Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan says Canadians needn't fear ISIS

We're so naive in Canada. It'll never happen here. Famous last words

Diplomatic Negotiation, I guess that supposition is out the window. Time to upgrade Syria, Libya, Iraq and where ever else these vermin call home to the stone age.

I think ISIS would have never happened if the west stayed out of Iraq in 2003 and Syria in 2012.

But no, we have to go and fucking meddle.

Diplomacy wont solve the problem we made, bullets and bombs will. The only way to solve a conflict once it's begun is to see it through.

I agree. But I don't have a Delorean handy right now, so- I guess we have to clean up this mess. Yeah, the thing that bothers me is this means more Canadians returning home in boxes. But, yes, we MUST see this through, now.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson

One possible way to go instead of putting American, Canadians boots on the ground is to support the Kurds, Jordanians anyone in the region who is against ISIS.

How radical is Jordan politically? Are they a country we should be supporting on a permanent basis?

Maybe not, but does it therefore follow that things would be better?

Here's a question for you. How would Saddam or his crazy sons be reacting to Iran getting the nuclear bomb, right now.

The problem we had and have with our war against Islamo-facism is people failing to name it, identify its flaws and attack it at its ideological roots.

If we'd done that. The hijra would not have happened. Charlie Hebdo, and Paris would not have happened. If we had dealt with the historical evidence of the way Islamic ideology behaves, they would all be over there, and we could actually stick our noses up at Syria or conflicts like it that would be sure to pop up and say, "Who cares." In fact it would be good strategy to let them fight among themselves. Just don't let them have nukes and ICBMs. As bad strategy goes I'll take a dozen Iraqs over that one.

Similarly, the Soviet crushing of the Prague Spring would have never happened if the Allies had stayed out of Central Europe in 1939.

Iran wouldn't have started working on an atomic weapon program at all if they hadn't felt surrounded by hundreds of thousands of American soldiers to both the east and west of them in Afghanistan and Iraq. Don't invade Iraq and maybe Mamoud Ahmadinejad doesn't become the Iranian president. No Mamoud and Iran doesn't accelerate it's nuclear program and there's no bullshit speeches from him at the UN denying the Holocaust and vowing to wipe Israel off the map. No invasion of Iraq by the US, Saddam is still around to keep the religious fanatic shitheads suppressed, and suddenly the tensions in the entire area are marked less intense than they became.

Can't ever fix the past but I remain convinced of one thing. All the evil that's come to pass over the last twelve years, and has been accelerating over the last four from the appearance of ISIS, is a result of the US deposing Saddam. Eliminate that one reckless and irresponsible decision and a lot of this chaos and death simply doesn't happen. The US can try, and I really don't care who is in the White House anymore because each president (no matter what party they're from) only seem to make thing worse, all they want to deny it but what they did in Iraq is as bad as what Kennedy and Johnson kicked off in Vietnam. Like Johnson said, paradoxically just before he sent even more US troops into South Vietnam, why the hell are Western soldiers going to be dying for this insane part of the world when the local Iraqi, Syrian, and Saudi boys don't seem to care enough about it to do the fighting themselves?

Now let's ask ourselves if that makes sense.

Previous to America going into Iraq there was concern Iraq was secretly going nuclear. The UN pressured them into accepting inspectors.

Are you saying that if everybody had left Iraq alone Iran would not have had those suspicions?

Iran and Iraq did not get along. They had a war, and nothing was really resolved at the end of it.

So why wouldn't they want nukes if they though Iraq was getting them, but they would want nukes if America was dealing with Iraq - preventing Iraq from going Nuclear?

And how would no pressure on preventing Iran from going Nuclear be a better safequard. They would just have got their nukes faster is all.

Iran pursued nukes more openly, because they knew America would not want to broaden the conflict by preventing them.

They felt safe. Making them feel safe earlier would not have been a solution.

How radical is Jordan politically? Are they a country we should be supporting on a permanent basis?

We have been supporting them on a permanent basis since WW2. The king of Jordan is the last remaining of the Hashemite kings, who were Arabs from what is now Saudi Arabia who were installed by Britain in what is now SA, Iraq, and Jordan after WW1 to protect British interests in the Middle East.


Fun fact, the guy who was to become the Iraqi King, the Brits had first tried to install him as King of Syria but he was immediately rejected by Syrians as a foreigner and Syria was awarded to France a month later. Frances plans didn't include the British puppet so they invaded in the very brief French-Syrian war. French has been a prominent language im Syria ever since. After a brief rest up in the UK the British named h king of Iraq. One of the new Iraqi kings first assignments from his British masters was to crack down on some newly formed groups that were resisting British rule: The League of Islamic Awakening and The Muslim National League. In 1958 he was overthrown by a military coup backed by the Soviets.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

Fiddy:

Forgotten the Axis Of Evil speech already, where Dumbya included Iran on the list of regimes to be disposed of ASAP? After that kind of statement it was entirely logical at the time for Iran to assume that they were next, even moreso considering that they were surrounded by massive amounts of American military firepower in the states to both the east and west of them. You've been drinking the Kool-Aid from your neo-con "information" sources for so long that you're not capable of thinking outside the box of American propaganda that's been saying the Iranians are "the evilest evil of all the evils that have existed in the entire evil history of evil" for the last thirty years. If Iran was going to build a bomb their most likely target would have been their Sunni enemies in Saudi Arabia, not their fellow Shiites in Iraq. And the Iranians aren't insane enough to deploy a nuclear weapon against either the Saudis or Israel either because they know that if they did their country would get turned into fused glass about two hours later.

Oddly enough the most insane ones are the Sunnis in ISIS, just like prior to them the most insane ones were the Sunnis in Al Qaeda, both of which are financed by the Saudis who in turn are regularly referred to as "our good friends and allies" by all the Western governments that are too deeply in bed with the Saudis on business and weapon sales deals to ever be able to extract themselves. That's the nauseating part of the entire thing. Saudi agents and puppets in groups like ISIS will commit endless atrocities yet nothing will ever be done to cut off the flow of money to them because that would offend our "friends" in Riyadh. It's actually more perverse than the disgusting proxy politics of the Cold War were.