Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

egbertowillies

(4,058 posts)
Sun Sep 28, 2014, 10:05 PM Sep 2014

Bill Maher had one of the most substantive discussion on ISIS / ISIL to date

The video is at my blog as I cannot embed DM videos here (http://egbertowillies.com/2014/09/28/bill-maher-isis-isil-sensible-discussion/)
---
While Bill Maher's New Rules was a distraction and an unnecessary attack on both Islam and Christianity, he likely had one of the most sensible and substantive discussions on ISIS earlier on. Specifically discussed was whether America is aggressively addressing the proper threat.

Bill Maher had John Feehery, Right Wing Republican & President of Quinn Gillespie Communications, General Anthony Zinni, and Charles M. Blow, New York Times columnist on his show Real Time With Bill Maher. It provided a multi-angled discussion from a satirist, a war monger, a general, and a pragmatist. True to form the ultimate consensus was not difficult to discern.

When Bill Maher asked if Americans are not always scared of the wrong thing, the ultimate answer was clear. He previously presented the threat Ebola had on the world based on the President and others’ statements. General Anthony Zinni ultimately agreed and said that while ISIS / ISIL was in fact a problem, Ebola was an existential threat for us all.

“I would say Ebola is the greater global threat. ISIS certainly is a regional threat,” said Anthony Zinni. “I think its tentacles can reach out and create problems in our country and others. It is not an existential threat. Ebola can become an existential threat on a global level.”

Bill Maher then questioned why Americans are always obsessed with the latest version of Islamic terrorism as it is likely to be with us for the foreseeable future. Charles M. Blow had the most sensible response.

“That is what worries me the most,” Charles M. Blow said. “How do you fight an idea? It is called the Islamic State but it is not really state. It’s an idea and that idea will always be there. There will always be anti-Americanism. We can degrade for sure. But this idea of degrade and destroy … how do you destroy an idea?”

Bill Maher read some quotes from our intelligence experts who repeated what many have been stating. The threat to America proper is no different than it has been. The statement of massive Americans signing up with ISIS / ISIL was also overblown and overestimated.

Right Wing Republican John Feehery was true to form. He tried to dispute Bill Maher pointing out that military engagement in a ‘safe haven’ over there does not guarantee safety over here.

“We have to keep these guys on the run,” John Feehery said. “That makes us safer.”

Charles M. Blow retorted that that is a never ending prospect. In other words it is futile. The following Bill Maher statement is the one Americans should key in on. Our actions are not making us safer.

“Why if they have a country of their own does it affect a squad of five or ten or at most twenty people as in 9/11 from attacking us. It really doesn’t,” Bill Maher said. “The people of America kind of get this because this is interesting. Forty seven percent of people say we are less safe than we were after 9/11 but they are for this bombing. So they are basically saying, ‘Let’s try the thing that made us less safe again.”

Is it then our fault that we allowed ourselves to be conned into another war? Americans need to be more pragmatic in our thinking and stop allowing others to encourage us to shoot from the hip.

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Bill Maher had one of the most substantive discussion on ISIS / ISIL to date (Original Post) egbertowillies Sep 2014 OP
Is it correct KT2000 Sep 2014 #1
People get rich off war. People create the factors to justify (spinwise) war. nt valerief Sep 2014 #2
I think Bill Maher is absolutely correct on this. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #3
You do not EVER kill an idea...you change the conditions that give it life. Moostache Sep 2014 #4

KT2000

(20,576 posts)
1. Is it correct
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 01:08 AM
Sep 2014

to say that ISIL is just an idea when they are actually taking over territory? People are fleeing to become refugees in other countries.

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
3. I think Bill Maher is absolutely correct on this.
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 06:22 AM
Sep 2014

We can never be completely successful in eliminating every threat of terrorism no matter what we do.

Look at Oklahoma City for example. There is one American right wing extremist group after another plotting to do something. They are actually a greater threat than the Muslim extremists.

I think a group of very rich men benefit too much from the MIC to pursue a peace strategy.

Moostache

(9,895 posts)
4. You do not EVER kill an idea...you change the conditions that give it life.
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 09:16 AM
Sep 2014

This is not some "winning of hearts and minds" pap either...if the United States wants to TRULY be safer (which we do NOT by the way...the powers that be WANT eternal panic and fear and war - easier to control people....after all, we have ALWAYS been at war with Eurasia), if we really desire peace as an outcome, we would immediately cut all support for Israel and close 90% of Empire USA's standing military bases around the world.

After those two initial steps, we can improve our moral standing in the world by truly leading on climate change, using the resources of the US military to help control the spread of Ebola and using the resources of the western world to treat that disease and others NOW, rather than later. If we really want to "fight them over there, rather than over here" (forgetting for a moment that there has NEVER been an actual "fight over here"....only terror bombings and attacks, which are not the same as a real war....), we would engage the people in a real dialogue about their lives and oppression and the 400 lb gorilla - RELIGION. Do not hold your breathe waiting for that!

People don't hate our "freedom"...they hate having Americans in their countries as a standing army, the same way they hated the Roman garrisons and never gave a shit about "the glory of Rome".

People don't hate our "ideals"...they hate our politicians as mouthpieces for oppression and spokesmen for global oligarchs running the planet into oblivion for an extra $0.10 a share.

ISIS/ISIL/ISL....AlQueda/Queda....Hamas....Hezbollah...the name is just a label for "Boogeyman of the Moment".
No real leaders exist inside or on the periphery of our government and that is by design. Whenever a real leader emerges - JFK, RFK, MLK, Lennon, Wellstone, etc. - they met an ugly demise, by design. Talk about elections and the House and the Senate and all is a distraction, an illusion to keep people from asking that most dangerous question - "Why?"

Why are there Islamic fundamentalists in the first place?
Why should we think that expensive bombing campaigns will actually eradicate the reasons for it?
Why does humanity continue to allow religion (and monied interests that USE it) to divide us into warring tribes?

Why is this time any different than last time? Because its Obama instead of Bush? UNACCEPTABLE.
We have gone back to war without so much as a single congressional hearing...why? Because the politicians learned that defending themselves from their own votes was too perilous. This time, there is no public record of their position. Blameless Congress? Yeah, right....

Stop asking the questions about right-left, red-blue, Rep-Dem....stop living in the oligarchs binary world of Eurasia-Oceania or Eastasia-Oceania as the winds may blow...starting asking "why?"

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Bill Maher had one of the...