HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Clarity: We Will Be Fundi...

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:30 PM

 

Clarity: We Will Be Funding The Terror Group Who Kidnapped Sotloff, and Asking Them to Fight the

Last edited Sat Sep 13, 2014, 06:36 PM - Edit history (1)

Group they sold him to.

Groups that have already formed alliances with each other.




What could go wronG?



More evidence this is nothing more than the continuation of the neo-con doctrine of perpetual war. Let's stop the cycle of violence now.

25 years in Iraq is enough.




Kidnapping: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/08/steven-sotloff-sold-to-isis_n_5788312.html

Alliance: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014895466

44 replies, 2637 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 44 replies Author Time Post
Reply Clarity: We Will Be Funding The Terror Group Who Kidnapped Sotloff, and Asking Them to Fight the (Original post)
grahamhgreen Sep 2014 OP
liberal_at_heart Sep 2014 #1
NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #2
grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #3
IronGate Sep 2014 #6
NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #37
BlindTiresias Sep 2014 #7
grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #18
NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #38
grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #44
Enrique Sep 2014 #12
Thinkingabout Sep 2014 #4
grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #10
Thinkingabout Sep 2014 #14
Hissyspit Sep 2014 #15
Thinkingabout Sep 2014 #17
Man from Pickens Sep 2014 #22
Thinkingabout Sep 2014 #26
Man from Pickens Sep 2014 #29
Thinkingabout Sep 2014 #31
Man from Pickens Sep 2014 #32
CentralMass Sep 2014 #41
Dems to Win Sep 2014 #5
grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #42
grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #8
Progressive dog Sep 2014 #9
grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #11
Progressive dog Sep 2014 #13
zeemike Sep 2014 #19
Progressive dog Sep 2014 #28
zeemike Sep 2014 #35
Aerows Sep 2014 #24
Progressive dog Sep 2014 #27
Phlem Sep 2014 #30
grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #39
Aerows Sep 2014 #40
dreamnightwind Sep 2014 #43
JEB Sep 2014 #16
TwilightGardener Sep 2014 #20
grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #23
TwilightGardener Sep 2014 #25
99Forever Sep 2014 #21
nashville_brook Sep 2014 #33
DirkGently Sep 2014 #34
deminks Sep 2014 #36

Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:33 PM

1. my head is spinning, but I'm sure that is exactly what they want. If they keep us confused they feed

us whatever narrative they want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:33 PM

2. For the most part, posting members of this board, the Democratic Underground, know jack shit.

 

You are, I assume, a member.

Can your provide something of substance, please?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #2)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:35 PM

3. Ad Hominem attack FAIL. Present your arguments or GTFO. PS- How we gonna pay for the war (crickets)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #2)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 05:16 PM

6. Jury results.

 

It was close, but you prevailed.
I voted to leave it.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message



On Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:04 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

For the most part, posting members of this board, the Democratic Underground, know jack shit.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5531292

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

quite a blanket insult to fellow DUers.

No substance at all in this post, a pure personal attack

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:09 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Valid opinion and question, not a personal attack.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Blanket attacks of DU, as a whole, is unqualified and disruptive. I'm against censorship, as a general rule and would request a warning to redact first, then do apprpriately.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I agree with the alert. This is unacceptable.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IronGate (Reply #6)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 09:00 PM

37. Well how about that?

 

Pointing out that members here who get their information from the Huffington Post don't have quality intel is just unacceptable.

Wow.

Thank you for your vote!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #2)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 05:20 PM

7. care to comment

on the validity of the huffpo article?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlindTiresias (Reply #7)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 06:36 PM

18. Crickets.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #18)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 09:02 PM

38. OMG, the huffington post! I didn't realize!

 

Clearly, Obama probably didn't have this valuable intel available to him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #38)

Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:22 PM

44. You doubt the veracity of Sotloffs family?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #2)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 05:25 PM

12. only one person knows anything

President Obama

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:47 PM

4. What is your plan to stop the violence?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #4)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 05:22 PM

10. First. Stop hitting. We can do that. We can stop hitting. Second, I see this is a great opportunity

 


to unite disparate ME players who have been at war with each other, some for 1400 years.

The Saudi's, Syrians, Iranians,Israeli's, and Iraqi's can all band together to fight this common enemy.... of course, that's assuming it is an enemy and not a proxy of SA. Of course, that does not fit in with the neocon vision of perpetual war for

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #10)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 05:37 PM

14. Good thought on stopping the hitting but there has to be a plan introduced to

Accomplish this goal. On settling the troubles in the ME, you noted this has gone on for 1400 years, it will not be easy. Just as generations here in the US passes thoughts onto their children, the cycle isn't broken. In the US the race wars continue, the same similar events occur in the ME. US has been trying for years to get a peace plan adopted but it hasn't happened. I think a viable plan hasn't been put on the table yet, still looking for a win-win plan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #4)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 05:41 PM

15. I say we use more violence.

Blow up a few wedding parties.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hissyspit (Reply #15)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 06:01 PM

17. I know the point you are trying to make, think of a real plan, this is a serious matter.

Just like we need to curb future Sandy Hooks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #4)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:00 PM

22. My plan to stop the violence

 

flood the region with weapons of all kinds, big and small

force disparate groups with vastly different cultures to co-exist within borders, borders that were drawn by a pair of Western diplomats a century ago for the purpose of dividing the area politically and preventing any unified opposition to outside domination

pick an enemy every few years to bomb the crap out of

that's sure to fix it in no time

or maybe we can try something else

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Man from Pickens (Reply #22)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:11 PM

26. Is this your final offer, didnt work before, what do you think has changed to get it to work now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #26)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:36 PM

29. it's clearly the only option

 

if there were any other options surely someone would have tried them by now

maybe we should add some extra bombing and extra weapons just to be sure

and support all sides with those weapons so that whoever ends up winning out owes us one

I'm sure they'll love us for it

the defense contractors will, anyway, and that's what's really important in America

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Man from Pickens (Reply #29)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:56 PM

31. I would love to see a viable option, meanwhile this radical ISIS has to be stopped, by

Whatever means. I prefer to have fewer troops on the ground. I think the key lies in Syria and getting permission to bomb or use drones may be slow in coming. But, we do not want the negotiations behind closed doors are, it wasn't announced about the bin Laden raid, might be the same this time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #31)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:59 PM

32. Let me play Devil's advocate for a minute please

 

I have three key questions on that point.

1) Why exactly does ISIS need to be stopped?
2) Why does it need to be the US doing it?
3) Is achieving the stated objective even possible?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Man from Pickens (Reply #22)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 10:40 PM

41. You should have no problem finding employment in Washington.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 05:06 PM

5. K&R Let the Saudis take out the Frankenstein they created n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dems to Win (Reply #5)

Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:49 AM

42. This is the solution.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 05:22 PM

9. It is unfortunate, but if the choices

are between funding the group that sold Sotloff in order oppose the group that beheaded him, having US troops back in combat, or doing nothing--I would vote for funding.
BTW: We have fewer military in combat zones than we have police in many large cities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #9)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 05:23 PM

11. But, they're not going to fight them.... they just signed an alliance.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #11)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 05:27 PM

13. Then I guess there is no point in

supplying weapons to people who won't use them against ISIS. We'll just have to fund the Kurds and Iraqis and let it go at that. Continue our air support of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #9)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 06:44 PM

19. Yes but the military have vastly more powerful weapons.

to where one can kill hundreds.

But why is there never a choice to just stop it?...that is not doing nothing.

But we got lots of money we can keep it going for many years...there is lots of money to be made in war materials...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zeemike (Reply #19)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:26 PM

28. Doing nothing?

Sure, we could let them continue to kill until they get tired of killing. That's always been a really clever option.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #28)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 08:30 PM

35. Or until the people in the region take action to help themselves.

But why do that when they have America willing to spend trillions to protect their interest so they can live safely in golden palaces with their concubines...but that is a clever move on their part.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #9)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:04 PM

24. Deploy the Ferguson, MO police.

 

They can't make the region any more messed up than it already is, and it might sate their trigger fingers if they are getting shot at, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #24)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:24 PM

27. If you can get them to go

Start a petition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #24)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:44 PM

30. +1

awesome!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #24)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 09:22 PM

39. There's a plan I can get behind!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #39)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 09:25 PM

40. They have MRAPs, personnel trained to kill

 

I think they are *perfect* to fight terrorists.

Heck, they can even protect their own when they shoot someone that is giving up.

I say, Deploy FergMO Force!

(George Zimmerman can be on the front line, too!)

If knowing the Ferguson PD and George Zimmerman are loose in your area with guns doesn't make you shit your pants with terror, not a damn thing will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #40)

Sun Sep 14, 2014, 08:39 AM

43. Yes, also send in the racoons

Let the terrorists deal with them. Not sure whose side I would be on, tough call.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 05:45 PM

16. Quagmire,

 

cluster fuck, abyss, treadmill, mirage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 06:49 PM

20. You need to be skeptical of all of this information. Stuff that comes out of Syria, especially

from a family's sources, is not reliable info. There are a lot of groups and interests in Syria with various political goals who are trying to manipulate public opinion. Look at the confusion over who used chem weapons last year--it still hasn't been conclusively proven, though it's likely it was Assad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #20)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:01 PM

23. The rebel/ISIS alliance seems pretty well documented, we can agree?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #23)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:08 PM

25. There are a number of rebel groups. Probably most of them would like to be

called "moderate" if it means they won't also get bombed by mistake, or if they can have western money and arms. It could also be some sort of move by ISIS to prevent getting the shit bombed out of it, by saying they're going to be now mixed in with more moderate rebels, or it could be Assad/Russian/Iranian propaganda, or something else entirely. US intelligence will have to dig harder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 06:52 PM

21. Enough insanity.

Let them settle their own issues. That's the only way it stands any chance of lasting at all. We CANNOT stop their fight, ONLY they can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 08:06 PM

33. k and r -- none of this makes sense.

who are our allies that will make an endgame possible? what has 25 years of war in the ME achieved?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 08:17 PM

34. Here's someone suggesting we're playing into Assad's hands perfectly.


Military leaders don't want a war. Intelligence services don't think we need one. It's the McCains and the McDonnell Douglas' of the world itching for another lucrative, treasury draining bloodbath.

Will we give it to them?

For Bashar Al Assad the ideal scenario is one in which ISIS helps him kill off his armed nationalist opposition in western Syria, American aviation assets pound ISIS positions in the east, and he sits comfortably in Damascus, feeling once again needed by the West as a useful partner against those arguably more evil than him. And a lucrative dividend awaits: The fact or perception of collaboration between Washington and Damascus driving wedges between the U.S. and every one of its regional partners, thereby serving the interests of the party Assad has so faithfully served: Iran.

Based on his experience with Washington since mid-2011, Assad has every reason to believe his strategy will bear fruit. Now, as his own forces focus on bombing, shelling, and starving civilians, ISIS fighters in western Syria work obligingly to eliminate his armed opposition. Now, as the U.S. contemplates an aerial campaign against ISIS targets in the east, Assad envisions a continuation of living large at the expense of others: Iran, Russia, ISIS, and now America. He expects harsh rhetoric from Washington. He will tell allies and adversaries alike to pay no attention to the words of those who have told him to step aside, warned him of red lines, threatened him with military strikes, and promised aid to opponents that never quite materialized in the forms or quantities required.

Indeed, if all the administration has to offer is more rhetoric, it is walking into a deadly geopolitical ambush. Even as Washington—ideally joined by partners—goes its own way operationally against ISIS with no reference whatsoever to the Assad regime, Assad will be believed both inside Syria and around the region when he claims that the fix is in. He will allege coordination and collaboration when none exists. He will hint at prominent visitors from Europe and the U.S., irrespective of their actual authorities. If all there is from Washington is talk, he will be believed.


http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119226/us-airstrikes-isis-syria-are-not-enough-punish-assad-too

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 08:45 PM

36. but McCain sayuz some of the groups can be trusted...

he knows 'cause he vetted some of them

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mccain-ive-vetted-syrian-rebels-people-not-trusting-them-making-excuses/

(snip)

McCain touted that he’s “vetted a number of them because I know them.” It was at that point Fox aired the infamous photo from last year of McCain and a few Syrian rebels, two of which turned out to be suspected kidnappers. This led to Rand Paul taking a shot at McCain and illustrating this as an example of why it’s hard to properly vet Syrian rebels.

(end snip)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread