Poor Treatment of Muslim Passengers

[newtogolf]

2 hours ago, ghalfaire said:

There really is no good solution to this conflict that I can see.  I would like to say we should just withdraw and not do no business with the Middle East or allow our citizens to visit there (like Cuba) as we (the USA)  really don't need their Oil anymore.  But if WWII taught us anything I believe it is isolationism won't protect you.  Enemies that have a vision of conquering the world  and believe violence is an acceptable tool to accomplish such domination  will sooner or later be at your doorstep.  Yet since the Middle East is a very complex place to try to do business or just "get along" with.  Since most of the existing countries were just put together by the allies after WWII without respect for ethnic groups, different religions, or tribal affiliations, most middle east individuals don't identify with a specific country but rather as a member of one or more of the other groups.  Seems as if no matter what we do there in dealing with Middle East States, we make mortal enemies of one or more of these groups.  But because of this I don't see any solution to the Middle East situation(s) that is acceptable to all.  It seems to me the only thing we can do is to protect ourselves as best we can and engage with our "friends" in the area.  But we should always remember that this is not our culture and don't try to do any nation building.  We are not ever going to establish a Jeffersonian Democracy like the US has in the Middle East.  That is like trying to teach a bear to read, it is a waste of time and pisses the bear off.  The other thing that would be good to remember is "enemy of my enemy is my friend".  Friend can quickly change however as it did with the Mujahiddeen (one engaged in Jihad).  So we need to have an "agile" policy as to who is friend and who is enemy and keep our own national interest in the forefront.

The damage is done, I'm not sure there's a way to fix it at this point.  The instability in the Middle East combined with our failed foreign policy there over the last 30 - 40 years and our tight alliance with Israel makes it difficult to build up much good will.

I'm hardly a foreign policy expert on the Middle East but it seems as though the US treats most countries in the Middle East like an ex-girlfriend we don't want to date anymore but also don't want to see go out with anyone else.  We (the USA) seem content to act disinterested in what goes on in the Middle East unless China or Russia shows an interest.  I remember when Reagan was POTUS, we couldn't decide if we were allies or enemies with Iran and Iraq.   Reagan at one point provided aid to Iraq to help them defeat Iran only then to go to war with Iraq when they invaded Kuwait. 

It doesn't seem much better today as we continue to switch sides and don't have a clear understanding of who are our allies and who are our enemies.   The problem today is we not only have to worry about the governments of these countries, but also their citizens who have organized militarily on their own to wage war against their governments and other countries (in the form of terrorism).  This is something I don't even Dr. Phil can fix.

[Mr. Desmond]

52 minutes ago, rkim291968 said:

That, too.   It was another factor out of so many.   I can even see the end of WW II as when many of the seeds were planted.  

I read several complaints against the US over the years by disenchanted Saudis - and our presence was always at the top of the list. I think Bin Laden would echo it. When people asked why the disenchanted (probably the people trying to overthrow the Saudi royalty) were pissed, I'd say, "What if 5k Chinese troops were stationed in Florida. How would you feel about it?"

[Gunther]

Muslim jihadists have existed for 1500 years.  There has always been a faction that interprets the Koran in a violent, literal way.  Fortunately, not all do.

The US holds zero culpability in this war, zero.  Why is ISIS killing fellow Muslims and Christians in Iraq and Syria and Libya and Egypt?  Why are they killing Swedes?  Why have there been 2 significant attacks in France this year?  US policy?  Deposition of the Shah in 1979?  Of course not.  

Sure, there have been policy missteps due to our dependence on foreign oil and the complexity of the region and people. But these attacks would be happening whether the US was a country or not.  Read up on why the term "...shores of Tripoli..." is in the Marine Corps hymn.

I don't know how to solve the crisis other than force and engaging the 1B peaceful Muslims somehow to educate the 500M ignorant on the proper interpretation of the Koran.  But trying to blame the US for this is so shortsighted and frankly comical; it's a losing philosophy that highlights our weaknesses.  Confront the enemy, vanquish them and reeducate the willing.

[jbishop15]

4 minutes ago, Gunther said:

Muslim jihadists have existed for 1500 years.  There has always been a faction that interprets the Koran in a violent, literal way.  Fortunately, not all do.

The US holds zero culpability in this war, zero.  Why is ISIS killing fellow Muslims and Christians in Iraq and Syria and Libya and Egypt?  Why are they killing Swedes?  Why have there been 2 significant attacks in France this year?  US policy?  Deposition of the Shah in 1979?  Of course not.  

Sure, there have been policy missteps due to our dependence on foreign oil and the complexity of the region and people. But these attacks would be happening whether the US was a country or not.  Read up on why the term "...shores of Tripoli..." is in the Marine Corps hymn.

I don't know how to solve the crisis other than force and engaging the 1B peaceful Muslims somehow to educate the 500M ignorant on the proper interpretation of the Koran.  But trying to blame the US for this is so shortsighted and frankly comical; it's a losing philosophy that highlights our weaknesses.  Confront the enemy, vanquish them and reeducate the willing.

ISIS leadership is composed mostly of former military commanders that were under Sadam Hussein. The US going into Iraqi (and other meddling to protect our interests) had a direct effect on destabilizing that region. 

I also want to point out that Iran had a democratically elected socialist leader who was deposed by the US to protect UK oil interests; Iran was much more Western and secular before we put the Shah in power. The Shah ended up being such a bastard that other religious extremist groups grew in power to depose him. 

[Abu3baid]

5 minutes ago, Gunther said:

Muslim jihadists have existed for 1500 years.  There has always been a faction that interprets the Koran in a violent, literal way.  Fortunately, not all do.

The US holds zero culpability in this war, zero.  Why is ISIS killing fellow Muslims and Christians in Iraq and Syria and Libya and Egypt?  Why are they killing Swedes?  Why have there been 2 significant attacks in France this year?  US policy?  Deposition of the Shah in 1979?  Of course not.  

Sure, there have been policy missteps due to our dependence on foreign oil and the complexity of the region and people. But these attacks would be happening whether the US was a country or not.  Read up on why the term "...shores of Tripoli..." is in the Marine Corps hymn.

I don't know how to solve the crisis other than force and engaging the 1B peaceful Muslims somehow to educate the 500M ignorant on the proper interpretation of the Koran.  But trying to blame the US for this is so shortsighted and frankly comical; it's a losing philosophy that highlights our weaknesses.  Confront the enemy, vanquish them and reeducate the willing.

LOL.. 500M ignorant Muslims on the proper interpretation of the Quran.. Just please source your statement so that I can read up where you picked up these statistics.  

I like that though, confront the enemy, vanquish them and reeducate the willing.. What's the difference between your philosophy and ISIS? 

[Mr. Desmond]

32 minutes ago, jbishop15 said:

ISIS leadership is composed mostly of former military commanders that were under Sadam Hussein. The US going into Iraqi (and other meddling to protect our interests) had a direct effect on destabilizing that region. 

I also want to point out that Iran had a democratically elected socialist leader who was deposed by the US to protect UK oil interests; Iran was much more Western and secular before we put the Shah in power. The Shah ended up being such a bastard that other religious extremist groups grew in power to depose him. 

1

I guess Joe Biden was correct about dividing Iraq into three parts - Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd. Don't think we'd be dealing with ISIL in Iraq if Obama had gone along with Joe. Why the insistence on a nation that was not a nation is beyond credibility. You could see this coming, especially a few years into the Shiites takeover (of the government) Discrimination, killings, torture, imprisonment of Sunnis. Guess it was payback for the Saddam years. Obama should have said, "Experiment of one nation is over. Joe, do your thing."

I like your second paragraph, too.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Mr. Desmond

[rkim291968]

10 minutes ago, Mr. Desmond said:

I guess Joe Biden was correct about dividing Iraq into three parts - Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd.

That was my thinking process, too.   Or, a strong dictatorship to hold them together under one roof is the other (only?) option.   

[Mr. Desmond]

5 minutes ago, rkim291968 said:

That was my thinking process, too.   Or, a strong dictatorship to hold them together under one roof is the other (only?) option.   

I think separation is best, and then over a period of time, try a confederation. Sometimes, one needs to be away from one to appreciate the other. Or maybe they work well as trade partners. I think another strongman would end up killing more of those not in power ... like Saddam.

[chspeed]

Everyone's a Monday morning quarterback when it comes to the Middle East, especially America's involvement. Everyone's an expert in hindsight.

While we need a coherent policy, handling this slippery, poisonous octopus is incredibly difficult and leads to completely unpredictable results.

The middle east has humbled so many leaders; peaceniks, hawks, capitalists, communists, diplomats, dictators, zionists, anti-zionists, isolationists, expansionists, geniuses and morons alike.

I wish that instead of pointing fingers, the world could channel all that energy to constructive, forward thinking ideas. I don't know the way forward, but it's out there, and it's in the future, not in the past.

Edited December 2, 2015 by chspeed

[boogielicious]

5 minutes ago, chspeed said:

Everyone's a Monday morning quarterback when it comes to the Middle East, especially America's involvement. Everyone's an expert in hindsight.

While we need a coherent policy, handling this slippery, poisonous octopus is incredibly difficult and leads to completely unpredictable results.

The middle east has humbled so many leaders; peaceniks, hawks, capitalists, communists, diplomats, dictators, zionists, anti-zionists, isolationists, expansionists, geniuses and morons alike.

I wish that instead of pointing fingers, the world could channel all that energy to constructive, forward thinking ideas. I don't know the way forward, but it's out there, and it's in the future, not in the past.

But we should use past failures to help figure the right path, correct? We can analyze what didn't work to help come up with new strategies. We are never going to please all, but could attain relative peace. I don't think the posters above are pointing fingers but really just reviewing mistakes.

[boogielicious]

I'm not sure that ISIS is really our biggest threat.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/02/us/san-bernardino-shooting/index.html

This is happening far too often.

[Mr. Desmond]

44 minutes ago, chspeed said:

Everyone's a Monday morning quarterback when it comes to the Middle East, especially America's involvement. Everyone's an expert in hindsight.

While we need a coherent policy, handling this slippery, poisonous octopus is incredibly difficult and leads to completely unpredictable results.

The middle east has humbled so many leaders; peaceniks, hawks, capitalists, communists, diplomats, dictators, zionists, anti-zionists, isolationists, expansionists, geniuses and morons alike.

I wish that instead of pointing fingers, the world could channel all that energy to constructive, forward thinking ideas. I don't know the way forward, but it's out there, and it's in the future, not in the past.

Biden had the plan before things went haywire. Common sense would tell you what would happen, and history tends to repeat itself if you don't learn its lessons. Common sense is "I wonder what will happen if I fire an Iraqi army of 500k men with weapons and they don't have a job?" And then some guy named Bush fires them, an insurgency begins, and we have what we have.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what was going to occur if you put the Shiites in charge. Religious extremism and tribalism conquers common sense.

This is what you do in the long run -- you educate the people. You break up that cobbled together country and turn it into a loose confederation with trade pacts. You can't have mostly uneducated religious zealots of differing faiths living together or ruling the other - history has spoken.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Mr. Desmond

[Golfingdad]

12 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

I'm not sure that ISIS is really our biggest threat.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/02/us/san-bernardino-shooting/index.html

This is happening far too often.

I'm OT here, but for the record, I thnk the local coverage is much better than cnn ... http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Multiple-Victims-Reported-in-San-Bernardino-Shooting-360080371.html

 

[Gunther]

1 hour ago, Abu3baid said:

LOL.. 500M ignorant Muslims on the proper interpretation of the Quran.. Just please source your statement so that I can read up where you picked up these statistics.  

I like that though, confront the enemy, vanquish them and reeducate the willing.. What's the difference between your philosophy and ISIS? 

I've seen documented pctgs of those who agree with ISIS at around 15%, which is ~200M.  I happen to believe the number is closer to 35% but no data to support it, admittedly, so perhaps the 1.3B can educate the 200M.  Either way, there's a helluva lotta them who want to take over the world and kill us or convert us in the process.

I agree, my closing sentence was pretty harsh and I withdraw it.  The point is we have to meet force with force, it's the only thing they respect.  

[mdl]

On 11/30/2015, 9:23:19, Mr. Desmond said:

Okay, only offered for an additional viewpoint , I saw this in the NY Times. What caught my attention was the headline...

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/30/opinion/campaign-stops/why-i-miss-george-w-bush.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

 

Haha.  Never thought I'd have to agree with someone missing George Bush.  But say all you want about his lying us into a ridiculous war in Iraq and his various other shenanigans.  You 100% have to give him credit, especially in comparison to the current Republicans, for staying very consistent in his public rhetoric that his actions were not a war against Islam and that we need to respect Muslim citizens and not demonize them and all the rest. 

[rkim291968]

1 hour ago, boogielicious said:

I'm not sure that ISIS is really our biggest threat.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/02/us/san-bernardino-shooting/index.html

This is happening far too often.

They set up a command center in a golf course.   I just heard it on a local radio that people were still playing golf and had to be told to "move."   Priorities.

[Mr. Desmond]

32 minutes ago, rkim291968 said:

They set up a command center in a golf course.   I just heard it on a local radio that people were still playing golf and had to be told to "move."   Priorities.

When is enough ... enough?  Hate talk and guns = ...

[jbishop15]

2 hours ago, Gunther said:

I've seen documented pctgs of those who agree with ISIS at around 15%, which is ~200M.  I happen to believe the number is closer to 35% but no data to support it, admittedly, so perhaps the 1.3B can educate the 200M.  Either way, there's a helluva lotta them who want to take over the world and kill us or convert us in the process.

I agree, my closing sentence was pretty harsh and I withdraw it.  The point is we have to meet force with force, it's the only thing they respect.  

I would looooooove to see how they got those numbers. Would love to see their methodology.