Terrorism Thread: It's Not Just Muslims. That's What They Want You to Think.

[Spicyryan]

you can say a lot of dumb things about American policy in the Middle East, and most of them have been said in the last few pages, but one of the dumbest is America installed Saddam Hussein as dictator in Iraq. his rise is a tortuous path in internal Ba'athist politics and Nasserian pan-Arabism that manifested in violence against the pro-West Hashemite monarchy (the people, you know, we actually did help install). and then there was that whole alliance with the Soviet Union thing.

Of course it wasn't. Saddam was installed as an authoritarian and anti-communist (hey back to the Domino Theory!) and as a way to back someone in the region against enemies like Egypt and Iran. It was practical, and evil, but practical.

I mean the US supported Saddam as he gassed the Iranians (and later the Kurds after Desert Storm, America sure left them out to dry) with the very gas we enabled him to obtain. Meanwhile douche face Reagan was gladly denying the gas was from Saddam, and blamed the Iranians.

[Spicyryan]

And no one is saying we're saints. What were saying is if we see a terrorist training camp, we will bomb said training camp. Y'all can build as many scarecrows as you want, if your answer to "what do we do about that base training fighters to kill americans" is "we were bad for being there in the first place" then you're missing the point. Sure maybe we shouldn't be there, but that doesn't change the fact that we located a kill-infidel factory and destroyed it. If you don't have a legitimate alternative but still want to say we shouldn't have bombed them, then I guess arm chair activism is alive and well.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

The classic "we aren't claiming to be perfect" defense.

You know, killing all your perceived enemies no matter how threatening they may or may not be. Out of fear of what they might do if you don't kill them first, is just cowardice, right? Just because someone is stronger, doesn't mean they aren't acting cowardly either.

[archibaldcrane]

i actually glossed over 'Iraqi youth just don't like the West in general no particulars they just don't like it' that is in fact dumber than what i responded to, well done team. we've achieved new heights in shitposting today.

I also like that the specific question was specifically about the US, and the goddamn Canuck is trying to get in on the party by saying they don't like "The West"

[Salodin]

The classic "we aren't claiming to be perfect" defense.

You know, killing all your perceived enemies no matter how threatening they may or may not be. Out of fear of what they might do if you don't kill them first, is just cowardice, right? Just because someone is stronger, doesn't mean they aren't acting cowardly either.

So you're saying don't bomb the infidel-killer factory. Gotcha.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Andalusian girls]

Of course it wasn't. Saddam was installed as an authoritarian and anti-communist (hey back to the Domino Theory!) and as a way to back someone in the region against enemies like Egypt and Iran. It was practical, and evil, but practical.

I mean the US supported Saddam as he gassed the Iranians (and later the Kurds after Desert Storm, America sure left them out to dry) with the very gas we enabled him to obtain. Meanwhile douche face Reagan was gladly denying the gas was from Saddam, and blamed the Iranians.

you may be having trouble with the complexity of my sentences allow me to break it down into blocks you should be able to comprehend


we

did not

install him

his party

overthrew

the monarchy

we liked

then

he allied

the Soviet Union

communists

he came

to power

when Iran and the

Shah

were still

American

allies

we established

a no

fly zone

in Kurdish Iraq

that enabled

them

to escape

Saddam's rule

and establish

Iraqi

Kurdistan

you don't

know

what

the fuck

you're talking

about

[Andalusian girls]

from hereon i will only post in the manner of ee cummings tysm

[Spicyryan]

So you're saying don't bomb the infidel-killer factory. Gotcha.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

You don't need a comprehensive solution if you can point out the current policies and action are a mistaken. Then again you do advocate for killing women and children because killing enemy combatants half way across the globe is super important to our safety. So I don't suppose anything less than "glass parking lot" rationale will suffice.

[archibaldcrane]

AG - is there value in distinguishing between the Taliban and Al Queda at this point as far as Afghan terrorist training camps and their threat to the United States goes?

[Salodin]

I never said go out and kill women and children. I do say don't be surprised if women and children die because their husbands and fathers chose to keep them around their infidel-killer camp knowing full well that if Americans found them, they'd be in harm's way. They're in a shitty situation, but then again it's not like their religion and culture currently afford them the same freedom as men. If they had a choice to live at their terrorist base or back in town, I'm sure they'd pick the latter. Guess we shouldn't engage brownies since they love using human shields eh?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Salodin]

Damn, wrap tanks and airplanes in women n children and america is fucked. We gotta figure out a way around this!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Spicyryan]

we

did not

install him

Absolutely did, the CIA orchestrated/backed the coup that put Saddam in power.

The US incited the Kurds to rebel. What does the no fly zone have anything to do with leaving them hanging out to dry?

[Ezek]

I never said go out and kill women and children. I do say don't be surprised if women and children die because their husbands and fathers chose to keep them around their infidel-killer camp knowing full well that if Americans found them, they'd be in harm's way.

The rules of engagement changes that Mattis presented towards the end of 2017 was a direct response for situations like this:

https://www.militarytimes.com/flashp...of-engagement/

“We are no longer bound by the need for proximity to our forces,” Mattis told the House Armed Services Committee in the afternoon. “It used to be we have to basically be in contact with that enemy.”

“If they are in an assembly area, a training camp, we know they are an enemy and they are going to threaten the Afghan government or our people, [Gen. John Nicholson, commander of U.S. Forces Afghanistan] has the wherewithal to make that decision,” he added.

“Wherever we find them, anyone who is trying to throw the NATO plan off, trying to attack the Afghan government, then we can go after them,” Mattis said.

Probably the only time I've unironically used "shouldn't have been an xxx in a warzone" or in this case, a goat fucker's training camp.

[Salodin]

Maybe it needs to be said, but the military would rather not harm civilians, would rather not have collateral damage. That doesnt mean were not going to bomb a terror training camp cause they like to keep their wives in the closet on base.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Andalusian girls]

Absolutely did, the CIA orchestrated/backed the coup that put Saddam in power.

The US incited the Kurds to rebel. What does the no fly zone have anything to do with leaving them hanging out to dry?

the 1963 Ba'athist coup against Qasim? or the 1968 Ba'athist coup against other Ba'athists? the 1953 coup against the Hashemite Dynasty? do you honestly even know the difference? do you care that there is zero proof any of them were orchestrated by the CIA? do you care that none of them installed Saddam as dictator, the final one installing Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr as president, a position Saddam steadily eroded over the 70s until he assumed total control over the country in 79 following Bakr's forced retirement? how ignorant are you, really

the no-fly zone demonstrates we provided them protection against Saddam's air force that enabled them to establish an autonomous zone immediately following the Gulf War, they were not left to hang out to dry, they won a de facto independence with our help. or were you unaware Saddam did not control Iraqi Kurdistan between 1991 and 2003?

AG - is there value in distinguishing between the Taliban and Al Queda at this point as far as Afghan terrorist training camps and their threat to the United States goes?

yes, of course. the Taliban has always been a regional force with little if any foreign aspirations beyond influence of the transnational Pashtun region with Pakistan whereas Al Queda's raison d'etre is international terrorism. the only issue necessitating force we had with the Taliban was that they enabled the activities of Al Queda, so long as they were only stoning girls to death in stadiums and raising the price of heroin there was no strategic rationale to engage them. they are analogous to Boko Haram, a horror, but not a threat in and of themselves.

[Day]

you can say a lot of dumb things about American policy in the Middle East, and most of them have been said in the last few pages,

i lol'd

[Eurell]

Itt: people responding to spicy and nynja.

One of em is posting conspiracy theories and the other is posting links that literally proves himself wrong.

[Spicyryan]

Maybe it needs to be said, but the military would rather not harm civilians, would rather not have collateral damage. That doesnt mean were not going to bomb a terror training camp cause they like to keep their wives in the closet on base.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Yes, keep their wives in the closet. You got 'em. Kind of hard to get over the fact you are saying that the military doesn't want to kill non-combatants, but 'fuck if that is going to stop them' though.

the 1963 Ba'athist coup against Qasim? or the 1968 Ba'athist coup against other Ba'athists? the 1953 coup against the Hashemite Dynasty? do you honestly even know the difference? do you care that there is zero proof any of them were orchestrated by the CIA? do you care that none of them installed Saddam as dictator, the final one installing Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr as president, a position Saddam steadily eroded over the 70s until he assumed total control over the country in 79 following Bakr's forced retirement? how ignorant are you, really

the no-fly zone demonstrates we provided them protection against Saddam's air force that enabled them to establish an autonomous zone immediately following the Gulf War, they were not left to hang out to dry, they won a de facto independence with our help. or were you unaware Saddam did not control Iraqi Kurdistan between 1991 and 2003?



yes, of course. the Taliban has always been a regional force with little if any foreign aspirations beyond influence of the transnational Pashtun region with Pakistan whereas Al Queda's raison d'etre is international terrorism. the only issue necessitating force we had with the Taliban was that they enabled the activities of Al Queda, so long as they were only stoning girls to death in stadiums and raising the price of heroin there was no strategic rationale to engage them. they are analogous to Boko Haram, a horror, but not a threat in and of themselves.

I apologize for not being as well versed in Iraqi history as you. The history is written by the winners.

Also, the no-fly zone was worthless. The ceasefire between the US coalition and Saddam allowed him to focus on the rebellion that the US helped stoke. America always leaves the Kurds out to dry, and that was no exception. The Shi'ite and Kurdish leaders begged for aid and America turned it's back on the country.

Itt: people responding to spicy and nynja.

One of em is posting conspiracy theories and the other is posting links that literally proves himself wrong.

Mention the CIA in the 60s orchestrated a coup in Iraq and suddenly you are a conspiracy theorist. That one bit out of everything about how you can't stop terrorists with terror and suddenly I am a conspiracy theorist.

Well, at least I am not Nynja. Have that going for me.

[chazzyphizzle]

6 in one hand half a dozen in the other

[thetruepandagod]

Spicyran... bruh...

[Zetanio]

Spicyran... bruh...

He's a fucking retard. Why are we surprised?