ISIS plans larger empire than we thought

[The Greater Luthorian Empire]

Old Caliphates were better.

Ottoman Empire was Best Empire.

You spelled worst wrong. Ali is the rightful heir of Muhammad, all Sunnis are traitors.

[Greed and Death]

I for one welcome our new Muslim overloads.

[Gauthier]

Ottoman Empire was Best Empire.

You spelled worst wrong. Ali is the rightful heir of Muhammad, all Sunnis are traitors.

Ohhhh shiite.

[Gauthier]

I for one welcome our new Muslim overloads.

And you call yourself a Republican? For shame!

[Greed and Death]

I for one welcome our new Muslim overloads.

And you call yourself a Republican? For shame!

No I call myself an evil greedy capitalist I would gladly sell out the GOP. They just pay the most now.

[Wind in the Willows]

Ugh. Get the blatant racism out of the house.

Are you aware that the post was satire of Wind in the Willows' post that people should be discouraged from being Muslims?

I said all religions.

[Cyrisnia]

You spelled worst wrong. Ali is the rightful heir of Muhammad, all Sunnis are traitors.

Ohhhh shiite.

gODDAMNIT

[Gauthier]

Are you aware that the post was satire of Wind in the Willows' post that people should be discouraged from being Muslims?

I said all religions.

Yes, we forgot that Richard Dawkins kept saying "Bomb the fuckers. All of them."

[Gauthier]

Ohhhh shiite.

gODaLLAHDAMNIT

Fixed that for you.

[Iraniyyah]

You spelled worst wrong. Ali is the rightful heir of Muhammad, all Sunnis are traitors.

Ohhhh shi'ite.

i see what you did there

[Draica]

I say we follow Ron Paul's solution:

“The same foreign policy ‘experts’ who lied us into the Iraq [W]ar are now telling us we must re-invade Iraq to deal with the disaster caused by their invasion!” the three-time presidential hopeful exclaimed in an op-ed published on the Ron Paul Institute official site. “They cannot admit they were wrong about the invasion being a ‘cakewalk’ that would pay for itself, so they want to blame last week’s events on the 2011 US withdrawal from Iraq. But the trouble started with the 2003 invasion itself, not the 2011 troop withdrawal. Anyone who understands cause and effect should understand this,” he wrote.

“A big US government weapons transfer to Iraq will no doubt be favored by the US military-industrial complex, which stands to profit further from the Iraq meltdown,” he added. “This move will also be favored by those in Washington who realize how politically unpopular a third US invasion of Iraq would be at home, but who want to ‘do something’ in the face of the crisis. Shipping weapons may be an action short of war, but it usually leads to war. And as we have already seen in Iraq and Syria, very often these weapons fall into the hands of the Al-Qaeda we are supposed to be fighting!”

“Because of the government’s foolish policy of foreign interventionism, the US is faced with two equally stupid choices: either pour in resources to prop up an Iraqi government that is a close ally with Iran, or throw our support in with Al-Qaida in Iraq (as we have done in Syria). I say we must follow a third choice: ally with the American people and spend not one more dollar or one more life attempting to re-make the Middle East.”

I'l add to that, we've attempted "Stability" in the Mid east before, spent 10 years there attempting to ensure it's stable. When we pack up and say, "Alright, time for you guys to handle yourself" the region goes back into chaos! So, we can either spend another 10 years attempting to make the Middle east stable, or, stay the hell away and let it work out it's own problems. I choose the latter.

[Respawn]

The ISIS claiming the title of a Caliphate is like a peasant claiming the title of a King. They are a fickle organization that has a hard time defeating the weakest and most unorganized nation in the region (Iraq), and are being driven out by Bashar Al-Assad in Syria. To further worsen their position, they have successfully managed to unite the whole region, and the whole world against them with their threats of a Middle Eastern Caliphate and worldwide jihad.

Them claiming the title of Caliphate will make it all the more sweeter when they are driven back into the gutters and sewers they came from.

Eugh, what?

ISIS are not having a hard team defeating the Iraqi forces. At all. The resistance they've met so far has been rather pathetic.
Assad's forces are retaking ground from the FSA, while ISIS are consolidating their position and are even advancing in some areas. Let's not forget that Assad is partly responsible for their rise in the first place.
Like I already said, their creation of a caliphate is bound to find them wealthy supporters from across the Middle East as it legitimises their aims.

Why are you so quick to laugh them off?

[Gauthier]

I say we follow Ron Paul's solution:

“The same foreign policy ‘experts’ who lied us into the Iraq [W]ar are now telling us we must re-invade Iraq to deal with the disaster caused by their invasion!” the three-time presidential hopeful exclaimed in an op-ed published on the Ron Paul Institute official site. “They cannot admit they were wrong about the invasion being a ‘cakewalk’ that would pay for itself, so they want to blame last week’s events on the 2011 US withdrawal from Iraq. But the trouble started with the 2003 invasion itself, not the 2011 troop withdrawal. Anyone who understands cause and effect should understand this,” he wrote.

“A big US government weapons transfer to Iraq will no doubt be favored by the US military-industrial complex, which stands to profit further from the Iraq meltdown,” he added. “This move will also be favored by those in Washington who realize how politically unpopular a third US invasion of Iraq would be at home, but who want to ‘do something’ in the face of the crisis. Shipping weapons may be an action short of war, but it usually leads to war. And as we have already seen in Iraq and Syria, very often these weapons fall into the hands of the Al-Qaeda we are supposed to be fighting!”

“Because of the government’s foolish policy of foreign interventionism, the US is faced with two equally stupid choices: either pour in resources to prop up an Iraqi government that is a close ally with Iran, or throw our support in with Al-Qaida in Iraq (as we have done in Syria). I say we must follow a third choice: ally with the American people and spend not one more dollar or one more life attempting to re-make the Middle East.”

I'l add to that, we've attempted "Stability" in the Mid east before, spent 10 years there attempting to ensure it's stable. When we pack up and say, "Alright, time for you guys to handle yourself" the region goes back into chaos! So, we can either spend another 10 years attempting to make the Middle east stable, or, stay the hell away and let it work out it's own problems. I choose the latter.

Because clearly we can isolate America from fluctuating oil prices. *nod nod*

[Unicario]

I say we follow Ron Paul's solution:





I'l add to that, we've attempted "Stability" in the Mid east before, spent 10 years there attempting to ensure it's stable. When we pack up and say, "Alright, time for you guys to handle yourself" the region goes back into chaos! So, we can either spend another 10 years attempting to make the Middle east stable, or, stay the hell away and let it work out it's own problems. I choose the latter.

Because clearly we can isolate America from fluctuating oil prices. *nod nod*

And I don't doubt that ISIS would embargo/refuse to sell oil to the United States. >_>

[Wind in the Willows]

I said all religions.

Yes, we forgot that Richard Dawkins kept saying "Bomb the fuckers. All of them."

I don't know if you're trying to be funny but it isn't really working.

[Nuverikstan]

I say we follow Ron Paul's solution:





I'l add to that, we've attempted "Stability" in the Mid east before, spent 10 years there attempting to ensure it's stable. When we pack up and say, "Alright, time for you guys to handle yourself" the region goes back into chaos! So, we can either spend another 10 years attempting to make the Middle east stable, or, stay the hell away and let it work out it's own problems. I choose the latter.

Because clearly we can isolate America from fluctuating oil prices. *nod nod*

Why not we just drill up Texas?! Here's my backyard if it lowers the gas prices.

[Scomagia]

Because clearly we can isolate America from fluctuating oil prices. *nod nod*

And I don't doubt that ISIS would embargo/refuse to sell oil to the United States. >_>

Doesn't most of our oil come from places that aren't in The Middle East?

[Draica]

I say we follow Ron Paul's solution:





I'l add to that, we've attempted "Stability" in the Mid east before, spent 10 years there attempting to ensure it's stable. When we pack up and say, "Alright, time for you guys to handle yourself" the region goes back into chaos! So, we can either spend another 10 years attempting to make the Middle east stable, or, stay the hell away and let it work out it's own problems. I choose the latter.

Because clearly we can isolate America from fluctuating oil prices. *nod nod*

You mean in terms of oil, you know that product that North Dakota or perhaps Texas which have created thousands of new jobs in both states, bolstered income and infact made one of the richest cities in America in North Dakota? Yeah, we should stop getting our oil overseas, fund drilling operations in America and build that Keystone pipeline. Maybe then we wouldn't have to worry about Iraq or the entire Mid east for that matter for economic support in any way, shape, or form. Maybe instead of spending billions in drilling over there, why not spend enough money to drill for our own natural gas/oil? One city of natural gas would employ more people than San Antonio, Austin, or El Paso. The natural gas industry supports nearly 12% of total employment in Texas, and contributes more than $100 billion to the Texas economy and even MORE to America's economy. It's a win-win.

But if you'd rather have our men and women continue to die so the Military Industiral complex and war profiteers can make money off of this conflict, then I suppose that's just alright. Not.

[Gauthier]

Because clearly we can isolate America from fluctuating oil prices. *nod nod*

You mean in terms of oil, you know that product that North Dakota or perhaps Texas which have created thousands of new jobs in both states, bolstered income and infact made one of the richest cities in America in North Dakota? Yeah, we should stop getting our oil overseas, fund drilling operations in America and build that Keystone pipeline. Maybe then we wouldn't have to worry about Iraq or the entire Mid east for that matter for economic support in any way, shape, or form. Maybe instead of spending billions in drilling over there, why not spend enough money to drill for our own natural gas/oil? One city of natural gas would employ more people than San Antonio, Austin, or El Paso. The natural gas industry supports nearly 12% of total employment in Texas, and contributes more than $100 billion to the Texas economy and even MORE to America's economy. It's a win-win.

But if you'd rather have our men and women continue to die so the Military Industiral complex and war profiteers can make money off of this conflict, then I suppose that's just alright. Not.

Actually I'm for renewable energy, but keep swinging your samurai sword at that strawman.

[Unicario]

And I don't doubt that ISIS would embargo/refuse to sell oil to the United States. >_>

Doesn't most of our oil come from places that aren't in The Middle East?

Yes, but the Middle East has an impressive influence on US gas prices, as evidenced by the last 11 years, and then 1970s Gas Crisis. If ISIS did manage to win the support of most oil-exporting nations in the Middle East, you could see gas prices in the US skyrocket to beyond any worst-case-scenario type of level.

[Draica]

You mean in terms of oil, you know that product that North Dakota or perhaps Texas which have created thousands of new jobs in both states, bolstered income and infact made one of the richest cities in America in North Dakota? Yeah, we should stop getting our oil overseas, fund drilling operations in America and build that Keystone pipeline. Maybe then we wouldn't have to worry about Iraq or the entire Mid east for that matter for economic support in any way, shape, or form. Maybe instead of spending billions in drilling over there, why not spend enough money to drill for our own natural gas/oil? One city of natural gas would employ more people than San Antonio, Austin, or El Paso. The natural gas industry supports nearly 12% of total employment in Texas, and contributes more than $100 billion to the Texas economy and even MORE to America's economy. It's a win-win.

But if you'd rather have our men and women continue to die so the Military Industiral complex and war profiteers can make money off of this conflict, then I suppose that's just alright. Not.

Actually I'm for renewable energy, but keep swinging your samurai sword at that strawman.

I said if, I never proclaimed that you did. Thus, it's not a strawman.

[Avenio]

I say we follow Ron Paul's solution:

*snip*

I'l add to that, we've attempted "Stability" in the Mid east before, spent 10 years there attempting to ensure it's stable. When we pack up and say, "Alright, time for you guys to handle yourself" the region goes back into chaos! So, we can either spend another 10 years attempting to make the Middle east stable, or, stay the hell away and let it work out it's own problems. I choose the latter.

What makes you think that ISIS is going to be content to leave the US alone if and when it manages to overtake countries like Iraq and Syria?

[Scomagia]

Doesn't most of our oil come from places that aren't in The Middle East?

Yes, but the Middle East has an impressive influence on US gas prices, as evidenced by the last 11 years, and then 1970s Gas Crisis. If ISIS did manage to win the support of most oil-exporting nations in the Middle East, you could see gas prices in the US skyrocket to beyond any worst-case-scenario type of level.

I see. Well, this is even more reason to switch to nuclear power then.

[Neo Rome Republic]

Because clearly we can isolate America from fluctuating oil prices. *nod nod*

You mean in terms of oil, you know that product that North Dakota or perhaps Texas which have created thousands of new jobs in both states, bolstered income and infact made one of the richest cities in America in North Dakota? Yeah, we should stop getting our oil overseas, fund drilling operations in America and build that Keystone pipeline. Maybe then we wouldn't have to worry about Iraq or the entire Mid east for that matter for economic support in any way, shape, or form. Maybe instead of spending billions in drilling over there, why not spend enough money to drill for our own natural gas/oil? One city of natural gas would employ more people than San Antonio, Austin, or El Paso. The natural gas industry supports nearly 12% of total employment in Texas, and contributes more than $100 billion to the Texas economy and even MORE to America's economy. It's a win-win.

But if you'd rather have our men and women continue to die so the Military Industiral complex and war profiteers can make money off of this conflict, then I suppose that's just alright. Not.

Never though I'd say this, but I agree with what you're saying.

[Gauthier]

Actually I'm for renewable energy, but keep swinging your samurai sword at that strawman.

I said if, I never proclaimed that you did. Thus, it's not a strawman.

Actually, it is.

But if you'd rather have our men and women continue to die so the Military Industiral complex and war profiteers can make money off of this conflict, then I suppose that's just alright. Not.