The Middle East Crisis, Time For Boots on the Ground ?

[Josquius]

We shouldn't say never but there isn't a need

[grumbler]

As far as money goes, aside from selling oil at rock-bottom prices, they have very wealthy patrons in our friends in the Gulf:  Qatar, the UAE and to a lesser extent, SA. 

So, when people bitch about the Europeans paying ransoms for hostages as funding ISIS, maybe they should think first about what exactly our government is doing to play its part of the sucker with our bestest buddies in the Gulf.  With friends like these, who needs friends.

The ISIL sponsors in Qatar, the UAE, and SA are enemies of the west, not their "bestest buddies," let alone friends.

[Razgovory]

Best buddies may be a bit strong, but we were friends way back.  Used to play basketball, I liked playing them cause none of those guys are over 5'5.

[mongers]

Interesting that only one American (7% of them) favours this type of campaign, but a whole 20% of other westerners/Europeans favour it.

[Eddie Teach]

That might be interesting if the sample was a decent size.

[Ed Anger]

Interesting that only one American (7% of them) favours this type of campaign, but a whole 20% of other westerners/Europeans favour it.

of course, the Euros would expect America to do it.

[mongers]

That might be interesting if the sample was a decent size.

We're not very numerous are we. 

Maybe someone could take it to Paradox OTR forum, oh that's right they don't allow these sorts of discussion. 

[CountDeMoney]

Interesting that only one American (7% of them) favours this type of campaign, but a whole 20% of other westerners/Europeans favour it.

of course, the Euros would expect America to do it.

Former imperial holdings, it's bombs away.  But in support of other Europeans they don't consider "real" Europeans, like the Balkans? Genocide away, baby.  Getting focused on hardcore sanctions to support less-than-European pipples like Georgians or Ukrainians?  zomg teh natural gas an stuff

[MadImmortalMan]

That might be interesting if the sample was a decent size.

We're not very numerous are we. 

Maybe someone could take it to Paradox OTR forum, oh that's right they don't allow these sorts of discussion. 

You might be surprised. They have an Israel v Palestine megathread now.

[PJL]

Airstrikes and supporting Assad & the Kurds and a non-divisive Iraqi government to the hilt is the least worst option. Unless the situation gets to the point where it spooks the financial markets, in which case further action may be needed. Yes, it will be blood for oil in a way, but it's better than blood for religion / ideology etc..

[Tonitrus]

Airstrikes and supporting Assad & the Kurds and a non-divisive Iraqi government to the hilt is the least worst option. Unless the situation gets to the point where it spooks the financial markets, in which case further action may be needed. Yes, it will be blood for oil in a way, but it's better than blood for religion / ideology etc..

That's the problem with our foreign policy standards.  We cannot support dictators like Assad against the religious extremists.  We have to support the pro-democracy elements who, when/if we were able to put them in power, would be immediately voted out of office in the free elections and replaced by the religious extremists.   

[Razgovory]

Interesting that only one American (7% of them) favours this type of campaign, but a whole 20% of other westerners/Europeans favour it.

Probably cause it'll be American boots on the ground.  I'm not keen on a big military intervention with tanks and stuff, but special forces raids and the like are okay.

[Razgovory]

The religion is the root cause of this. Shit like this isn't happening in non-Islamic shit holes. The moderates are part of the problem since they accept the same twisted basic tenants of the religion they just choose to ignore some of the specifics. Genocide will work, but that seems to be taking "the ends justify the means" a few steps too far.

This is true, except for the all the other places where it happens.

[crazy canuck]

Voted no.

Assuming ground troops accomplish anything - what is the plan after that?

I outlined it in my post.

Your plan assumes that there will be something else on the ground to take their place.  Unfortunately that assumption has proved incorrect in the past.

[Tonitrus]

The immediately preceding assumption, in fact.