patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,350,341 comments by 15,721 users - mell, UveBeenNudged1 online now
Comments 1 - 17 of 17 Search these comments
resistance
2015 Nov 17, 7:44pm
i agree. more bombs pounding sand really don't matter.
what matters is defeating the political correctness that prevents truthful dialogue about the nature of islam.
and telling the truth about saudi arabia.
and we all need to tell everyone we know.
Strategist
2015 Nov 17, 8:03pm
i agree. more bombs pounding sand really don't matter.
what matters is defeating the political correctness that prevents truthful dialogue about the nature of islam.
and telling the truth about saudi arabia.
and we all need to tell everyone we know.
Bombs are a temporary solution. We bombed Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya. We defeated Al Qaeda only to see the rise of ISIS. We will defeat ISIS, and another group will emerge. The only solution I see is to support brutal dictators who can be our puppets. There is no other choice until these societies are ready for democracy. They are not ready today.
indigenous
2015 Nov 17, 8:13pm
The bigger narrative here is the pathology of the US. How we relentlessly do empire, finance war with borrowed/inflated money (through the reserve currency status), how the fractional reserve banking system is coming to an end.
The fractional reserve banking system can only continue if there is growth, with no growth as in Japan the whole charade deflates no matter how hard the statists try to preserve it.
zzyzzx
2015 Nov 18, 7:38am
France needs to send in ground troops, if they have any that won't surrender.
Bombs are a temporary solution. We bombed Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya. We defeated Al Qaeda only to see the rise of ISIS. We will defeat ISIS, and another group will emerge. The only solution I see is to support brutal dictators who can be our puppets. There is no other choice until these societies are ready for democracy. They are not ready today.
Agreed. Of course these dictators do not come out of nowhere, they form out of necessity since it is the only form to provide some stability to a sectarian region.
Strategist
2015 Nov 18, 7:58am
France needs to send in ground troops, if they have any that won't surrender.
We will have to remind them what ISIS does to it's prisoners.
zzyzzx
2015 Nov 18, 11:07am
They can use a drone and hunt down one guy with a cell phone, but big trucks traveling between ISIS and Turkey is a problem?
Putin said at the G20 that 40 countries are buying ISIS oil. Some are G20 countries. Wheres the sanctions? Wheres the criminal charges for supplying ISIS with the means to create terrorism?
zzyzzx
2015 Nov 18, 11:12am
Russia is not messing around here. It is already leading by example, showing the rest of the world how to combat and destroy these islamist terrorist groups without exceptions.
While the rest of the "world leaders" talk, negotiate among each other, issue statements of condemnation towards ISIS while supporting other muslim terrorist groups, Russia is busy bombing all terrorists in Syria. ISIS, not-ISIS, Al Nusra, Al Qaeda, Ahrar Al Sham, Jaish Al-Fatah...makes no difference to the Russians. They are all islamist militants and criminals that must be annihilated and wiped out.
The 'good' Western democracies better take notes and learn.
tatupu70
2015 Nov 18, 11:18am
Russia is not messing around here. It is already leading by example, showing the rest of the world how to combat and destroy these islamist terrorist groups without exceptions.
While the rest of the "world leaders" talk, negotiate among each other, issue statements of condemnation towards ISIS while supporting other muslim terrorist groups, Russia is busy bombing all terrorists in Syria. ISIS, not-ISIS, Al Nusra, Al Qaeda, Ahrar Al Sham, Jaish Al-Fatah...makes no difference to the Russians. They are all islamist militants and criminals that must be annihilated and wiped out.
The 'good' Western democracies better take notes and learn.
It's nice of them to join the party about 10 years too late. What do you think the US has been doing in the Middle East for the last decade?
Where was Russia when the Western democracies were fighting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan?
zzyzzx
2015 Nov 18, 4:13pm
What do you think the US has been doing in the Middle East for the last decade?
Obviously not enough!
tatupu70
2015 Nov 18, 4:17pm
Obviously not enough!
If Putin hadn't been sitting on his ass for the last 10 years, maybe we wouldn't be in this situation.
Heraclitusstudent
2015 Nov 18, 4:17pm
Where was Russia when the Western democracies were fighting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan?
Where were the Western democracies when Russia was fighting Al Qaeda (or their predecessors) in Afghanistan?
Oh right... we were busy giving Al Qaeda weapons.
Strategist
2015 Nov 18, 4:20pm
They can use a drone and hunt down one guy with a cell phone
Why can't we have some sniper drones or something? The size of birds that swoop down and shoot a single bullet on the forehead. A few thousand of those and we could get rid of every ISIS soldier in a weekend.
Heraclitusstudent
2015 Nov 18, 4:24pm
Why can't we have some sniper drones or something? The size of birds that swoop down and shoot a single bullet on the forehead. A few thousand of those and we could get rid of every ISIS soldier in a weekend.
Don't be impatient. When it comes we may live to regret it.
tatupu70
2015 Nov 18, 4:25pm
Where were the Western democracies when Russia was fighting Al Qaeda (or their predecessors) in Afghanistan?
Oh right... we were busy giving Al Qaeda weapons.
True enough. Although Russia wasn't fighting terrorism-it was political in nature
Tenpoundbass
2015 Nov 18, 4:28pm
or a grassroots movement where we make hudreds of thousands of Solar powered drones that communicate by satalite.
We synroconously fly them to Syria using your iPhone "There would be an app for THAT", with a 9mm pistol. Those floor smoochin Commies wouldn't know what hit them. The deafening buzz of 800,000 quadracopter engines droning at the same time, would strike fear in most until they ran off and found Jesus.
We could call it the Crew Sades...
MisdemeanorRebel
2015 Nov 18, 5:22pm
True enough. Although Russia wasn't fighting terrorism-it was political in nature
And the Obama Regime wasn't fighting ISIS, since they only attacked the oil convoys for the first time in a year of bombing.
NOVEMBER 17, 2015Ron Paul
The horrific attacks in Paris on Friday have, predictably, led to much over-reaction and demands that we do more of the exact things that radicalize people and make them want to attack us. The French military wasted no time bombing Syria in retaliation for the attacks, though it is not known where exactly the attackers were from. Thousands of ISIS fighters in Syria are not Syrian, but came to Syria to overthrow the Assad government from a number of foreign countries -- including from France and the US.
Ironically, the overthrow of Assad has also been the goal of both the US and France since at least 2011.
Because the US and its allies are essentially on the same side as ISIS and other groups – seeking the overthrow of Assad – many of the weapons they have sent to the more “moderate” factions also seeking Assad's ouster have ended up in the hands of radicals. Moderate groups have joined more radical factions over and over, taking their US-provided training and weapons with them. Other moderate groups have been captured or killed, their US-provided weapons also going to the radicals. Thus the more radical factions have become better equipped and better trained, while occasionally being attacked by US or allied planes.
Does anyone not believe this is a recipe for the kind of disaster we have now seen in Paris? The French in particular have been very active in arming even the more radical groups in Syria, as they push for more political influence in the region. Why do they still refuse to believe in the concept of blowback? Is it because the explanation that, “they hate us because we are free,” makes it easier to escalate abroad and crack down at home?
It may not be popular to say this as emotions run high and calls ring out for more bombing in the Middle East, but there is another way to address the problem. There is an alternative to using more military intervention to address a problem that was caused by military intervention in the first place.
That solution is to reject the militarists and isolationists. It is to finally reject the policy of using “regime change” to further perceived US and western foreign policy goals, whether in Iraq, Libya, Syria, or elsewhere. It is to reject the foolish idea that we can ship hundreds of millions of dollars worth of weapons to “moderates” in the Middle East and expect none of them to fall into the hands of radicals.
More bombs will not solve the problems in the Middle East. But a more promising approach to the Middle East is currently under fire from the isolationists in Washington. The nuclear deal with Iran ends UN sanctions and opens that country to international trade. Just last week the presidents of France and Iran met to discuss a number of trade deals. Other countries have followed. Trade and respect for national sovereignty trumps violence, but Washington still doesn't seem to get it. Most presidential candidates compete to thump the table loudest against any deal with Iran. They will use this attack to propagandize against approving trade with Iran even though Iran has condemned the attack and is also in the crosshairs of ISIS.
Here is the alternative: Focus on trade and friendly relations, stop shipping weapons, abandon “regime change” and other manipulations, respect national sovereignty, and maintain a strong defense at home including protecting the borders from those who may seek to do us harm.
We should abandon the failed policies of the past, before it's too late.
https://mises.org/blog/paris-more-bombs-will-not-solve-problem#.VkvsWSaQyXQ.facebook