Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The War ISIS Wants

nybooks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 228 posts

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#21

Post by blisterpeanuts »

varjag wrote: post #9
kefka wrote: post #4

So, it seems that the only way to fight this was is to change their minds by asking assistance from the peaceful Muslim groups. We can discriminate Daesh and Muslims, and that only shows the monsters they say we are. We can bomb Daesh, which only encourages more to join their cause. Worst case, we can nuke the whole area of Iraq and Syria where Daesh has power, and that would only show every Muslim in the world that…

You underestimate the degree to which people of violence listen to the language of violence. The article suggests the military conquest is the key of Daesh attractiveness. But similarly, its military loss will be its demise. Lost territory and decimated ranks will make it a lot less exciting to the recruits. Harder wars have been fought and won before.

I agree. The Taliban and Al Qaeda were routed in Afghanistan, and the only thing that saved them was a sympathetic government next door in Pakistan, allowing them to regroup and rearm. The Americans, had they stayed, could have protected the democratic government until it was strong enough to stand on its own, but war weariness and impatience caused them to withdraw prematurely. This was not a sign of jihadist strength and resilience, just good luck. Interviews with some of the fighters suggested actually that they were tired of war as well.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#22

Post by nightspirit »

blfr wrote: post #3

The fact that the EU’s replacement rate is 1.59 children per couple and the continent needs substantial levels of immigration to maintain a productive workforce The idea here is that all people are the same, and all you need to do is shoehorn enough to keep the economy going. Beyond the complete lack of humanity in the outlook that we are like barrels of brent, it's simply wrong. If this was the case, the entire worl…

> The fact that the EU’s replacement rate is 1.59 children per couple and the continent needs substantial levels of immigration to maintain a productive workforce

> The idea here is that all people are the same, and all you need to do is shoehorn enough to keep the economy going.

Maybe it's time to start thinking why people who end up living in the West are unwilling to reproduce, despite having the highest standard of living ever available to humans.

Solving the underpopulation problem by constant import of uneducated masses from all over the world is going to cost more and more, both in terms of the peta-man-hours needed to teach them functioning in new reality (language barrier for a start) and in terms of things going wrong when the former fails.

I mean, what are these guys supposed to do here? Join the rat race, stop reproducing and replace themselves with who-knows-whom 100 years down the line? Despise this culcure and blow stuff up? Something else?

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#23

Post by pythonlion »

omginternets wrote: post #6

It's not that I disagree with the points brought up by this article (how could I! We've known these things to be true for years!), but I'm worried about the leap that people make, namely that military action isn't necessary. It's hard to imagine any effective strategy that doesn't involve killing people in Syria. It's disgusting, necessary, and -- I willingly admit -- not sufficient.

couple of thousands pinpointed (and larger) airstrikes, comprehensive wipeout of terror cells in Europe. maybe it sound extreme, but its a clear action to-face the situation. ofcurse the first witch should come to mind is to save as many lifes and dignity etc. . and i think solving it without killing will only make it a dragging problem.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#24

Post by carlob »

Margh wrote: post #18
carlob wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how long did it take for the whole of Europe to mend the damage of WWII, both physical and political? Germany has been left effectively occupied and divided for 45 years after the end of the war. We're talking about an industrialized country, which shared a very similar culture for the most part with the occupying powers. How do you think the post-WWIII would go in the Middle East? Do you think Syria will meekly…

West Germany had a similar culture to their occupant, the east not so much. Germany also became the centrepiece for a US vs. Russia proxy war, Syria would likely become the same and is arguably already in that state. In any case it would depend on whether a post WWIII and independent(ish) Syria, much like the post WWII Germany, makes the prudent decision to outlaw and taboo the fanaticism that got it into that situat…

> West Germany had a similar culture to their occupant, the east not so much. Germany also became the centrepiece for a US vs. Russia proxy war, Syria would likely become the same and is arguably already in that state.

That why I said mostly. However I still think Russia/East Germany is way closer than France or US/Syria or Iraq.

Other than that Germany was not the only European power that kept suffering the consequences of WWII well into the '80s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#25

Post by yk »

hedgew wrote: post #10
kefka wrote: post #4

So, it seems that the only way to fight this was is to change their minds by asking assistance from the peaceful Muslim groups. We can discriminate Daesh and Muslims, and that only shows the monsters they say we are. We can bomb Daesh, which only encourages more to join their cause. Worst case, we can nuke the whole area of Iraq and Syria where Daesh has power, and that would only show every Muslim in the world that…

I disagree. The last time we tried that went horribly wrong; we watched and negotiated and "waged the war of ideology" too patiently while Hitler grew in power, until ultimately the Nazis had to be fought and slaughtered and condemned without mercy. If history repeated itself, we would be wise to intervene faster instead of twiddling our thumbs on the sidelines. And we'd know that waging any kind of ideological war w…

The last time the west waged a war of ideology was the cold war, that one went pretty well all things considered.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#26

Post by pythonlion »

asgard1024 wrote: post #17
omginternets wrote: post #6

It's not that I disagree with the points brought up by this article (how could I! We've known these things to be true for years!), but I'm worried about the leap that people make, namely that military action isn't necessary. It's hard to imagine any effective strategy that doesn't involve killing people in Syria. It's disgusting, necessary, and -- I willingly admit -- not sufficient.

> It's hard to imagine any effective strategy that doesn't involve killing people I disagree, one is actually described in the article: "[For] the youth of the nation are closer to the innate nature [of humans] on account of the rebelliousness within them." Do you think capitalism/democracy/whatever mix we have in the West does a good job of preventing these people fighting for "Jihad"? We don't really give young peo…

what you said its all true but there are out there already some fanatics who wants to kill you, they can. and they did, and i don't know how many more life should be letting to "statistic danger", in the various places of the world. its really hard to calculate, really.. i don't know.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#27

Post by simonh »

Amezarak wrote: post #15
blfr wrote: post #3

The fact that the EU’s replacement rate is 1.59 children per couple and the continent needs substantial levels of immigration to maintain a productive workforce The idea here is that all people are the same, and all you need to do is shoehorn enough to keep the economy going. Beyond the complete lack of humanity in the outlook that we are like barrels of brent, it's simply wrong. If this was the case, the entire worl…

> Beyond the complete lack of humanity in the outlook that we are like barrels of brent, it's simply wrong. Indeed. And there seems, to me, to be something nihilistic in the idea that Europeans should simply let immigrants replace them. Maybe instead, European nations should look into instituting domestic policies that encourage the population to maintain a healthy replacement rate. The article appears to be implying…

>The article appears to be implying that Western nations should not make war against Daesh because "that's what they want."...

I agree the article spends a lot of time implying what we shouldn't do and not much time at all saying what might make for effective policies, but it's hardly advocating Islamising Europe either.

I took two things away from the article. One is that the kind of pretty much deliberate social and economic marginalization of Muslim minorities in France is a terrible mistake. You can have a pluralistic egalitarian society without insisting that everyone has to dress, talk and behave exactly like white western Europeans all the time. Having an Imperial legacy and historic connections with extensive regions of the wider world isn't compatible with being culturally allergic to anyone who looks or acts foreign. We in Europe need to build strong cultural bridges connecting us to the Muslim minorities in our midst that are now also Europeans and deserve respect and support. I may take flak for this, because it turns my stomach to imply that France has any responsibility for the recent attacks, but frankly the French state is not doing it's job.

The second lesson is regarding our foreign policy in the Middle East. Keeping out of Syria and letting whatever happens just happen hasn't worked. The result has been a breeding ground for radicalization and chaos that has exacerbated the situation in Iraq, and lead to the biggest Refugee crisis Europe has seen since WW2. The Iraq war was awful and the political pressure to withdraw and 'bring the troops home' intense, but doing so was a horrible mistake. Once you're in, you're in for better or worse. We can't wash our hands of these conflicts and expect that the resulting mess will stay put and not affect us.

As a corollary, I think that our consistent policy that none of the borders in the Middle east are up for negotiation is a mistake. If the Sunni, Shia and Kurd regions of Iraq want to be separate states, they should have the freedom to do so. Trying to insist that the Sunni minority had to stay welded to a larger hostile Shia population was just asking for unending trouble. Partition isn't always the right answer, but in some situations it needs to be an option.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#28

Post by blisterpeanuts »

carlob wrote: post #16

My girlfriend taught in the Parisian banlieue for a year. In her experience most of what is said in this article is very much true. In this areas (which would correspond pretty much to inner cities in the US) the draw of radical Islam is very strong, starting with high school kids. After all what else is there to do? Deal drugs? On the other hand I would like to see this study that shows that increase in the level of…

Many of the extremists have come from affluent homes, e.g. second generation Pakistanis with secular, professional parents living in comfortable London suburbs. Converts come from across the socio-economic spectrum.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#29

Post by [deleted] »

blfr wrote: post #3

The fact that the EU’s replacement rate is 1.59 children per couple and the continent needs substantial levels of immigration to maintain a productive workforce The idea here is that all people are the same, and all you need to do is shoehorn enough to keep the economy going. Beyond the complete lack of humanity in the outlook that we are like barrels of brent, it's simply wrong. If this was the case, the entire worl…

[deleted]

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#30

Post by macspoofing »

... and they hope that this war results in the outcome they envision - which is some utopia that the Muslim world unites against the crusading threat and a caliphate is established? But they are human and they are perfectly fallible. And maybe force is necessary. In an ideal world, this is when a multi-national force under the UN banner is actually warranted.

By the way this is the exact situation that American after 9/11 swore would never happen again - a safe haven for global terrorism to be planned and launched from. That one is on Obama, though with Iraq Bush made that option incredibly difficult.

Post reply on HN