Hi Tomato,
I think mistakes have been made. To me it appears that Putin outmaneuvered the world on this.

Considering the Crimean issue and Obama's threats to Putin - sounded like N.Korea's Kim. Putin was waiting for the right time.

Although non of my business to involve in discussions regarding the upcoming elections: Advantage Clinton is she does not have to go through a learning curve.

Problem is: Putin & others may not take her seriously and keep pushing the boundaries.

Same thing applies to boko haram, Al shabab and other 'branches' of ISIS. To me, Obama isnt innocent. Something is certainly fishing covertly and American will wake up in rude shock after the damage has been done

its all BS and a sham. the US creates terrorist networks so we have an excuse to invade other countries and steal their resources and force our "democracy" on them. politics is nothing more than the entertainment arm of the military industrial complex. it might be hard for other people to see but to me its really clear. we could have taken out ISIS 100 times over already, so why dont we? because the MIC needs something to do for war profiteers to make money. its all a sham. if they were really worried about protecting americans, they would have our soldiers here, defending us. were in what, 120 countries? 980 bases worldwide? and were phucking broke but yet we still continue to waste money on these ridiculous wars. the people over there arent all terrorists, theyre people trying to protect their homeland. if a foreign military invaded the US, would the man who takes up arms against them be considered a terrorist? no, he would be someone defending his country. most of these "terrorists" dont want us there, and i dont blame them.

We'll, we're doing a horrid job of it.
We spent $hundreds of $billions if not $Trillions in Iraq, and lost thousands of our troops there; all for the "benefit" of severely destabilizing the region; handing substantial parts of Iraq over to ISIL.

Did we get so much as a toaster out of the deal; the way we could here by opening a bank account?
And get a look at all the plunder we're getting from Pakistan & Yemen, the locus of our up-tempo predator drone strikes.

The U.S. military invasion / occupation of Iraq was one of the worst U.S. foreign policy blunders in history.

btw:
The Bush administration originally planned to call their U.S. military invasion & occupation of Iraq "Operation Iraqi Liberation".
But when they figured out the acronym, they kept quiet about it.

What a BUFFOON !!!

Edited for over-sized image.

soufie
Site Moderator

go talk to some people in the military conrad, i have friends who served over seas, and thats what they told me. so i guess you know more about the subject than someone who was actually over there fighting?

"Over-sized image" thats comical. Sure I aint the culprit, only weigh 500 kg last time i checked. Hahahaha

This makes almost ZERO sense.

ISIS are Wahhabis.

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is a Wahhabi and he is from Iraq

His predecessor Abu Omar al-Baghdadi was a Wahhabi and he was from Iraq.

Mullah Omar.. the leader of the Taliban is a Wahhabi. He taught at a Madrassa in Pakistan before he became the Taliban's leader.

All of the ISIS literature and teachings come from Sheikh Abdelaziz bin Baz and Juhayman al-Otaybi. DIE HARD WAHHABIS.

Sunnis are NOT Wahhabis.

ISIS does not consider the rulers of Saudi Arabia to be TRUE Wahhabis.

I can't make this any more clear to you.

Wahhabism is very very very different than your average Sunni.

ISIS are chopping off heads in Anbar Province and the heads they are chopping off are SUNNI!!!!!!!!!!

al-baghdadi...lol, funny sounding name... sounds like a street pimp from philly...

"Wahhabism is very very very different than your average Sunni." iV
So much so that; ostensibly in adherence to the Holy Qur'an:

That Sunni, Shi'ah, and Wahab not only slay atheists.
They'll slay one another; Sunni treating Shi'ah as infidels, etc.

What a cesspool!

NO WONDER they wear diapers on their heads!

They are all psychos still living in the stone age. They all need to be dealt with....soon.

It is very unlikely that they will be any time soon. The world pretends to be up in arms over ISIS all the while they know that they are funded by elements of the hardcore islamist wing of the Saudi monarchy.

ISIS serves a two fold purpose... A battle tested adversary to Hezbollah and a threat to the reformists within Saudi society.

The recent shia mosque bombings by alleged ISIS sympathizers are just a warning to the reform minded that if they speak too loud they will be dealt with..

This is a very nasty business...

Yep.

QUOTE:
ISIS are chopping off heads in Anbar Province and the heads they are chopping off are SUNNI!!!!!!!!!!

ISIS are against everyone who doesn’t agree with them. They are against Sunni, Shiat, Christ, Kurd, Yazidi etc.

And their timing is apt. Obama is 'generous' to them, at least

Your 'contempt' is derailing us from any path towards a solution. In fact, now that I think about it, isn't contempt a side of the same coin with 'fear' being on the other side? Makes people 'trigger happy', I say.

If I may quote American words: “Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself”
With all the mis-information going on about todays Muslims; what I do see is an honest attempt in our forum to profile ISIS.

Back to: Who is this ISIS?

So most members want to pin Wahabbism to ISIS.
If so then the Iraqi Shias & Saudi Arabian Sunnis would have got together to put ISIS down. Then why are they not doing it?

Because the Iraqi Wahhabi is different from the Saudi Wahhabi originally recruited by OBL. I'm talking about the recruits, the manpower & not the leadership. Ok, let's say I'm wrong; then we put this aside for the moment.

The point is it is a matter of land grab. For anyone to gram land, Russia to grab Crimea; Pakistan to grab Kashmir, or Iraq to grab Syria, one has to begin with a cover of 'moral righteousness'. Wahabbism comes in handy. Wahabbism, which the majority of Muslim world have rejected but cannot raise their voice against because 'no Muslim can raise his voice against their holy book'; is probably the greatest misinformation spread around this land grab on Syria. It failed in Afghanistan plainly because of 'miscalculations by Al Qaeda fraternity'; constraining USA to step into Afghanistan. Terror strikes by fringe groups are not the voice of the majority of Muslims. But these could be covert operations by a government. Pretty soon the Operators raise their own funds - and no longer need their sponsors.

ISIS appears to be just such a creation. The Wahhabism is just a cover.
Pakistan army sponsored and provided the initial bases for Al Qaeda & India had to go for a border war before they could be dismantled.

Now the question remains: If Saudi with their Sunni majority. Syria with their Sunni majority and Iraq with their Shia majority are not; then which rogue government is sponsoring them?

Moreover, considering that Iraq was 'taken over' by USA and considering the large American base inside Saudi Arabia, where has it all gone wrong?

I think that Wahabbism is just a cover for the deeper game going on.
Meantime - under-educated, unemployed and mis-informed Muslims all over the world are looking to 'play' with soft spots in the world as their target.

actually the Wahbbis and the other Islamist Fringe-Groups are the only consistent practitioners of Islam!
Read the Koran!
They have been playing this "Game" for Centuries!
Nothing new about it!

Flattering, but I doubt LTme is the cause of unrest in the Middle East.
My comment was both contemptuous and insulting.
Deliberately so.
I don't think mass decapitations, fomenting global terrorism, and burning a man alive while he's trapped in a cage is constructive.

ISIL are metaphorically knuckle-dragging barbarians.
And I strongly suspect they could achieve a geo-political objective more efficiently without the primitive sadism.

I'm a U.S. citizen, but not a xenophobe. I have lived abroad for years; and felt welcome in the foreign lands I lived in.
True to the ancient Latin legal maxim, generally think the best of persons, unless I have a reason to think otherwise.

Having contempt for the contemptible is no shame.
ISIL are thugs.
They rob banks, steal oil, kidnap, destroy priceless irreplaceable artifacts, and murder.

FDR had his hands full. There were megalomaniacs in Europe trying to conquer the planet.
Japan put a big fat dent in our Naval inventory.
The quotation you've posted might have settled some nerves back then.
And I'm not advocating fear.
But I don't think self-defense; protecting ourselves and our allies and trading partners is that far out of line.

Do you?

I realize not everyone that wears a turban is an ISIL member.
If my comment offended non-terrorist turban wearers, my apology.
My comment was intended as directed to the bad guys, and I know not every Muslim is in that group, BUT !!!

When a cartoon was published depicting a bomb in Mohammed's turban, the rioting in Islam was so fierce that human life was lost.
Because of a cartoon.
But when the attacks of 09/11/01 occurred, resulting in the mass murder of thousands of innocents; pan Islam took it quite sedately.

Doesn't that seem just about precisely backward to you?

I know of two possible explanations for this.

a) Either Muslims as a group just aren't that fussy about the loss of human life, and think a cartoon is vastly more important.

- or -

b) Many Muslims are rational human beings, but are so terrorized by the numerous terrorists among them, that they cower in silence, despite their humanitarian objection.

Which of those two explanations would you prefer U.S. to accept?

Many Islamist terrorists are quite well educated; some holding advanced degrees, some even doctorate level.
And among these, some are willing to undertake suicide murder missions.

Is that a sensible perspective on how to handle an asset as valuable as a college education?

PS

This is the suspect LEO claimed charged at them with a knife, and after failing to ground his weapon, was shot dead.

Is the cemetery out of line in this case? Has the deceased been convicted of anything?

I also note, this portion of the report I found does not mention Islam, but does use the word "terror".