How will Rand Paul defeat Radical Islam?

[GunnyFreedom]

Those 50 also have many family members. If ISIS Special Forces stealthily came to the U.S., killed your loved ones, then stealthily left, mightn't you become motivated to retaliate? Why not just leave them all alone for a few decades? Maybe a new President could even offer to even help them with their needs. Don't we ethically owe at least some reparations for "shock and awe?" Why should previous criminal U.S. administrations dictate the here and now and the future?

If my loved ones were running around killing random Zairians, and Zaire killed only those people doing the killing, then no, I would not be moved to retaliate. Why would I be? Murder is murder, even if I happen to know the murderers.

 

[idiom]

How will radical islam be defeated? its been a HUGE menace since the 700s. Even the Hawks such as Rick Santorum Know this!

Historically, Islam has been self-defeating, even more so in the information age. It can only be maintained in the context or sustained foreign invasion an oppression. Otherwise it rapidly becomes unpopular and collapses in on itself, especially given its general denial of science and technology.

 

[CaptUSA]

How will Rand Paul defeat Radical Islam?

Give 'em Obamacare.

 

[anaconda]

If my loved ones were running around killing random Zairians, and Zaire killed only those people doing the killing, then no, I would not be moved to retaliate. Why would I be? Murder is murder, even if I happen to know the murderers.

If Zairians had invaded the U.S. in the early 20th century, stole your oil, erected military bases, and forcefully installed their own brutal, corrupt, and puppet leaders, and then periodically came over and bombed your household into smithereens and killed several of your friends and family, how would that rate? Would a subsequent murderous clandestine raid against your family by Zairian Special Forces provoke no emotional response as long as there was no other collateral damage?

 

[anaconda]

Give 'em Obamacare.

Fine, if you're not worried about being tried for unspeakable war crimes.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

If Zairians had invaded the U.S. in the early 20th century, stole your oil, erected military bases, and forcefully installed their own brutal, corrupt, and puppet leaders, and then periodically came over and bombed your household into smithereens and killed several of your friends and family, how would that rate? Would a subsequent murderous clandestine raid against your family by Zairian Special Forces provoke no emotional response as long as there was no other collateral damage?

Look, if you are selling the idea that we should just let the people attacking us, attack us because we've done horrible things in the past, I'm not buying. I'm saying that we should restrict our action to 1) Congressionally declared Marque and Reprisal, against 2) only those individuals who are actively working to kill Americans. "Roll over and die" is just not an option, particularly if you want to be nominated and elected President of the United States.

 

[fisharmor]

I don't think I've ever read a serious scholarly article or book on radical Islam which doesn't fully recognize that it is not a religious movement...
Radical Islam is a political movement. If you actually take the time to read and/ or listen to the things radical Islamicists say, it becomes clear that they are talking about events in history - oftentimes events in recent history. Even the reaction to Israel is political: Jews have been living in the area for millennia, and if Muslims wanted them all dead they would have seen to it a long time ago... probably during the time when they were indisputably in charge. When they talk about "pushing Israel into the sea" they're having a normal political reaction to a series of political events.

The most tragic thing about all of this is that while radical Islam is clearly not a religious movement, the reaction to it in the US clearly IS a religious movement. Radical muslims aren't draping their dead in special pieces of cloth that represent their state-god. They aren't exerting horrible social pressure on their hardware stores to offer discounts to those who served in the jihad. They aren't complaining openly about their socialist healthcare system for veteran jihadists not seeing their decorated jihad heroes properly. They don't have a minimum of two days a year when the state-god mandates that everyone stop and reflect on their fallen heroes. They never flood the TV with parades and specials about how noble it is to serve the state-god. Their news shows occasionally actually dare to portray dissenting viewpoints on the issue of eternal war.

 

[Ronin Truth]

Shutting down the Middle Eastern branch of the American World Empire might help out some.

 

[anaconda]

Look, if you are selling the idea that we should just let the people attacking us, attack us because we've done horrible things in the past, I'm not buying. I'm saying that we should restrict our action to 1) Congressionally declared Marque and Reprisal, against 2) only those individuals who are actively working to kill Americans. "Roll over and die" is just not an option, particularly if you want to be nominated and elected President of the United States.

But ISIS is not attacking us. The only point I wished to make was that I'm certain that killing ISIS people will have it's own form of blow back. They have not attacked us. Why should we attack them?

 

[GunnyFreedom]

But ISIS is not attacking us.

Then there is no one to kill, and nothing to Marque and Reprisal at the moment. However, some may argue that targeting American Journalists around the world for capture and execution is a legitimate target for Marque, just like it was in 1803 under Thomas Jefferson.

The only point I wished to make was that I'm certain that killing ISIS people will have it's own form of blow back.

I'm not buying it. Populations are radicalized via collateral damage. You kill a guy who has spent the last 5 years beheading folks or burning them alive and even his own mother is gonna think he might have had it coming.

They have not attacked us. Why should we attack them?

Why would Thomas Jefferson send the Marines after the Barbary Pirates when not one of them had ever set foot on American soil?

 

[Sam I am]

How will radical islam be defeated? its been a HUGE menace since the 700s. Even the Hawks such as Rick Santorum Know this!

He's going to stop fucking their shit up, so that maybe in a couple decades, they might develop economically and become less radical

 

[surf]

first off, we've already been through the whole "how do you defeat, militarily, an ideology"? and the conclusion drawn amongst RPers is that you can't.

so, with any reasonable actor taking a military option off the table (inc. "sanctions"), that leaves Rand leading a country involved with the trading of goods and services and with diplomatic neutrality.

it'll take a few years, but this is how you defeat "radical islam." the porn infiltration plan is the backup.

 

[Occam's Banana]

How will Rand Paul defeat Radical Islam?

By using pork chops infused with kryptonite?

Or maybe he could just tell his Thing Ring to do its thing ...

 

[hells_unicorn]

How will radical islam be defeated? its been a HUGE menace since the 700s. Even the Hawks such as Rick Santorum Know this!

Honestly, radical Islam, indeed Islam in general will be defeated by regional powers other than the U.S. It's not our part of the world, and frankly I'd venture to guess that if we were less involved over there Russia would probably take care of most of the problem, particularly since they have a more direct interest in protecting the Orthodox communities in Syria and elsewhere in the region.

 

[JohnM]

its been a HUGE menace since the 700s.

Intermittently.

I lived in the Middle East in the 1960s and 1970s. In those days, it was NOT a huge menace.

Indeed, for most of the 20th century, it was a pretty marginal movement, and considerably less of a threat to world peace than, say, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, or Harry Truman.

As for answers to the question in the original post, there's plenty of wisdom in some of the posts above.

 

[anaconda]

Why would Thomas Jefferson send the Marines after the Barbary Pirates when not one of them had ever set foot on American soil?

Because the Americans were harassed in international waters, which should be accessible to all?

 

[helmuth_hubener]

Wow, we need more threads like this one!

 

[anaconda]

However, some may argue that targeting American Journalists around the world for capture and execution is a legitimate target for Marque, just like it was in 1803 under Thomas Jefferson.

How many ISIS folks should we kill because of the deeds of two or three individuals? Or are we going after these two or three individuals only (which might more closely resemble a standard criminal investigation)? Perhaps these were rogue outliers. Perhaps they were impostors. Their faces were covered. At least on spoke with a British accent. Some of these incidents show some signs of being staged. How do we know these few incidences were'nt false flags?

 

[anaconda]

I'm not buying it. Populations are radicalized via collateral damage. You kill a guy who has spent the last 5 years beheading folks or burning them alive and even his own mother is gonna think he might have had it coming.

I would suggest they are radicalized out of despair and persecution. Including the marauding imperialist invasion and bombing type of persecution. It needn't be collateral damage. It can be just direct damage. I wonder if the Revolutionary forces beheaded an occasional redcoat? Did wives and family of Nazis cheer as they were hanged (I doubt it)? I'm guessing the vast majority are tribal in their resolve that they are righteous in their intentions and deeds. Including family. Perhaps especially family.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

How will radical islam be defeated? its been a HUGE menace since the 700s. Even the Hawks such as Rick Santorum Know this!

Easy, by opposing professional GOP politicians.

Reminded of this thread from yesterday.

[h=1]GOP Lawmakers Rip Obama for not Being Faithful Enough to Saudi Arabia[/h]
Have to admit GOP politicians got game:

GOP Lawmakers Rip Obama for not Being Faithful Enough to Saudi Arabia

A growing chorus of Republican politicians is demanding that President Barack Obama respect and follow the agenda of Saudi Arabia, a country known for its export of Sunni extremist beliefs, brutal executions of petty criminals and religious heretics, and suppression of women’s rights. From negotiations with Iran, to the ongoing Saudi bombing of Yemen, to issues of regional Middle East security, Republicans are insisting that the Saudis should be trusted.
In a major speech on Monday, Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., ripped Obama for alienating Persian Gulf regimes, including Saudi Arabia. “Just last week we saw the embarrassment of almost all the Gulf leaders, including the Saudi king, pulling out of President Obama’s summit at Camp David,” he said. Christie, who is considering a presidential bid, added, “our allies want policies, not photo ops, and we’re not listening to them.”
Former Gov. Mike Huckabee, R-Ark., has admonished the Obama administration for negotiating for a nuclear deal with Iran. “Now the Israelis are in a greater alliance with the Saudis, Jordanians and Egyptians than they are with the United States because those countries at least have the good sense to know you don’t trust the Iranians,” Huckabee said at a campaign speech in New Hampshire on April 18.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2...blicans-obama/



Related

Obama's grandmother visits Saudi Arabia for muslim prayer

Christie calls for 'forceful' defense of Israel, says Obama not 'decisive'
​