Paris implications continued

[Fez]

First, the bolded doesn't just follow logically, even though you try to present it this way. You'll need to make a case that large conflicts require large outside interventions to end them (you'll be unable to do this). Second, that's irrelevant, since you've admitted you don't really care about ending the Syrian civil war, so long as it doesn't affect the US and its allies, and that that's not what attacking civilian populations in ISIS controlled territories is about. You say so in all the sentences surrounding what I've bolded, and the couple posts before.

I find your stance to be profoundly amoral and we will have no agreement due to irreconcilable first principles. But at least don't try to hide it behind dishonesty about caring about the death toll of the Syrian civil war, or saying what you advocate is related, when you know full well it has nothing to do with your true position- for you it's all about Westerners, plain and simple.

The Syrian conflict has gone on for over four years with no end in sight without major outside intervention; its pretty clear its not going to end on its own at this point. Major outside intervention might also not end it, but its time to put that theory to the test.

And while yes my goal is preventing outside terrorist attacks, the number of deaths that have occurred within the conflict is relevant because it shows the scale of the conflict. And ending the conflict by destroying ISIL is what is necessary to prevent those attacks. If "only" a few hundred or few thousand people had died in Syria, the argument could be made that ISIL is not a major organization and that it can be destroyed by a few well-targeted attacks. But that's not the case.

Its not amoral for countries to act in their own interest. The US has exactly one duty, which is to uphold and fulfill the social contract it has with its citizens. That includes providing defense for them; which means attacking threats, making and upholding alliances, and so on. Often it also includes humanitarian aid, since improving other countries that could become failed states that enable terrorists to operate is another way to protect the US. In this case, it means destroying ISIL.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

The Syrian conflict has gone on for over four years with no end in sight without major outside intervention; its pretty clear its not going to end on its own at this point. Major outside intervention might also not end it, but its time to put that theory to the test.

Or it could be resolved with the West, Russia, Assad, and the opposition negotiating a settlement and Assad transitioning out of power, at which point tackling ISIS becomes a much easier process, surrounded by a new Syrian government, Iraq, and Kurds. This is, in fact, the likely outcome. It's more or less what the US is pursuing, and if Russia is willing to push Assad out it becomes much more likely. All without leveling cities.

 

And while yes my goal is preventing outside terrorist attacks, the number of deaths that have occurred within the conflict is relevant because it shows the scale of the conflict. And ending the conflict by destroying ISIL is what is necessary to prevent those attacks. If "only" a few hundred or few thousand people had died in Syria, the argument could be made that ISIL is not a major organization and that it can be destroyed by a few well-targeted attacks. But that's not the case.

Again, you concede this is not about ending the conflict for you. You said you're fine with Assad's government retaking control of ISIS held areas, but as long as Assad is in power the war will continue. It's clear that it doesn't matter to you if the civil war ends or continues as long as the West is not affected, so there is no reason to debate this. Own your stance.

 

Its not amoral for countries to act in their own interest. The US has exactly one duty, which is to uphold and fulfill the social contract it has with its citizens.

That includes providing defense for them; which means attacking threats, making and upholding alliances, and so on. Often it also includes humanitarian aid, since improving other countries that could become failed states that enable terrorists to operate is another way to protect the US. In this case, it means destroying ISIL.

 This is an is/ought confusion. It may be the case that this is the US' "one duty," as a matter of legality or historical pattern (I doubt this could really be established as a matter of fact, but it could be conceded, and make no difference). That in no way establishes that it is morally right, or that it ought to be the case.

To me, it is profoundly amoral to privilege the lives of civilians of certain countries over others. Again, that's just a disagreement of principles and it's irreconcilable.

[Swordfish]

I don't know enough about the situation to say whether any of this is accurate, but it's interesting at least....

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

[Antonius Pius]

I'll add this here, already did in the other thread.  The Hanover stadium in Germany is being evacuated, about an hour and a half before game time.  There was supposed to be a friendly between the Netherlands and Germany.  The AP sports reporter at the game sent out a tweet.  The police are telling people to move away from the stadium, apparently.

And there's supposed to be a third game tonight in England, with Prince William in attendance.  I wonder if that will be cancelled as well.

Apparently there was a clear and acute threat focused at the Hannover stadium. Authorities have said there was a bitter but good reason to suspend the match and clear the stadium. The German government had, AFAIK, intended to attend in large numbers, perhaps by this focus making this match a target. Sad enough as it is, but I hope we haven't played into the terrorists' hands.

The England-France match played out without problems.

[Kalbear]

I don't know enough about the situation to say whether any of this is accurate, but it's interesting at least....

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

A counterpoint to this: ISIS troops largely ruled by need for basic sustenance and terror. This goes to another point made by iheartteslatesla elsewhere - that one of the big problems in the ME is that they're under serious drought conditions, farms are dying, and farmers are moving in droves to the cities - where they're poor, starving, and making everyone angry. 

[Fragile Bird]

ISIS and the drought in Syria: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-b-strozier/how-climate-change-helped_b_5903170.html

The drought that preceded the current conflict in Syria fits into a pattern of increased dryness in the Mediterranean and Middle East, for which scientists hold climate change partly responsible. Affecting 60 percent of Syria's land, drought ravaged the country's northeastern breadbasket region; devastated the livelihoods of 800,000 farmers and herders; and knocked two to three million people into extreme poverty. Many became climate refugees, abandoning their homes and migrating to already overcrowded cities. They forged temporary settlements on the outskirts of areas like Aleppo, Damascus, Hama and Homs. Some of the displaced settled in Daraa, where protests in early 2011 fanned out and eventually ignited a full-fledged war.

Drought did not singlehandedly spawn the Syrian uprising, but it stoked simmering anger at Assad's dictatorship. This frustration further destabilized Syria and carved out a space in which ISIS would thrive.

[Horza]

Just a reminder that ISIS is losing the ground war in Iraq and Syria on every front - it's what comes afterward that matters.

[Corvinus85]

Just want to post this here. If any of  you boarders are from Turkey, I hope you are ashamed of the Turkish fans that booed during the moment of silence at the Turkey-Greece game https://twitter.com/itsultralife01 I wonder how many of the scum actually agree with the Paris attacks, or are just real life trolls.

[Bonesy]

Here's a thought:

What if the Syrian refugee community are grateful to be here and safe, and become our frontline intelligence asset against ISIS infiltration?

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

Here's a thought:

 

What if the Syrian refugee community are grateful to be here and safe, and become our frontline intelligence asset against ISIS infiltration?

Godammit it, I like it.

[kairparavel]

1)

 

NBC Nightly News ‏@NBCNightlyNews  14m14 minutes ago

Federal sources: Air France flights from DC-to-Paris and LA-to-Paris diverted to Nova Scotia and Salt Lake City due to phoned threats.

2)

said his sister was punched in the stomach and face, called "a terrorist" and was told to go back home while she was being assaulted.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/muslim-woman-allegedly-attacked-toronto-1.3322298

3) Cancelled German/Netherlands soccer game

4) Governors refusing Syrian refugees

 

These are some of the implications.

[Jaxom 1974]

Is it Assad that is the actual sticking point that could prevent a proper US, EU, Russian coalition that can so the job and work with the other Middle Eastern states? 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Kair,

The Governors can say they are refusing to accept Syrian refugees all day long and twice on Tuesday.  Per the US Constitution they lack any power to control international borders, ports of entry, or the internal movements of people once they have been admitted into the US.  As such all these Governors can do is talk.  If they actually try and to block people coming into their States they should be slapped down hard and fast by the courts.  This is clear black letter law and the States have no say in immigration.

[Shryke]

I don't know enough about the situation to say whether any of this is accurate, but it's interesting at least....

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

It's accurate but at the same time incomplete. Even the guy that article consulted with says The Atlantic didn't present the full picture.

http://thinkprogress.org/world/2015/02/20/3625446/atlantic-left-isis-conversation-bernard-haykel/

I think this part sums up the major point he was trying to make better that that article:

“The reason ISIS emerged clearly has to do with the chaos in Iraq, the disenfranchisement of the Sunnis of Iraq (which is the result of the American invasion-occupation), and the chaos in Syria (which is a regime that has also disenfranchised Sunni Muslims),” he said. “We have two big Arab countries, side-by-side, both in chaos, both with large Sunni populations that are disenfranchised … With a lot of young men who have no prospects for employment and feel marginalized. And who then identify their sense of humiliation and marginalization with the larger Muslim world, which they claim is also being marginalized and being humiliated.”

“Let’s say you were an Iraqi, and you’ve had your entire family wiped out by the Shia government of Baghdad. Or you’ve seen your sister raped, or your brother tortured. Then you feel like you have nothing to lose, and the only way to respond to this is to resort to violence. And ISIS provides a ready-made ideology and package and movement to express that sense of rage.”

 

[Shryke]

Just in general well ISIS does have religious dimensions in it's creation and recruitment and all that, alot of what's actually driving it is instability in the region and shitloads of foreign money being dumped into the Syrian Civil War and the like, most of it from other local Middle East powers (as much as people complain about the US doing this or that, it's guys like Turkey and Saudi Arabia and the like who are really the ones feeding this fire)

[Shryke]

And some levity:

http://www.theonion.com/article/gop-warns-refugees-likely-be-driven-terrorism-way--51861

Declaring that opening the nation’s doors to displaced Syrians posed a major security threat, GOP leaders warned Tuesday that any refugees who resettled in the U.S. would most likely be driven to terrorism by the way America treats them. “We absolutely cannot provide a safe haven to these Syrians due to the very real threat that the abusive and hateful conduct of Americans will push the refugees toward radicalization and recruitment by extremist militant groups,” said Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), echoing the sentiments of numerous other presidential candidates and state governors who have argued that Syrian asylum seekers would in all probability embrace a radical jihadist worldview after constantly enduring anti-Muslim hate speech, racial epithets, and threats of violence and persecution by both the American people and government officials. “The moment we let these Syrians in, I promise that our most ruthless and cruel tendencies will take over, and we won’t relent until these refugees feel like they have no choice but to plan and execute a terror attack right inside our borders. It’s better to be safe than sorry in this situation.” Cruz claimed that the country did not face the same threat from Syria’s Christian refugees, stressing his confidence that only a small percentage of U.S. citizens would regard them as Muslim extremists.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Swordfish

That is the scariest thing I have read in a long time.

 

[Free Northman Reborn]

On a related note, reports from twitter state that after confirmation of the explosive cause of the Russian airliner tragedy, Putin has been quoted as saying: "To forgive the terrorists is up to God, to send them to Him is up to me."

Gotta love the man.

[Crixus]

BAHAHAHA: http://journal.ijreview.com/2015/11/250238-what-defeating-isis-would-look-like/

 

What is this?? 'The wildman'??? 

 

Wow. 

[baxus]

Just want to post this here. If any of  you boarders are from Turkey, I hope you are ashamed of the Turkish fans that booed during the moment of silence at the Turkey-Greece game https://twitter.com/itsultralife01 I wonder how many of the scum actually agree with the Paris attacks, or are just real life trolls.

Sure, go after all Turks because some of them have acted like jackasses. FYI, Bosnian fans did the same during their Euro qualification play-off match in Ireland two days ago. It's hardly the first time moment of silence has been disrespected at a football match, and Turkish and Bosnian fans are definitely not the only ones who've done it. In addition, terraces of football stadia worldwide are by default not the places to go looking for best aspects of society.