Support NeoGAF

[Funky Papa]

For more than one year the boarders of Egypt, Tunisia an Algeria were under surveillance. Many incidents happened along the borders of these countries that indicates that.

They cannot control them in full. They are enormous and they have limited resources.

 

[goomba]

French Minster of Defense: "Safety comes first before anything else in Egypt"

That's probably what the French monarchy said during the French revolution.

 

[DXB-KNIGHT]

There is public discussion among some on arabs on Twitter regarding ISIS and Italy that I found interesting mainly since this is the first incident of ISIS happening closed to Italy, the video specifically has ISIS members threating Rome and the case of ISIS members hiding among the illegal immigrants that are fleeing Libya to Italian shores.

 

[Stereogatari]

There is public discussion among some on arabs on Twitter regarding ISIS and Italy that I found interesting mainly since this is the first incident of ISIS happening closed to Italy, the video specifically has ISIS members threating Rome and the case of ISIS members hiding among the illegal immigrants that are fleeing Libya to Italian shores.

I think the Rome of ISIS' mad plans is Turkey.

Turkey was historically known as Rum by the Arabs.

Either way they wouldn't dare touch either of the Romes because they'll get a clusterfucking.

 

[m_shortpants]

We helped France bomb Gaddafi because "he was killing his own people".

Meanwhile, in Syria...

I understand that Syria is different, and there is a massive conflict of interests between the US and Russia in a almost cold war like proxy battle, but our inaction there is shameful. And so our justification for assisting rebels in Libya becomes even more dishonest.

We have perpetually failed the Middle East. This is something that goes back to Sykes Picot. What a mess. Ugh.

 

[Joni]

We partially bombed Libya because we were sick of the refugees. It is why we'll bomb it again.

 

[RustyNails]

We need an ISIS OT to keep track of the latest developments.

Saudi Arabia is hosting a high level meeting today with defense chiefs of all coalition members to discuss strategy and possibly "deploy ground troops"

 

[Vilix]

We need an ISIS OT to keep track of the latest developments.

Saudi Arabia is hosting a high level meeting today with defense chiefs of all coalition members to discuss strategy and possibly "deploy ground troops"

ISIS OT Of Assholes And The Shit They Do. I'm down.

 

[Stinkles]

Is there even a defense force on GAF for these shitstains? If you can't even muster some bottom feeder here, you done goofed.

 

[Future PhaZe]

My main concern is how much their mindset can spread to EU territories. If they can gain a stronghold there...doomsday type shit

 

[Sayad]

Is there even a defense force on GAF for these shitstains? If you can't even muster some bottom feeder here, you done goofed.

There was at least one, he just got banned few weeks ago.

 

[Stinkles]

There was at least one, he just got banned few weeks ago.

What was his angle? Something something American colonialism something something Israel?

 

[DXB-KNIGHT]

What was his angle? Something something American colonialism something something Israel?

The ironic thing they threaten the West and Israel for the sake of Muslims yet the majority of their casualties are muslims.

 

[Avtomat]

We helped France bomb Gaddafi because "he was killing his own people".

Meanwhile, in Syria...

I understand that Syria is different, and there is a massive conflict of interests between the US and Russia in a almost cold war like proxy battle, but our inaction there is shameful. And so our justification for assisting rebels in Libya becomes even more dishonest.

We have perpetually failed the Middle East. This is something that goes back to Sykes Picot. What a mess. Ugh.

I agree with you on the bolded but what else do you want apart from inaction at this time?

I saw someone earlier in the thread calling for the EU to send out troops in Libya to achieve what exactly another 10 year military misadventure with nothing but a failed state to show for it?

I think people need to realise that you can't build nation states down the barrel of a gun, nations need time to form not being imposed by external powers. The middle east, north Africa and subsaharan Africa are littered with weak states whose geographic definitions are entirely nonsensical when you superimpose them on local alliances.

 

[Stereogatari]

I agree with you on the bolded but what else do you want apart from inaction at this time?

I saw someone earlier in the thread calling for the EU to send out troops in Libya to achieve what exactly another 10 year military misadventure with nothing but a failed state to show for it?

I think people need to realise that you can't build nation states down the barrel of a gun, nations need time to form not being imposed by external powers. The middle east, north Africa and subsaharan Africa are littered with weak states whose geographic definitions are entirely nonsensical when you superimpose them on local alliances.

Is there no way that Western institutions can try and instill the same senses of democracy, liberty and freedom that we have in the West? Or did they try that in Iraq and Afghanisan, because on the surface it looks like both were invaded, were given the platform to have democratic elections and then the West called it a day. But surely there could have been more the West could have done?

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

As we've seen Arab countries are fucking useless when it comes to military ops. Jordan has provided air assets in the bombing campaign against IS but they would be hesitant to send its own ground troops across the border into Syria. Who else would step up?

Iraq? Too busy in its own country.
Lebanon? Ditto.
Saudi? Lol.
Turkey? Double lol.

Iran?! Actually they're already in Syria and Iraq fighting IS ironically enough. but they're only small IRGC units who spend more time fighting alongside Hezbollah and Assad's forces against moderate Syrian rebels.

If you want to get the job done properly then you need Western forces sent in to occupy the country. It won't be a rerun of the Iraq War for the simple reason there isn't any safe haven for these Islamoterrorists to mount attacks from.

During the US occupation Islamic State's predecessor Al Qaeda in Iraq was able to use Syrian territory to plot attacks on coalition forces. This time no such safe haven would exist....IF the West chose to go in and occupy Syria (which is probably the only real way to clear the region of these Islamobarbarians, as well as Assad's genocidal regime).

Then I guess Arab countries will continue to have to watch their citizens be executed and just hope that IS doesn't open a branch on their land or try to invade.

Eventually, they will be forced to respond. If they want to sit on their ass and do nothing until things reach critical mass, they can go ahead and do that; we'll just have to take comfort knowing it will be a valuable lesson for the future.

Part of this is probably the expectation that the West will come and fight IS for them. We have set that precedent over and over. It's time to stop that.

 

[Sayad]

What was his angle? Something something American colonialism something something Israel?

He was a bit subtle about it, though one look through his history and it's amazing how he survived for so long. This is what his posts usually looked like:

How does that mean rooting far war. I want to see a caliphate in the Muslim world and that's where it stops.



The Syrian army, hezbollah, Iraqi army, peshmerga, PKK, Shia militia are not civilians.

I see no joy in civilians being killed on any side.

Post that triggered his banning(perm?!) though probably not the sole reason for the ban:

Lol

The Islamic State keeps winning.

^ about ISIS hacking USCC Twitter account.

 

[Stevetopsy]

Is there even a defense force on GAF for these shitstains? If you can't even muster some bottom feeder here, you done goofed.

I haven't seen anyone speak out who is on the side of ISIS, but what I do see plenty of and what gets more and more ridiculous everyday with each new atrocity is the people who absolutely maintain that religion here isn't an issue. That it's clearly all political, tribal, societal, whatever. Such as...

People follow many other destructive ways beyond religion too.

This, to me, is equivalent to me saying "Cigarettes are addicting and bad for your health. I wish they would just disappear", and them saying " Cigarettes aren't the problem man. If they didn't exist people would just get addicted to something else that's unhealthy."

... So? Maybe yes, maybe no, who knows really. Even if it were verifiably true, don't you agree that it would be a good idea to not exacerbate the problem and have one less way out there for people to deteriorate their health? Or with the climate change deniers... regardless of whether it's actually happening or not, wouldn't it be a good idea to be more environmentally aware with how we treat the planet?

Each month the savageries of ISIS stack up higher, done in ways that correspond to a 1:1 reading of Islamic teachings and each month more facts come to light and more reporting is done on how these are indeed individuals motivated in a large part due to their dogmatic beliefs, such as:

Very good Atlantic piece on ISIS

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

Of course i'm not saying that the Islamic terror and ISIS situation is entirely due to religion. I know many different factors have converged to create what we see today, but to deny or play down the influence that Islamic dogmatism is having on these individuals is simply absurd. I'm an atheist and and I get the feeling that most here are at least non-religious. It's hard for me as I'm sure it is for many here to imagine that people actually believe this stuff so strongly that in their minds it justifies what they do, but that is the hard truth.

Being religiously influenced and justified puts this on a level above anything with "earthly" justifications and makes it that much more dangerous. That's because it comes down from the highest office imaginable. This is, in their minds, a task given to them and sanctioned by God. This is a divine mission for them, bigger than life and death... there is no greater sharpener of focus and maintainer of conviction than believing you are doing work for the creator of all things.

 

[DXB-KNIGHT]

Egyptian News Papers: Egypt is building a unified Arabic force to handle the situation in Libya that consists of Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt.

 

[spekkeh]

Is there no way that Western institutions can try and instill the same senses of democracy, liberty and freedom that we have in the West? Or did they try that in Iraq and Afghanisan, because on the surface it looks like both were invaded, were given the platform to have democratic elections and then the West called it a day. But surely there could have been more the West could have done?

Well they were in Afghanistan for over a decade, but that country (you could hardly call it a country) was pretty doomed from the start, it's essentially tribalistic and barren. They just focused on Kabul and that worked out for a time, but no new Karzai surfaced and you can only keep a man in power so long before he starts looking like a puppet.

Iraq, I think, secretly the idea for the invasion was actually to create a western democracy in the heart of the arab world. A model state that would become an example for the other nations. What the Bush administration I think miscalculated was that the harmony between different groups was a delicate balance of surpression that Saddam worked, and the amount of reckoning that the surpressed groups wanted to enact now that he was gone.

Another problem of forcibly turning a dictatorship into a democracy is that it should somehow be carried by the people, but dictatorships work long and hard to consolidate the knowledge into a tiny group of people and make the rest of the populace paranoid and corrupt. The people most fit to rule were the Baath party, the army or the beneficiaries of the al-Tikriti clan. Not the ones you'd want there. So naturally you get strife and gross incompetence, which can only be circumvented by either installing a puppet leader, or enforcing a strong, western, constitution, either of which goes against the idea of a state being of the people.

The US chose a more laissez-faire approach, where they helped militarily but left the nationbuilding more up to the Iraqi people. In retrospect that was a bad idea.