Thread: What Will It Take To Get Rid Of ISIS?

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower

Should we wish to find the cause, how about the Sykes–Picot Agreement

Errr, that was covered by what I said in my post, also that agreement was, again, not THE cause, it's A cause. There is NO one cause and it's pointless looking for one.

Pointless is it?

http://www.poeministries.org/pages/L...otsofIslam.htm

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Ultimally you are responsible for your own destiny

So are you going to apologise to Ray Carey for everything you've said to him regarding Nick Berg? After all the noise you made about that particular atrocity it now seems that you regard what happened to Berg as his own fault.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Pointless is it?

Yes.

Yes you covered a little of the agreement not all and not the basis of why it came about.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower

Should we wish to find the cause, how about the Sykes–Picot Agreement

Errr, that was covered by what I said in my post, also that agreement was, again, not THE cause, it's A cause. There is NO one cause and it's pointless looking for one.

Jeez Rick you read that in six minutes.

Originally Posted by rickschoppers

A good read and spin HH. This should be read by all westerners to give the other side of the ME argument.

Had more than six minutes. According to the timestamps, I had eight minutes which was time enough.

Originally Posted by rickschoppers

Originally Posted by Neverna

Originally Posted by rickschoppers

Yes, they are digging themselves a pretty deep hole. If they do become the dominant faction in the ME they will be difficult to negotiate with since they have burnt so many bridges.

If this were hollywood, they would ultimately be defeated by the good guys (whoever that is), but this isn't hollywood. Movies always villianize a character or group of characters before they write them out of the script and ISIS fits the bill. You could always spin it 180 degrees like some are trying to do here and paint ISIS as victims. They would then be applauded for defeating the coalition because they would then be the villians.

Either way, it is going to be a long while before a dominant faction surfaces in the ME. Let's all just hope they turn out to be the good guys.

Please retract that comment as you know it is not true.

No retraction necessary. Please remove your tunnel vision to see the words in a different light than what you seem to be stuck on.

It's easy, Rick. Show me some posts by "some members" on this forum where a member has painted ISIS as victims. Highlight the 'spin' if you need to.

Cheeez Neverna... Maybe I should have put a coma in that sentance or something so that you could better comprehend it. "On here", refers to the Teak Door website, not just this thread." Painting ISIS as victims", is a separate hypothetical thought.

I really don't know how else to explain it Neverna and if you continue to see it in only one context, I can't help you.

Originally Posted by rickschoppers

Cheeez Neverna... Maybe I should have put a coma in that sentance or something so that you could better comprehend it. "On here", refers to the Teak Door website, not just this thread." Painting ISIS as victims", is a separate hypothetical thought.

I really don't know how else to explain it Neverna and if you continue to see it in only one context, I can't help you.

I know you mean on Teak Door and not just this thread. You made a statement that should be easy for you to prove if it's true. Show some examples.

"Hypothetical thought"? Have members of TD painted "ISIS as victims" on TD or not? Yes or no? I contend no. If you think they have, show some examples.

Originally Posted by Neverna

Originally Posted by rickschoppers

Cheeez Neverna... Maybe I should have put a coma in that sentance or something so that you could better comprehend it. "On here", refers to the Teak Door website, not just this thread." Painting ISIS as victims", is a separate hypothetical thought.

I really don't know how else to explain it Neverna and if you continue to see it in only one context, I can't help you.

I know you mean on Teak Door and not just this thread. You made a statement that should be easy for you to prove if it's true. Show some examples.

"Hypothetical thought"? Have members of TD painted "ISIS as victims" on TD or not? Yes or no? I contend no. If you think they have, show some examples.

So we both agree. No, nobody on TD has painted ISIS as victims. I said it could be spun that way as some have spun other topics.

Get it? Got it? Good.

Originally Posted by rickschoppers

Originally Posted by Neverna

Originally Posted by rickschoppers

Cheeez Neverna... Maybe I should have put a coma in that sentance or something so that you could better comprehend it. "On here", refers to the Teak Door website, not just this thread." Painting ISIS as victims", is a separate hypothetical thought.

I really don't know how else to explain it Neverna and if you continue to see it in only one context, I can't help you.

I know you mean on Teak Door and not just this thread. You made a statement that should be easy for you to prove if it's true. Show some examples.

"Hypothetical thought"? Have members of TD painted "ISIS as victims" on TD or not? Yes or no? I contend no. If you think they have, show some examples.

So we both agree. No, nobody on TD has painted ISIS as victims. I said it could be spun that way as some have spun other topics.

Get it? Got it? Good.

But you didn't say that. You said ..

Originally Posted by rickschoppers

You could always spin it 180 degrees like some are trying to do here and paint ISIS as victims.

A poorly written post by you then, Rick. What you really meant to say was that a hypothetical Hollywood movie could be spun 180 degrees to show IS as victims, and spinning something 180 degrees is something that members here on TD do or are good at. Is that it?

OK, I can live with that. Sometimes when I write on this site, I know what I mean but it may get misinterpreted to mean something completely different. Does that ever happen to you?

It's why clear writing should be both encouraged and practised. It reduces the chances of misinterpretation.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by RPETER65

I guess if you ignore the the murders of thousands of Saddams own people you could say relatively peaceful, and let's not forget the chemical weapons used on Iran.

Yes, which is the reason for inserting the word into the sentence.

Originally Posted by MrG

Yes, and marching your army into a keg of dynamite like the ME in 2003--made so largely by the Westen Powers at the end of WWI--without an exit strategy, then releasing all the generals and soldiers with their weapons to form the basis of ISIS, alienating the population you are supposed to be there to help form the "Athens of the Middle East" as Boy George put it, is a policy of disaster.

We must assume there were different objectives then, as no sane government officer would willingly put their name to recommending a disastrous policy. A few as illustrated above, were "just following orders". Did not a few "order followers" hang after WWII? Will the same justice be metered out to the appropriate men and women.

Will compensation to the people and facilities annihilated/destroyed/infected/irradiated be paid or refurbished similar to some, but not all, "victims" after WWII? The countries involved need to ask themselves whether they have any feelings of guilt and not continually blame some "Officer of the Government".

As I said above, a hole in the ground, followed by a sharp stick anally inserted would be not only efficient but something the current generation of insane men and women would remember.

The reason I responded is there is no place for relatively peacefully in a discussion of pre war Iraq

Iconclasm - present at the moment in Islam more than anywhere else.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

If the British had listened to Lawrence instead of breaking all the promises they'd made to the Arab leaders who'd helped them defeat the Turks the Middle East would be a far more stable place.

Read Lawrence In Arabia by Anderson (I think). Recently published history of WW1 in the Middle East from the POV of the Brits, Arabs, French, Americans, Germans and of course, Lawrence.

Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower

Here's a interesting read.

How the West is responsible for all the problems in the Middle East | Seth J. Frantzman

Yes, a very interesting read. Can't say I disagree with much of it. Would like to see a little more of the author's perspectives on the ME.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Ray Carey delighted in the death of Nick Berg and made his glee well-known aboard here

He didn't. You and a few others just created the myth that he did and then kept building on it

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

If you recall, Ray Carey aka Reach-Around, also advocated the death of any other contractors working in Iraq attempting to rebuild the country and put food on the table(s) of their dependants

He did not 'advocate' death and for you to limit it to 'contractors working in Iraq attempting to rebuild the country and put food on the table(s) of their dependants' is a bit slimy.
If you can, please quote his posts as my memory is a bit fuzzy - though he was clearly being provocative

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Of course Nick Berg was ultimately responsible for his position

That's what it boils down to . . . now just imagine if posters with an agenda start spinning your post ad infinitum like you did with RC over years . . .

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Ray Carey was/is widely reviled by a large majority of folks aboard here for his sentiments.

No, he wasn't. Tell us who this 'large' majority consisted of . . . a large majority being at least 75%-90% of posters . . . not the few neo cons recalcitrants that started the ball rolling . . . and using 'reach-around' at every instance.
He was reviled by you and your ilk, constantly hounding him, changing the story, embellishing his posts.

^
History revisionism seems to be your forte. RC certainly did rejoice in the death of Nick Berg and if those threads had not been redacted, could show you in black & white.

RC also advocated the demise of our brave soldiers in the Military.

One sick puppy...

Originally Posted by OckerRocker

No, he wasn't. Tell us who this 'large' majority consisted of . . . a large majority being at least 75%-90% of posters . . . not the few neo cons recalcitrants that started the ball rolling . . . and using 'reach-around' at every instance.
He was reviled by you and your ilk, constantly hounding him, changing the story, embellishing his posts.

You can count me as one. I well remember Ray reveling in the death of American contractors.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

RC certainly did rejoice in the death of Nick Berg

Except he didn't

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

RC also advocated the demise of our brave soldiers in the Military.

. . . as above

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

if those threads had not been redacted, could show you in black & white.

Handy, BM - very handy

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

I well remember Ray reveling in the death of American contractors.

As far as I remember, hence my request to show the posts, is that he basically said that if they were there then they chose their fate

Originally Posted by OckerRocker

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

I well remember Ray reveling in the death of American contractors.

As far as I remember, hence my request to show the posts, is that he basically said that if they were there then they chose their fate

Sorry, it was nothing like that. I don't store posts like some posters, but I well remember being revolted by Ray's absolute glee in the deaths of American contractors. At the time - and I can only remember that I was fairly new to TD at the time - I simply couldn't believe that sick fuckers would post crap like that. Now, I know better.

I have no interest, OR, in debating this, but I do know without question what I read, and it was disgusting.

Originally Posted by OckerRocker

As far as I remember, hence my request to show the posts, is that he basically said that if they were there then they chose their fate

Selective memory again as he also included the soldiers families in his screeds against the Military & civilian contractors.