The War ISIS Wants • Hacker News Board

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#151

Post by knowaveragejoe » Tue, Nov 17, 2015, 5:28 PM UTC

pythonlion wrote: post #23

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.

"Comprehensive wipeout of terror cells in europe" is difficult because the whole point of a terror cell is that they blend perfectly with the general population.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#152

Post by kaz1 » Tue, Nov 17, 2015, 5:31 PM UTC

thewarrior wrote: post #143

thewarrior wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what you're getting at but I'll try to explain. Fukuyama said that Capitalist Democracy was the pinnacle of civilisation. In the same way Salafi / Wahabbi ideology says that we must as much as possible live like the prophet and his contemporaries. Any innovation is derided as Bida/Heretical. So its not possible to reform certain laws in response to changing circumstances. Eg: Women can inherit only…

I cant reply directly as HN has blockedit. You're right but woman not being a breadwinner is no longer the social reality today. So do we change the law or go back to the old ways ?

Whatever a woman earns -- after taking care of her primary/general responsibility of largely being the minister/secretary of (informal) education, cultural and internal affairs within the realm of a budding family -- remains with her and is not obliged to spend for the basic subsistence of the family. She still gets her inheritances. Besides, as the last of the Abrahamic religions today, Islam presents itself as the continuation of the basic common messages that the prophets came with. The prophets came with robust messages to fix social reality (not necessarily every single aspect of it though), and they themselves were not primarily trying to fit-in and win mere popularity contests at any cost.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#153

Post by smegger001 » Tue, Nov 17, 2015, 5:41 PM UTC

woah wrote: post #129

graycat wrote: post #115

Interesting article. Here's why the ISIS plans won't work as the article describes how ISIS is planning: ISIS has basically five things going for them: (1) A lot of oil money, (2) a lot of desert no one wants to try to live in, (3) a lot of young men without much to do except live off the oil money, (4) a totally, world-class, grand-champion, one of a kind wacko leader -- calling that guy a wacko is an insult to all…

So you feel that genocide is the way to go?

How do you respond to openly barbaric group that wants to commit genocide against you in a civilized fashion?

You can try to negotiate and they will kill your ambassadors. You can try to ignore them and they will slaughter your innocent civilians. You can try to attack them and they will hide amongst their civilians.

What do you do.

When they openly tell you they want to nuke you out of existence, it is a matter of survival for not just you but for your civilization what do you do?

You have a button to kill the threat now or you can wait for them to get the button to kill you and you know they will have no hesitation to press it.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#154

Post by rdtsc » Tue, Nov 17, 2015, 5:45 PM UTC

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #150

rdtsc wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also the funding of the Syrian rebels by Obama and other Western nations. ISIS was just one of the groups in the Syrian civil war, a bunch brutal and crazy idiots, that would have never amounted to anything. At the same time CIA wanted to destabilize the region, to kick the currently Russia-friendly government out (and as a consequence kick Russia out of its pretty much only naval base in the region). So they kept fu…

Source for "all those "moderate" rebels switched to ISIS"? Source for "$100B in funding"? This smacks of conspiracy claptrap that adds nothing of substance to the discussion.

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

"Defense Intelligence $80.1 billion[12] 3.3% Because of classified nature, budget is an estimate and may not be the actual figure"

Something makes me doubt another $20B into the intelligence budget would have changed the outcome for the better.

More sauce:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/1...

https://en.zamanalwsl.net/readNews.php?id=5696 (translated)

http://www.wnd.com/2015/02/u-s-backed-syrian-group-joins-isl...

> This smacks of conspiracy claptrap that adds nothing of substance to the discussion.

Well, did you have anything to discuss, or just wanted sauce? Because I am not sure "src pls!" replies add much to the discussion.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#155

Post by vezzy-fnord » Tue, Nov 17, 2015, 5:45 PM UTC

csallen wrote: post #126

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ISIS and the NSDAP are not even close to being similar geopolitical entities.

The purpose of analogy is not to say that two things are similar in every way.

Except the two groups are starkly different in every way but irredentist and domineering ideology that the analogy is useless.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#156

Post by macspoofing » Tue, Nov 17, 2015, 5:48 PM UTC

Borogravia wrote: post #77

macspoofing wrote: post #30

... 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…

>That one is on Obama Well, no. Bush had a glorious, golden opportunity in the wake of 9/11 to turn this huge wave of international goodwill into something that could have actually made the world a safer place. Instead, he did precisely what the terrorists hoped he would do - Bush not only invaded Afghanistan, he lied the country into a breathtakingly stupid and pointless war with Iraq, single-handedly destabilizing…

You haven't actually addressed what I was saying. Let's say all that about Bush is true. It doesn't change the reality that today a terrorist organization, ISIS, operates with impunity in a large swath of land, from which they plan and carry-out global terrorist attacks. I just remarked that this is the exact situation that America after 9/11 swore would never be tolerated. And I guess now it is.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#157

Post by ElysianEagle » Tue, Nov 17, 2015, 5:50 PM UTC

amyjess wrote: post #112

nightspirit wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> 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. Not "despite", but "because". In an agricultural society, you need lots of children because you need a lot of hands working the farm. If you're dirt-poor in an industrial society, you need lots of children so they can all work in factories to…

There's also the fact that in many poor nations, there simply isn't enough of a social safety net to take care of you in your old age. The surest form of insurance is to have as many kids as you can and count on some or all of them to support you when you're no longer able to work.

With SS, Medicare (in the US), etc. even though you won't live in luxury, you at least have some kind of income coming in in your retirement years.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#158

Post by Thriptic » Tue, Nov 17, 2015, 5:53 PM UTC

notahacker wrote: post #105

blisterpeanuts wrote: post #14

The article is a nuanced view of the present situation, but doesn't go into the historical perspective. Contemporary radical Islam is a response to Western modernity and perceived decadence and has been brewing for decades if not centuries. It is an outgrowth of Salafi Islam, a severely literal interpretation of the Koran that has become widespread over the past 70 years thanks to trillions of petrodollars that fund…

It's also worth pointing out that even Salafi jihadism isn't a homogenous whole, with many of the other jihadist movements actively fighting ISIS A key difference between al Qaeda, which could broadly be defined as trying to "tip the scales eventually toward a Caliphate" whilst battling for certain populist causes and ISIS is that the latter considers itself to be a Caliphate, and is actively pushing for the Islamic…

> That means it isn't going to calm down, but it also means that its claims to legitimacy based on fulfilment of prophecies about unification of territories are more readily defeated by military means than other jihadists' claims to be defending the Muslim world from infidels.

I agree. The fact that ISIS effectively seeks to become a nation state makes fighting them a lot more straight forward. It's very difficult to fight an insurgency or terrorist group which is not interested in holding territory and blends in with the population. It's pretty straight forward to bomb, lay siege to, or generally bleed a group which needs to have government buildings, infrastructure, police, logistics etc. The fact that their legitimacy is primarily based on continuous expansion is also great, as defeat creates a highly negative feedback loop for them making recruitment more difficult.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#159

Post by SHIT_TALKER » Tue, Nov 17, 2015, 5:54 PM UTC

woah wrote: post #113

blisterpeanuts wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Universal condemnation" is precisely what they're seeking. The more notoriety, the better. Hence, pushing gay men off of buildings and drowning men in cages (with underwater cameras filming). They are seeking street cred, a rep, a mystique of fear. Condemnation doesn't work. What does work is a combination of excellent police work in routing out cells of recruiters and operators, and precise, devastating bombing rai…

Bombing? Boots on the ground? You think these things work? Have you been asleep for the last 15 years?

They work but there has to be a commitment to seeing things through no matter the extent of the ensuing carnage, something most western countries have lost their stomach for. See: Chechnya.

Re: The War ISIS Wants

#160

Post by eli_gottlieb » Tue, Nov 17, 2015, 5:56 PM UTC

beachstartup wrote: post #116

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that people delay having children, it's that society punishes having children. My fiancee's pregnant coworker was told (we live in the USA, unfortunately) that she would have six weeks of unpaid leave after giving birth, followed by two weeks of short-term disability insurance, and then she could return to work or lose her job. This is for a salaried, postdoctoral scientist at a biotechnology company. In a r…

apparently all the benefits that exist in europe and asia still don't work, so i'm not really sure what your point is here, other than you want some free money for having a baby. society doesn't 'punish' you for having children, having children is simply an expense somebody has to pay for, and nobody wants to do it. you clearly don't want to pay the opportunity cost, as evidenced by your post, so what makes you think…

Let me brag a little bit.

Myself and my fiancee don't have children yet. However, you may kinda want us in society's gene pool. After all, I've got a damned resilient immune system, she's wonderfully empathetic, and we're both ferociously clever and hardworking individuals who valued our educations and actually want to contribute to society. Hell, we're even proud of paying our taxes, we both volunteer for things in our spare time, and we consider time spent on civic or community affairs to be well-spent.

I'd be fine paying the "opportunity cost" myself, but you see, I'm not the one with the uterus. Really, if we could get by and support a kid on one income per couple, we could easily just make some sacrifices of Nice Things, but we can't. Yes, we actually are stuck between living as fiscally responsible adults in the Dual Income No Kids class, and the precarity of the so-called "middle class" nowadays, in which one layoff or unexpected medical emergency can throw the whole family into poverty.

It's become: housing, children (with the entailed college funds, housing cost of good public schools, etc.), responsible preparation for a rainy day -- pick any two.

Elizabeth Warren was lecturing people about this a decade ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GHg3GAeQ1Y