Do you support military action against ISIS?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

46 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	27 (59%)
	No
	19 (41%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[PowerToThePeople]

1. Only military action I support is defense of direct invasion of USA homeland. n/t

Piles of poo-poo and used cars come to mind.

[MohRokTah]

7. Sad you last post got hidden? eom

[IronGate]

10. Why don't you post a repeat of the last post you had hidden?

Used cars? Another subtle insult to our President, hmmmm?

[sharp_stick]

15. Sometimes it's hard

to control one's impulses isn't it?

[Nye Bevan]

26. Would you have supported using US troops to liberate the Nazi concentration camps? (nt)

[Jim Beard]

62. No, it was a German decision and none of our business. It was Japan that

attack us, not Germany. The problems in Iraq today are no different than our own civil war, the people are fighting for their homeland and self determination. Same thing is happening in the Ukraine and also happened in Yugoslavia. Vietnam was another example of where we interfered in the people struggle for self determination.

[Takket]

2. voted no because...

while isis is a brutal, borderline genocidal organization that I think needs to be dealt with, I don't believe it should be by us. there are 200+ countries in the world that find them untenable. and many of them have militaries. if people care about stopping them, they shouldn't all be staring at us waiting for us to do something.

[Comrade Grumpy]

3. Yes, by Iran, Turkey, Iraq, and Syria.

The Turks and the Iranians are the local regional powers.

Iraq and Syria are the ones beset by ISIS. And Lebanon, too, now.

These countries need to overcome their political rivalries and sectarian differences and wipe these fuckers out. At the risk of sounding melodramatic, at this point, this is a struggle of civilization against barbarism.

[Scootaloo]

6. Lebanon has the military capabilities of your average high school

Seriously, asking the Lebanese military to do anything other than duck and cover is a losing proposition at the best of times.

[Comrade Grumpy]

9. Yeah. And Hezbollah is already pretty busy in Syria.

But Turkey and Iran....

[Scootaloo]

12. I don't think Turkey is interested

Turkey wants to be Europe, and has a habit of ignoring what goes on in its own neighborhood, so long as its own borders are secure. Erdogan has been exploiting Gaza as a campaign piece for the coming elections, but beyond that, the Turkish government seems ready and willing to let the middle east rot away. Which is disappointing because Turkey actually has the pull and means to make a damn difference.

Iran, if i understand, it becoming very active over this. Which is probably a big part of why the US is active as well, our constant efforts to please the Sheldon Adelson Society by "containing" Iran. And I think, as counter-productive as that is, the strategy works - Iran is too wary of the US to truly commit, even though the Maliki government would probably throw the door wide open otherwise.

[Comrade Grumpy]

18. It might be in Turkey's interest to get interested.

It played a fucked up role backing the failed rebellion in Syria, and it could be on the verge of some serious blowback from that.

ISIS is not that far from Turkey in northern and eastern Syria.

And now, the PKK and YPG, whom the Turks consider terrorists, are helping fight ISIS.

God, this is messy.

[Scootaloo]

19. Been saying it since 2010...

I hope nobody's too attached to the current map of the middle east.

[LeftyMom]

39. Turkey's main interest is not losing territory when Kurdistan happens,

while enjoying having the Kurds as a relatively stable, prosperous and pro-western buffer between them and the craziness. One with enough oil that the west will defend them, no less.

Their interest in keeping Kurdistan unofficial but secure is best served by Staying The Fuck Out of It. So they will, unless and until that changes.

[joshcryer]

46. Interesting.

Just the other day you implied the USA would do nothing. Now that we're doing something you appear against it.

[moriah]

4. Someone needs to tell "ISIS" about Isis. I heartily approve of her message.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isis

[Scootaloo]

5. I'm iffy

By now, it's pretty clear that the Iraq military either lacks the capability or the will to stand up against ISIS. I suppose i really can't blame them, Iraqis have been living under the horror of war for nearly forty years now.

But regardless, this leaves ISIS free reign to do as they please. And "as they please" seems to involve killing a bunch of people who can't fight back.

I believe in humanitarian interventions. Iraq is not capable. And I don't know if Iraq is going to allow Iran, or Turkey, or Syria to operate against ISIS within Iraq - But I know Iraq allows the US to do so.

So if we have the ability and the means, should we sit back and go "yeah no, you're on your own. Sorry for fueling this frnkenstein's monster that's slaughtering your asses, but, ah, gotta go!"

[MohRokTah]

8. Looks like many DUers support the genocide of the Yadizis.

[leftstreet]

11. well that didn't take long n/t

[conservaphobe]

13. They're just people.

It's not like there's kittens up on that mountain or something.

[Comrade Grumpy]

25. That's a sleazy cheap shot. I haven't heard you calling for an invasion of the Congo.

You know, where six million people have been killed in political violence since 1998.

Looks like, MohRokTah supports the mass murder in the Congo.

See how that works?

[MohRokTah]

36. I would support air strikes in the Congo where they could stop the killers. eom

[former9thward]

41. How about air strikes in Nigeria?

Ukraine? About a dozen other places? You want our war budget to be tripled?

[MohRokTah]

43. There is no genocide occuring in Ukraine.

It's not certain if there is any genocide occurring in Nigeria.

[former9thward]

59. So if there is "genocide" occurring we should attack?

Genocide, of course, defined by you depending on the country. Again, How much do you want the War budget increased?

[Scootaloo]

45. Oh wait, so now you're AGAINST bombings?

I'm very confused. You're all for flattening Gaza on the US' dime, but when it's ISIS, you hit the brakes? Why?

[former9thward]

58. You can pretend the U.S. is responding to the Gaza rockets

but it is not. The U.S. military is not involved. I am opposed to U.S. military involvement unless we are directly attacked.

[jamzrockz]

53. The same ISIS

have been running wild in Syria killing civilians and govt forces and not a pip from the US govt. I wanna know why these set of people are any more special from the people being slaughtered right now in Syria by ISIS.

[sabrina 1]

14. What personnel are we supposedly protecting over there? I thought we left. Mercenaries

are there, which means there must be some US troops still in the country because airc, our laws do not support mercs being there unless they are 'supporting the US Military'.

But we knew that.

So all we have to do is get the personnel out, as we were forced to do recently in Libya.

The regional powers there can handle these extremists. Granted we cause all of this, with our illegal invasions and support for some of the worst militants, see Libya eg.

The best thing we can do to try to correct that grotesque crime perpetrated by the Cheney/Bush regime and whoever helped them get it started, is to start PROSECUTING our War Criminals and then take their ill gotten gains to pay reparations to the victims of those crimes.

So now we have a new 'enemy'. Let someone who is likely to SUCCEED where we totally failed, take care of it. Because our record of 'success' has been heartbreakingly dismal.

[napi21]

16. YES, but ONLY by air. NO boots on the ground.

Looks like a GREAT opportunity for drones & bombs. I believe I also heard that these ISIS men aren't afraid to die because theyb believe in reincarnation, so we'd be helping them out!

[Louisiana1976]

34. +1 million

[politicman]

52. small technical mistake, but illustrative of the media in the U.S

And you and your comment is the perfect example of how the U.S government can have such a effed up foreign policy and still get the backing of the U.S people in this effed up policy.

Its not your fault and its not a huge mistake or important mistake you make in your comment, but it just illustrates how the U.S government and media don't provide enough information to the U.S public.

These ISIS people are Sunni's, they don't believe in re-incarnation, they believe that if they die in Jihad then they are guaranteed heaven no matter how many sins they have committed in their lives. They ones that believe in re-incarnation are some Shias, and the Alawi's who make up Syrian Assad's government.


So like I said, its a small technical mistake that makes no difference in seeing ISIS as bad guys, but is just illustrates that the media in the U.S can say what it likes about any enemy and the populace will automatically believe it or the U.S media can neglect to provide much information about the enemy and the populace will not research on their own to see what the media is not telling them, as we have witnessed time and time again in the past.

[MisterP]

17. stop tossing arms and money at the meta-Salafists in Syria and we won't have to bomb them

in Lower Kurdistan (peace sells ... but who's buying?)

[GeorgeGist]

20. By whom?

[indie9197]

21. ISIS is just another "made up" enemy eom

[MohRokTah]

22. .

[Throd]

24. Could you please elaborate?

[NuclearDem]

29. Yeah, no.

[joshcryer]

47. There is video of 1400 young men being executed brutally.

Just because they might enact revenge. It is the most brutal thing I have ever seen. I recommend not watching it, but believe me when I say they are the definition of pure evil.

[sammythecat]

56. This is the video I saw 3 or 4 weeks ago

http://www.funker530.com/brutal-graphic-video-released-by-isis/

It was produced and distributed by ISIS. Maybe it's the same one. It's an hour long. I don't know if it shows the murders you speak of because I had to stop watching after 10 minutes. I'd seen enough and couldn't take any more. It's just a sickening rampage of one goddamn murder after another.

I try to pay attention, but I'm no Mid-East scholar and it can get confusing as to who's good, who's bad, who's worse and who's the worst of all, but one thing that is clear is these guys are evil. As bad as it gets.

I have no idea what the long term solution is to all these problems, but right now, if we can stop them by bombing their artillery, then I'm all for it. They're religiously insane heartless murderers who want to impose Sharia law. Monsters out of a nightmare is what they are.

[joshcryer]

57. They're so evil they have Mahdi army after them.

And Mahdi army is well known for executing people via tying their limbs up and driving two different ways (and yes there is video of that as well), they employ child soldiers, too. So you have to think, if ISIS is upsetting Mahdi then they must be some level of evil that is incomprehensible.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

23. yes. no. yes. no. don't know.

honestly we have truly fucked the middle east so much, its hard to say what would work and what would not.

[Jackpine Radical]

27. Certainly not unilateral or western-only military action.

[Autumn]

28. No. there are other powers in the Middle East who need to step up and deal with this problem.

It's their countries that these crazy fucks want to take back to the stone age.

[NuclearDem]

30. In conjunction with the other governments in the region.

And to protect minority groups under attack by ISIS.

Fuckers have destroyed enough history in the region as it is. We don't need entire unique cultures wiped out because of their medieval fundamentalist bigotry.

[RandySF]

31. There is a HUGE difference between Obama and Bush.

Bush started a unprovked war that's leading to what we see today. Obama is try to stop the consequences of Bush's actions.

[JoePhilly]

33. And the Iraqi government ASKED for our help

Bush just invaded.

[m-lekktor]

38. aaaah DEM wars are good! ok.

what do good intentions matter when the end result is the same? how does dropping bombs on people help them?

[joshcryer]

48. Yes, dropping bombs on ISIS does not help ISIS.

Nice logic there.

[hughee99]

51. Exactly, it's like people giving Nixon shit for Vietnam.

He was just dealing with the situation left from previous administrations.

[NightWatcher]

32. I wish there were an "I don't know" option

I don't think that too many of us know exactly what the Hell is going on over there. I knew people who worked with SIGIR (Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction) and were so glad to leave that insane clusterfuck of a mess. There are religious groups fighting other religious groups funded by secular groups who oppose other tribes who....

We stuck our nose in a hornet's nest when we killed Saddam. Sure he was a fucker, but he was a tough fucker who controlled his country.

[DonCoquixote]

35. I will admit, Isis is evil

and I will furthermore say that the fact this was the alternative to Saddam makes me think less of the Iraqi people.

However, the last thign we need is to get involved, especially as israel is rampign up it's war with Syria whcih will be a war with Iran which will be the war to establish a greater Israel that has been on back order since Clinton. Is it any accident that Bibi felt free to ramp up the war while isis was threatenign Syria and iraq? BYW, a lot of these isis types were the same "Freedom fighters" Hillary wanted to back, and, when she become president, probably WILL back.

[Jim Beard]

63. We should do with Iraq with what the British

did with Palestine and that is to GET OUT!.

[JackRiddler]

37. How about first cutting off their supply of arms and money...

from the allies of the U.S. in the region?

[BrotherIvan]

40. Shh!

We have to keep arming the world because...

[Jim Beard]

64. Maybe if they had "Open Carry"

things would be different?

[BillZBubb]

42. Airstrikes to protect civilian populated areas or enclaves only.

[Marrah_G]

44. I think the question is too simplistic

I think it's a very complicated question with no good answers.

[roamer65]

49. If Irbil falls to Jihadistan, the Iranians will invade former Iraq from the north.

They won't want these nut bags on their border.

[Chathamization]

54. Plenty here were saying Baghdad was about to fall to ISIS two months ago

This is a rebellion that's active in Sunni Arab areas. Because they've been able to take over Sunni Arab towns with the support of locals and other militants doesn't indicate that they have the ability to take on much larger armies and conquer the big cities of other sects.

[Iggo]

50. Nope.

[chrisa]

55. No. What's happening in Iraq isn't our problem.

[Calista241]

60. I voted yes because we will either be fighting them now

Or well be fighting them later when they're much more dangerous.

These people are perpetuating actual genocide. They are flat out evil, like the Nazi's. And they may have the strength to bring other weaker ME governments into their umbrella.

And like it or not, for the immediate future, our country needs easy access to oil. We either secure access now, or watch our economy decline into depression in the future.

[Jim Beard]

65. I used to think that but Afganistan cured me of that.

I think with the current Group of ISIS, you will see the larger states of Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia step in. They are stable countries and don't want the loose cannons in their backyards. We didn't take action this time until it was indeed the oil refineries that were threatened.

[Calista241]

66. I just don't want this to be another Rwanda. n/t

[TheKentuckian]

61. Nope, we have done all we are capable and willing to do. Any number of countries have

the required air superiority for the espoused mission including Arab nations. Hell, Iran is next door, is friendly with the government, and is capable but we are still playing our games.

Add to that we are unwilling to actually do anything that would put the region in order and it seems beyond pointless, there will ever be wolves and radicals and we have no intent or will to break them.

It is crazy that many of the same folks that want to keep poking the bear are squeamish and outraged at Israel for doing what must be done to contain the crazies. No, most of the people aren't the crazies but enough of them are and they have enough influence "with more moderate factions" that they cannot effectively be separated.

One might despise Israel methods but they are able to wrap their minds around what is being dealt with and we are to interested in other toxic agendas, resource control, right wing economics, and naivete to do shit but shoot ourselves in the foot while destroying all we touch.

Maybe the martyrdoms would motivate the folks in the region to change paths and separate themselves from the radicals. We have the stop disregarding the batshit fundamentalism and warrior nature of the broad culture and we have to stop feeding the crazy in what we think of as unrelated efforts but they do not.