Earlier today, our own bth made a worthwhile request. “What I want is a discussion on this forum of what an actual punitive attack on IS would be composed of and how it would be accomplished.” Yesterday, Babak Makkinejad asked, “And who is the enemy this time? Another noun? Or would it be an adjective this time? Damned good questions from both our committee members, in my opinion. I'll start.
At this moment, only Egypt has formally declared war on the Islamic State. I won’t be so bold as to tell France what she should do in the coming days, but I’m pretty sure she will do what’s right.
I am comfortable in declaring what I think the US should do immediately. I want to see the US Congress unequivocally and formally declare war on the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. At the same time our Congress should stop shilly-shallying around any and all AUMF declarations. End that crap and the amorphous GWOT (global war on terror). All that does is give every parochial interest group cover for increasing Executive and Judicial overreach and other pet programs.
This declaration of war should specifically state that all means available may be used to defeat our enemies including criminal law. Our enemies are murders, not soldiers. We will adhere to international law and our own codes of conduct out of a concern for our character, not out of a concern for our enemies’ rights and privileges.
We should formally inform all neutral parties that we will deal with any efforts to provide aid and comfort to our enemies quickly and harshly. This will serve as the final warning. Any US citizen or corporation providing aid and comfort to our enemies will be treated as a traitor in time of war. No exceptions.
All those who join us in this war will be considered allies and will be treated with respect and cooperation. If that means issuing letters of marque, so be it. Again, no exceptions.
Then we get down to business and openly accept the costs and consequences of this war.
TTG
Sans,
Stop with the Talmudic rhetoric and trying to argue white into black. Its all about proportions. Its the reason why South Africa is more dangerous than Monaco. Not taking proportions into account is either a sign that you're an idiot or trying to virtue signal.
Lecturing me of all people about "life is dangerous". Ahaha. Oh boy.
Posted by: Tyler | 16 November 2015 at 10:02 PM
Ingolf,
Disingeneous sophistry isn't polite either.
Posted by: Tyler | 16 November 2015 at 10:03 PM
sans racine,
For my small part, absolutely. I admire your grace and style.
Posted by: Ingolf | 16 November 2015 at 10:14 PM
Those bad bad democratically elected and re-elected Neos!
qui tacet consentire videtur
Posted by: glupi | 16 November 2015 at 10:49 PM
You are what you eat, according to the medical professionals, Tyler. I fear we Homo Sapiens underestimate it at our peril
A young US couple - a soldier who has served as mine sweeper in Afghanistan and Iraq, his body-conscious wife and their months-old baby - relocated to my, small European, non-GMO, less-additives country. They were all plain fat, although they had done their best to eat right and excercise - "the weight just doesn't come off" they said. The baby was a scary sight: a blond blue-eyed angel grossly blown up out of all proportion to its age group. After 1 month of local food things changed
Posted by: glupi | 16 November 2015 at 10:59 PM
Once upon a time, there was a period of rapid manufacturing growth and relative prosperity. EC business tycoons needed cheap labour for all those nasty low-paying health-engandering jobs the natives could afford not to do.
So,for example, Germany went actively recruiting in Turkey. France had an advantage - as an ex-colonial empire it could tap into a French-speaking multitude and further its desire to keep an influence in its former colonies in the process. Religion, demographic growth, other humanities BS were of no concern for the business moguls.
Unfortunately, this was a time of active human rights propaganda. Aimed at the Soviet bloc it also succeeded too well among the new, yet second-hand European citizens.
Then business tsars outsourced the jobs.
And even truly generous social programs cannot make up for that feeling of achievement and belonging of the employed.
And Ronaldo and Rihanna get paid millions and flaunt it around.
And those newly empoverished, who still remember a better time, firmly believe they are entitled to live
Posted by: glupi | 17 November 2015 at 12:19 AM
Tyler
Agree on proportionate response - i'm trying to get you to review the balance of emotion and use of proportion in your posts, not playing a game. Agree on lecturing, what right have I to tell you what danger is, you already know. But maybe I do too, so avoid the lecturing already. So then just maybe hold back from making assumprtions about the nature of the migrants - I don't know them so I can't judge, I can only say that it's a screwed-up situation and they are a side-effect. Now let's focus on who caused this and the solutions. Just saying...
Posted by: sans racine | 17 November 2015 at 02:14 AM
TTG! Any ideas on why US told France NOT to request a NATO Article Five declaration?
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 18 November 2015 at 11:35 AM
William R. Cumming,
I don't think the Administration's heart is in a war against IS, at least not until DC is hit. The Borg still believes IS is useful in getting rid of Assad for Netanyahu. And that certainly don't want to see NATO on the side of Russia.
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 18 November 2015 at 12:29 PM
Sans,
So now it's an argument about how to argue. Hello sophistry.
Posted by: Tyler | 19 November 2015 at 02:34 PM
Glupi,
Yes because the Chosen owned media and various laws against hate speech have no effect on one's opinion.
Herp derp indeed.
Posted by: Tyler | 19 November 2015 at 02:42 PM
Glupi,
Are you physically unable to post without either missing the point or referencing an anecdote?
Posted by: Tyler | 19 November 2015 at 02:43 PM
Forgive me, Tyler. Please
Posted by: glupi | 27 November 2015 at 02:30 AM