pass. Continuing on that course, will what? Allow the Caliphate to expand to Libya and other areas around the Mediterranean.

 

I don't have any power either, to affect ISIS. Not personally, I am 62 and although I could be called back to the military, we would have to be in horrific sh## for the reserve rules to extend to me. But my nation is strong and capable. Militarily, economically, engineering wise, medical expertise wise, internet wise, and has global reach and influence, to where if we want to get a thing done, we can get it done.

 

Regards, TAR

No impact on your life?

Edited September 20, 2016 by tar

[dimreepr]

Your fear empowers them and your nation prolongs them.