PDA

View Full Version : ISIS now going after christians and Yazidi?



garhkal
08-08-2014, 01:26 AM
So what's everyone's thoughts on the current issue now running rampant in the news, about all these Yazidi and Christians being pushed out of their towns on to a mountain range? Should we step in?
If so, why have we not in the Ukraine or any other 'hot spot'?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/07/world/iraq-options/index.html?hpt=wo_c2

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/07/iraq-air-drops/

sandsjames
08-08-2014, 01:29 AM
So what's everyone's thoughts on the current issue now running rampant in the news, about all these Yazidi and Christians being pushed out of their towns on to a mountain range? Should we step in?
If so, why have we not in the Ukraine or any other 'hot spot'?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/07/world/iraq-options/index.html?hpt=wo_c2

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/07/iraq-air-drops/

No...we should not. In either place. Neither threatens our National Security.

Rusty Jones
08-08-2014, 01:37 AM
I think we need to save it for North Korea. No, seriously. Once we're out of Afghanistan and take a little time off... we need to do something about North Korea. Putin was able to do his thing in Georgia and Ukraine, and we didn't do shit; correct? So, have we got the balls to attack North Korea and dare Russia to do something about it?

LogDog
08-08-2014, 02:22 AM
I can understand the need to help these people but I don't think the American people have the stomach to commit a large number of ground troops there to protect the Christians and Yazidi.

What I'd like to see is Saudi Arabia put together a coalition of Middle East and Muslim nations to go into to Iraq and other areas to fight ISIS. We've sold them billions of dollars of weapons and aircraft and now is the time for them to step up and lead.

As for U.S. involvement, I'd support the U.S. providing command/communication/intelligence to the coalition forces. I'd also support use of AC-130 Gun Ships to attack ISIS forces in support of the coalition forces. The thing I wouldn't want is to have any U.S. ground forces there. This is a Middle East problem and they have the resources to deal with it.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
08-08-2014, 05:40 AM
I'm all about effing up ISIS, and effing them up good. However, where is Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Jordon, Egypt? Why not China? France? Germany? Why does the US stand alone in opposition to ISIS, or willingness to actually stop them from slaughtering innocent people?

waveshaper2
08-08-2014, 02:26 PM
Deja-vu and a little perspective. The US military has been involved in Northern Iraq (only talking about Northern Iraq not the rest of that lovely place) for over 20 of the last 23 plus years. This involvement has involved a combination of and/or all of the following; Targeted air strikes, boots on the ground, full blown unleashing of air power/ground forces, counter insurgency, nation building, humanitarian relief efforts/camps, no-fly-zone, military training/equipping of varies forces/factions, etc, etc, etc.
1. First Gulf War; 17 Jan 91 - 28 Feb 91. Full blown war.
2. Operation Provide Comfort 1; 6 Apr 91 - 24 Jul 91. Humanitarian relief effort.
3. Operation Provide Comfort 2; 24 Jul 91 - 31 Dec 96. Humanitarian relief effort/targeted air strikes.
4. Operation Desert Strike; Aug/Sep 96; This was the last time that Irbil Iraq fell to the bad guys. The US evacuated 6000 pro US Kurds and sent most of them to Guam.
5. Operation Northern Watch; 1 Jan 97 - 1 May 03; 36,000 sorties flown and numerous targeted air strikes.
6. Iraq War (OIF/OND); 20 Mar 03 - Dec 11. Full blown war/counter insurgency/get the hell out of dodge.
7. I'm sure I missed some?

sandsjames
08-08-2014, 02:43 PM
Deja-vu and a little perspective. The US military has been involved in Northern Iraq (only talking about Northern Iraq not the rest of that lovely place) for over 20 of the last 23 plus years. This involvement has involved a combination of and/or all of the following; Targeted air strikes, boots on the ground, full blown unleashing of air power/ground forces, counter insurgency, nation building, humanitarian relief efforts/camps, no-fly-zone, military training/equipping of varies forces/factions, etc, etc, etc.
1. First Gulf War; 17 Jan 91 - 28 Feb 91. Full blown war.
2. Operation Provide Comfort 1; 6 Apr 91 - 24 Jul 91. Humanitarian relief effort.
3. Operation Provide Comfort 2; 24 Jul 91 - 31 Dec 96. Humanitarian relief effort/targeted air strikes.
4. Operation Desert Strike; Aug/Sep 96; This was the last time that Irbil Iraq fell to the bad guys. The US evacuated 6000 pro US Kurds and sent most of them to Guam.
5. Operation Northern Watch; 1 Jan 97 - 1 May 03; 36,000 sorties flown and numerous targeted air strikes.
6. Iraq War (OIF/OND); 20 Mar 03 - Dec 11. Full blown war/counter insurgency/get the hell out of dodge.
7. I'm sure I missed some?

A friend of mine posted on FB today how it's funny that all it takes for Democrats to support war in Iraq and for Republicans to oppose it is to change who's in charge.

crwchf16
08-12-2014, 12:03 AM
I'm all about effing up ISIS, and effing them up good. However, where is Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Jordon, Egypt? Why not China? France? Germany? Why does the US stand alone in opposition to ISIS, or willingness to actually stop them from slaughtering innocent people?

The sad, simple fact is the rest of the world knows that eventually we will do something about this. With that in mind, why should they spend their money and risk their soldiers?
Now that the bombimg has started it'll be interesting to see who helps us and who sits on the sidelines and criticizes. So far the only countries to step up and help (that I've heard of) are Australia and maybe the UK.

garhkal
08-12-2014, 06:53 AM
Maybe we need to stop doing so then. Stop stepping in, in every crisis until those in the region themselves do so.

USN - Retired
08-12-2014, 07:34 AM
"History has proved again and again that whenever mankind interferes with a less developed civilization, no matter how well-intentioned that interference may be, the results are invariably disastrous." ~Captain Jean-Luc Picard

hustonj
08-12-2014, 01:03 PM
Has anyone else thought about the Geneva Conventiosn aspect of this conflict?

An organized force with the stated goal of establishing a government over a geographical area (whether carving ut a new territory or taking over an existing government) is recognized under the Geneva Conventions as a military.

According to international treaties, ISIS is not simply a bunch of criminals like "normal" terrorist organizations. They are an actual potential accepted player on the world stage. Now, it doesn't look like anybody is interested in recognizing their governement, which hurts that claim, but they have doen with military force what no other "terroroist group" has managed to do through the use of force. Not in recent history, anyway.

Hamas was actually elected into power in Palestine, you might remember.

All other modern "terrorists" are not legal combatants under the Geneva Conventions. They are just criminals, murdering civilians and/or military members.

Well, I think it is interesting.

garhkal
08-12-2014, 07:39 PM
Regardless of whether they may be considered a legitimate army, they are still imo a bunch of thugs and criminals.