Alexander PhiAlipson wrote:And when we do nothing, we do what ISIS wants us to do. When we let in more Muslims, we do what ISIS wants us to do. When we try to keep them out, we do what ISIS wants us to do.jbird4049 wrote:
Which is why Osama bin Laden was happy with Bush the Younger's invasions. He wanted a big conflict between the West and Islam. We would be doing what ISIS wants us to do.
Tell us what ISIS doesn't want us to do.
clubgop wrote:
Who gives a fuck what these psycho fucks want? Instead of nation building, we just break these places. Let them fight over the pieces.
Let's see, 3,000 killed.
In return 2 nations invaded, drone attacks on something like 10 (sovereign) nations including funerals, weddings, traveling parties, party-parties, town meetings, "suspected" terrorists, revival of ISIS, destabilizing of at least 4 governments, and hundreds of thousands (at least) deaths, injuries, and creation of refugees which also leads to European immigration crisis. And the creation of millions of angry, upset, often hungry, impoverished, unemployed people by the multiple wars we started, or supported, and did not win.
ISIS as an individual organization was almost dead, the we invaded, destabilized Iraq, and then failed to finish the destruction of ISIS while weakening Iraq's ability to do so.
If we had gone after just Osama bin Landen, almost nobody would have gainsaid us. But we did not do that, did we? Perhaps rather than demonizing the millions of people we have hurt, and often radicalize, we should have done, and do, something different?
Now though, we are all the King's men, and all the King's horses, and we have Humpty Dumpty all broken. So your suggestions on what we should do now is about as good as mine.
