IS & Syria: Why does this become Americs's problem??

[Algernon Moncrieff]

So I'm listening to "Democracy Now" and Amy is talking about the US expanding airstrikes because a major airbase in Syria fell to IS. Question: hasn't Syria been a Soviet/Russian client state since the 50s? Perhaps they'd like to help their friends, the Assads.

[napi21]

1. Mainly because they beheaded an American Journalist.

The opinion of the military experts is that ISSA must be attacked in Syria to get at their roots and destroy them. Although I hate war, I agree with the military leaders. They are doing nothing but destroying people abd mostly innocent ones. I disagreed with attacking Iraq, I think we need to stay the hell out of other people's business, but if they (ISSA) opts to kill Americans, just ecause they ARE Americans, then I say wipe 'em out.

[TexasTowelie]

2. Okay, I've seen the acronyms ISIS and ISIL but what does the acronym ISSA actually mean?

Although attacking Darrell Issa isn't necessarily a bad thing.

[MindPilot]

6. ISSA is what my last employer called their IT department.

Information System & Solutions of America. (what the hell is wrong with "IT" ?)

I suggested that it may not be a good idea to offend everybody by not only using the name of a local wing-nutter, but also the Arabic word for Jesus.

My protests were ignored.

[pampango]

3. It is everyone's problem and we are part of everyone. It is not, however, solely an American

problem. It needs to be dealt with multilaterally as do most global problems.

[el_bryanto]

4. Yes - this.

We don't have much credibility in the region because of our long standing support of Israel and our invasion of Iraq/Afghanistan. We need someone at the table that the people in that region can trust and it isn't the US.

Bryant

[The2ndWheel]

10. And who would that be instead?

The multilateral solutions are a pipedream. Nobody listens to the UN if it isn't backed up by the US military, and even then it's tough. The US, China, and Russia are permanent members of the UN Security Council. The US isn't trusted, and what can be said about China and Russia that hasn't already been said? Then there's France and the UK, who have at times had some issues with their Muslim populations.

There's no good way to do it, which is why things are the way they are.

[el_bryanto]

11. The UN is more likely to be efficacious than a go-it-alone approach in my opinion. nt

[The2ndWheel]

13. If the UN was actually a UN, I'd agree

Not that I'm trying to say the go-it-alone approach works. It doesn't, but the rest of the world, or at least the major nations of the world, don't seem to have too big of a problem if the US goes it alone. Nobody really tries to stop the US, or even economically sanction it.

The UN is a gathering of nations that aren't really bound together by much. If they all pooled their resources, and there was an actual UN military that was stronger than any single nation's military, then it might work. Until then, the US runs the show, every problem is our problem, the US will be the world's police, and nobody else will do much about anything.

[GOLGO 13]

5. ISIS (and all the other malcontents) has got to know that there is a price to be paid for

butchering Americans. Also, ISIS is now on the top of our shit list and if Assad has got intel on them we'll probably make a few deals with him.

[Vattel]

7. Because even if going to war would cause more harm than good,

we just have to go to war because an American was killed. (bitter sarcasm)

[randome]

8. Because they are monsters and I personally have no problem killing monsters.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Sometimes it seems like the only purpose in life is to keep your car from touching another's.[/center][/font][hr]

[Chathamization]

9. Ignorance and poor memory, mostly

It can be used to wind up the masses against the latest monster of the week. A couple of months ago you were inhumane if you weren’t for US intervention against Boko Haram. That’s out of style now, and the newest enemy we must destroy is ISIS/ISIL/IS (we used to refer to these guys as al Qaeda when that label had more impact; now they’ve had a rebranding).

If we listened to the people with TV sitcom attention spans, the US would be involved in at least a half dozen other wars. And those wars would promptly get ignored for the next big and exciting fight (look at how much attention the deterioration of Libya has gotten).

[TBF]

12. Oil, duh.

ISIS is a threat to our "new" government in Iraq. Which is a threat to our obtaining oil at the prices we consider fair. When George Bush took out Saddam Hussein he did it for a reason. We are still dealing with the fallout.