Skip to main content

CNN Story on ISIS
Now that Ferguson, Missouri, is not producing enough tear gas to keep CNN's attention, I couldn't help but notice Chuck Hagel bouncing in his chair, talking about how ISIS is a greater peril than anything mankind has faced since the saber-toothed tiger. Somewhere, just off screen, John McCain is preparing two lists: people we should have bombed, and people we should bomb now. There's a big CNN fear graphic on the screen right this moment asking "Does ISIS have cells in the US?" There's a queue extending out into the parking lot of politicos waiting their turn to shake a finger at President Obama for not rushing back to the White House to deal with this Urgent Threat of Unprecedented Proportion. While wearing a tie. As God intended.

You know how much threat ISIS represents to the United States? None. That's how much. Exactly none. If there was a value less than none, then it would be that, but there's not, so none is the answer.

You know what does represent a threat to the the United States, a bona fide danger to our continued existence as the land of the semi-free and occasionally bravish? Acting as if every person who says they want to turn the United States into dictatorial hell hole, is capable of making the United States their bitch. ISIS is a ragtag organization on the far side of the world, armed mostly with the discards we either sold to the last set of thugs (note: proper use of the term) who used the gear to cow their relatives, or the stuff we left sitting around because bringing the old stuff back threatened all those contracts for building new stuff. ISIS could no more threaten the United States than Lindsey Graham could punch God in the nose. The existential threat level is green. Or at least, it should be.

As the Deputy Undersecretary of Pogo might say, we have determined the source of the threat, and we're it.

Come on inside. Let's talk.

You know what ISIS is? A bunch of politicians. People trying to build a power base. A bunch of guys who understand, as politicians have grasped since Sargon handed out blocks of cuneiform about how he really kicked Ur-Zababa's Akkadian ass, that war extends beyond swords, guns, tanks, and bombs. It includes press releases on really nice stationery, scratchy cassette tapes from a fictional cave, videos of old dudes walking in the mountains.

Of course James Foley's death is a tragedy. Of course it was a barbaric act. Of course the English Leather-scented narration was intended to generate a frisson of "Oh, they sound so civilized while acting so evil." Of fucking course it was meant to scare us.

Here's the super-secret strategy on how to handle it: Don't act scared.

Is ISIS planning to follow the al-Qaeda script for world domination? Eh, no. But let's say they are. So why don't you get bin Laden on the phone and ask him how poking big dogs with a pointy stick worked out for him. Unavailable? Well, check al-Qaeda's No. 2 man, or the other No. 2 guy, or that other No. 2 guy. Hmm.

The day before 9/11, al-Qaeda had a well-defined leadership structure, bank accounts around the world, a country where they were welcome to set up their terrorist jungle gyms, and dreams of world conquest. How much of that is left?

Sure, I can hear people preparing a flustered "but al-Qaeda is everywhere!," cut off the hydra's head, blah blah blah. The truth is that most people calling themselves al-Qaeda have as much relationship to the original organization as your pal who owns a storm trooper helmet has to the Star Wars Empire. Al-Qaeda in this, al-Qaeda in that, may contain plenty of people who are brutal, angry, and murderous, but they're not al-Qaeda. They use that name because they think it scares you. They'd probably like to hold fan conventions, but they don't, because ... drones.

Bin Laden (whose real relationship to 9/11 was more one of "Hey boss, these guys have a crazy idea, and if we put in a little start-up funding, it might pay off" rather than "You go left, I'll hike the ball, and the rest of you head for Boston") was a politician too. One who—because he didn't have a power base—was more interested in shaking things up to see what happened. Give those U.S. folks a quick hook to the chin, then kick them in the balls, and see if they doesn't crawl away and cry. Maybe we'll get a big slice of the ashes! Only ... no.

Still, you can't say that al-Qaeda wasn't extremely successful. Not at killing Americans. We managed more of that in Iraq. We manage to kill more Americans every year by refusing to wear helmets when we ride motorcycles. You could probably make a compelling case that corn syrup is more deadly to Americans than all the terrorists who ever lived.

Nope, where al-Qaeda really scored was in their ability to get us to hand over freedoms for an illusion of safety. The NSA reading your email and listening in on your phone, idiots mistaking a dropped t-shirt at the Mexican border for the prayer rug of invading Muslims, TSA workers who know you more intimately than your spouse. Those are bin Laden's victories.

That giant armored car in the streets of Ferguson, Missouri, and the 7,000+ machine guns local police now have on hand to point at American citizens? That's al-Qaeda's big win. That's the win we gave bin Laden. Because we were scared.

We demonstrated that we were a nation willing to do anything to preserve freedom. Even take away freedom.

So … ISIS. No. No matter how many speeches someone in ISIS' deliberately foggy chain of command gives about running the New World Caliphate out of a nice brownstone on the Hudson, they are not going to load their creaky arsenal into empty oil tankers and sail for our shores. They are not a threat. The things they are saying, the things they are doing—including the awful, brutal, terrible death of James Foley—are intended to sustain their people who are in the midst of a considerable fight, in which they are by no means assured of victory. Those words are also meant to make us think twice about getting in, while not riling us so badly that we shake off our entirely justifiable war-weariness and do a repeat of the last cycle.

But what if some of the people in ISIS don't really care about that? What if they are insane? Maybe they are. Probably some are. Though likely not the leadership, because insane people tend to not be so good at the logistics needed to march an army halfway across two countries. But even if they are all high-functioning nut jobs, so what? Louie Gohmert is demonstrably insane, but that doesn't mean I have to have my own armored car. They won't do anything, because they can't.

Let me say it again: Danger ISIS represents to the power, democracy, and freedom of the United States = 1 peanut. A moldy peanut. One with a nut missing. Danger from the United States reaction to ISIS provocations and the renewed drum-beat on the right = Barnum & Bailey's full set of elephants.

That's not to say that some bloodthirsty bozo isn't right now cobbling up a scheme to kill XXX number of Americans by XXXXX a XXXXX into a XXXX. I'm a writer. I get paid (or at least, I did once upon a time) to think up scary things. Believe me, I can think of two or three doozies when it comes to things that you could pull off with all-too-common materials. How likely is it that a genuine ISIS cell is hiding in the United States lining up, let's say, zeppelins of death right now? Very, very, very unlikely. So unlikely that even planning for it would prove we're the ones who are insane. Funding for systems to destroy incoming asteroids should come way before that (though probably ISIS does finish ahead of funding for systems to tackle incoming dinosaurs who slip through a time portal. By a nose.).

Oh, and please [your name here] in [some place], Iowa, don't delude yourself that the local Tassel Festival is the perfect place to attack because no one is guarding it. First, no one is guarding it because no one cares about it, including terrorists, and second, your local police force probably already has more armor on hand than the Germans used to overrun Belgium. Do not line up to panic just because Hagel and McCain and half the United States Senate feels that KBR and Lockheed-Martin are overdue for a really good pay day.

Just calm down. Find a coffee shop. Eat a scone (cinnamon, try the cinnamon), and in the timeless words of Douglas Adams, Don't Panic. Trust me. Your country really needs you in this time of peril. It needs you to refuse ISIS a victory, by refusing to play this game. Again.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:30 AM PDT.

Also republished by Group W: Resisting War.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  That would be good riddance (13+ / 0-)

      Then again, who are their financial backers? Is ISIS a Sunni construct or Shiite? I've lost track.

      As my late Grandpa used to say,

      Nothing disgusts me more than two religious sects trying to kill each other off.

      And God said, "Let there be light"; and with a Big Bang, there was light. And God said "Ow! Ow My eyes!" and in a flash God separated light from darkness. "Whew! Now that's better. Now where was I. Oh yea . . ."

      by Pale Jenova on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:44:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Can't think of anything that would be much better (45+ / 0-)

      than a reminder that, no matter how much oil is produced in the United States, fossil fuel dependency leaves us vulnerable to the whims of a market that can be sent reeling by both political and economic winds. Unlike actual wind. And sun. Which are much harder to monopolize.

      •  Isis is not a threat (27+ / 0-)

        Until it is.
        Just like AL quaeda was in 2001.
        We have no idea how dangerous isis is  just like we did not know how dangerous alqueada was in august 2001. But bush certainly knew the threat they were and had information we did not. Do you have information on isis that we do not because if you don't you cannot make these statement as if they were facts. You have no idea if they are a real threat to us or not...neither do I neither does anyone on this blog.

         We meaning this site and it's front pagers and its  members ripped hard on bush for ever and deservedly so for  ignoring the threat they were.
        I'm not sure why you were stating with such confidence  they are not a threat when you just don't know.
        And that does not negate the rest of your points that we have in our own country from our own corrupt extremists.
        How you can state that we are in ok land after the unjust war we waged..... And that we don't have anything to fear.  Is surreal.
        Because September 11th was just a one time payback.

        If you advocate ignoring them like Bush Co ignored Alqueada.  Which you are. That is stunning.

        "Is a dream a lie if it don't come true...Or is it something worse... That sends me down to the river... Though I know the river is dry". The Boss.

        by Christin on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:27:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Nothing has changed here (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          elwior, charliehall2, AmericanAnt, G2geek

          ISIS is the new Alqueada.  No matter their ideals, they hate us.  It is their reason for living, so they tell us.  

          We are supposedly doing all we can to protect ourselves against terrorism, if we believe what we're told.  They want to kill us; and they will never ever give up.  We have American citizens who have been converted and recruited by them.  They live among us.  More of them physically join the movement to fight in the middle east?  Possibly.

          So, I would agree that they are no more of a threat than ever; except there are more of them among us, due in no small measure to our treatment of minorities.  Again, what is new? We can have little confidence they are all known to security sources.  Again, this is not new.  

          If American security is endanger, and we are willing to quiver in fear at their very existence, then we deserve no better.

          "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

          by cowdab on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:15:18 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes I agree you are correct (16+ / 0-)

            Yes I agree you are correct my point is is that for the past 13 years s! we have been crucifying George W Bush and company for ignoring what was put in front of him he had information we are course did not. And we all know that if he told us al Qaeda was a threat in August of 2001 meaning of a threat to the US this same kind of diary would have been written . And most likely the same people would be a agreeing with it.  Instead al-qaeda did attack our country and we have had 13 years of knocking and crucifying Bush on this very blog for ignoring the threat that they were . It becomes tedious when even liberals want to have it both ways.

            That's why I said we have no idea on a blog if Isis is a threat to us. Mark writes as if he has information from the CIA that we do not . We know he is writing this from information cobbled together from out on the inter tubes.

              Not to mention it is heartbreaking that people here  think we should leave the Iraqi citizens to deal with these murderous monsters that we created . You cannot get more surreal then liberals turning their back on a filthy mess we helped create and you can't get more surreal than even al queada stating isis is too brutal and sick.

            "Is a dream a lie if it don't come true...Or is it something worse... That sends me down to the river... Though I know the river is dry". The Boss.

            by Christin on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:33:31 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  We Liberals who opposed the Iraq war from the (21+ / 0-)

              the beginning, should now support a war in Iraq because the fools who invaded Iraq created the mess we warned them they would cause?

              Where do we start? Syria, Iraq, or can we invade the Saudis, who really got it coming?

              So we ally with Assad until we get rid of Isis and than arm the Assad opposition we approve of? Shhh nobody tell him.

              Like Al Queada, Isis wants Americans on the ground chasing them around the desert and the deadly back streets of cities and towns. Is it likely they are going to come out and fight us in a conventional battle? The Iraqi army didn't stand a chance, and these murderous nuts are no where near as geared up organized and skilled as Saddam's army was. How any of this prevents a major terrorist attack in our country or anybody else's is not explained.

              Somebody better have a better plan than the idiot Cheney and his gaggle of bug-eyed  incompetent loons.

              •  This ISIS nonsense (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Grabber by the Heel

                serves the immediate interest of the USA, namely to show that mere Iranian military presence in Iraq is not enough to guarantee the safety of the OIL fields and infrastructure.  Apparently, US bombing (well, satellites and intelligence) is necessary for that.  

                So if there is a power move going on to force the Iranians out of Iraq and resume US 'protection' (with a new SOFA, now that Maliki is out of the picture [how, exactly?]), then there is grounds to think that ISIS is funded by and directed by the CIA.  It's exactly the kind of dick move that they pulled all over Central and South America, so often that they created a terrorist-torturer academy in the USA to train their little pet monsters in how to terrorize a population.

                So are they a threat to the US?  Not until the CIA cuts off funding or suddenly decides to back a different horse.

                190 milliseconds....

                by Kingsmeg on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:03:14 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  If I recall correctly ... (19+ / 0-)

              al-Qaida attacked us because we were THERE, meaning we had American military presence in or near their holy sites and we were fighting proxy wars against the Soviet Union that caused Muslim casualties.

              And you want us to keep going back THERE and creating more havoc. Yeah, that'll make us safer.

              Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters. -- President Grover Cleveland, 1888

              by edg on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:38:36 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You are putting words in my mouth (5+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sandbox, auapplemac, IreGyre, VClib, G2geek

                You are putting words in my mouth that I never said said. What I keep skating quite clearly is I don't know if they are a threat or not. Mark is confidently skating they are not and people are agreeing with him based on what..... His opinions on a blog. I'm the agnostic. He's the atheist.

                And what I also said was I think it is absolutely horrific that we invaded a country and trashed it to pieces. We destroyed their infrastructure we destroyed their government we destroyed everything they once had based on a lie. They are now living in the hell that we helped create and you are advocating that we should say hey sorry we fucked up good luck with that bye . And we sure do hope that. Isis does not murder your whole family but whatevs hey not  our probs.

                "Is a dream a lie if it don't come true...Or is it something worse... That sends me down to the river... Though I know the river is dry". The Boss.

                by Christin on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:49:15 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Opinion? Here is my opinion: (5+ / 0-)

                  ISIS is not a threat to us because they cannot get to us.  They have no intercontinental missiles.  They only have small munitions.  Anything larger we pick off the face of the earth.   They are not likely to take any more territory beyond Syria and Iraq, both failed states.  They have little-to-no future as a threat to the US.  Their ability to set up "cells" in the US is nil, < snark > unless you count the infiltration talking place across the Mexican border. < /snark >

                  An illusion can never be destroyed directly... SK.

                  by Thomas Twinnings on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 03:29:24 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  "they cannot get to us." Bullshit. (0+ / 0-)

                    Where have you been over the past 13+ years?

                    AQ has had sympathizers in the US, who have tried to blow up synagogues and the like.  They have not gotten away with it because the FBI has intercepted all of them, with the exception of the Tsarniev Bros, which exception proves the rule.

                    Now think of one ISIL getting into the USA with a suitcase full of Ebola-infected clothing & bedding.  

                    For that matter, one ISIL speeding down a city street and then veering off onto a crowded sidewalk and then detonating the containers of gasoline stacked up inside the car.

                    The fact that more people die every day from falls down staircases is irrelevant.  More people died on 9/11 from automobile accidents.  So Fucking What?

                    "Oh, it can't happen here."

                    "But if it does, it's no big deal."

                    Right.

                    GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

                    by G2geek on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 12:05:35 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You 2 are talking past each other (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      nswalls, Nada Lemming

                      They are not an existential threat to the US that is simply a fact.

                      Are there some sympathisers of IS or AQ who either are already in the US or have US or EU passports and so can easily get to the US.

                      Of course.

                      Is it easy to purchase arms in the US once you get there?

                      Of course.

                      Can they produce bombs from easily obtainable components?

                      Of course.

                      Can they produce the level of deaths that were produced in Europe by IRA, or ETA, or Red Brigades, or Baader-Meinhoff, probably yes but that raises the question why has there been negligible evidence in the past 13 years.

                      And now the important one.

                      ARE AMERICANS ALL NERVOUS COWARDS?

                      Well I don't think so, but I think the US media and politicians act like it.

                      In terms of the deaths from terrorism in N Ireland, in comparison to 9/11 in a country of 320 million, it was the equivalent of 17 dead in N Ireland. N Ireland faced over 4 times that every year from 1970-1995 and deaths peaked at 420 or 30 times that, or the equivalent of a 9/11 every 2 weeks for a year, then another 9/11 every month for the next 10 years, then one every couple of months for another 20 years!!!

                      America is the most powerful nation on the planet. It will upset some people elsewhere who will try to react by terrorist attacks and most will be defeated but occasionally one will get through.

                      This will happen get over it.
                      Once you accept that absolute and total security and safety is impossible, you can have a sensible discussion about risks and benefits of actions or security. If you assume there is ever a point where there will NEVER be a threat from terrorism from any source you will constantly be trying to 'do something' to 'win'.

                      •  it's like public health. (0+ / 0-)

                        HIV went pandemic but we responded by adopting a culture of safe sex.  

                        That didn't mean paranoia of having sex, it just meant using condoms.  Occasionally condoms broke and HIV was transmitted that way, but people didn't stop having sex.

                        The fact that we won't achieve full prevention of all acts of terrorism, or all automobile accidents, does not mean we shouldn't take prudent steps.  

                        Know what I find pathetic?  All the people who are flocking to the "self-driving car" (the Google roboto-mobile and other internet-connected vehicle designs) "because of safety."  Speaking of pervasive surveillance and forfeiture of freedom of movement.  In general I find consumer culture pathetic: bowing and scraping before the false-gods of Convenience and Price, while we're poisoning the atmosphere with CO2 and rendering ourselves weak and stupid at the same time.

                        GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

                        by G2geek on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 04:07:46 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                •  Christin, I thought that was why the (6+ / 0-)

                  NSA was spying on all of us. To keep us safe from the boogeymen, terrorists who want to kill us.
                  And the only way to really protect the Iraqis because we ruined their country, is to put boots back on the ground.
                  We already lost close to 5,000 lives and countless other lives have been ruined. For what?
                  Many of the terrorists threats have come from the FBI because they set up some loser.
                  I wonder how much money is wasted when they go looking for someone to set up?  
                  If the US wants to do something about ISIS, it should go after its friends who are funding them.
                  There are a ton of hits when I googled who is funding ISIS.
                  Saudi Arabia, and the US because they funded the Syrian rebels who then turned in to ISIS.
                  Counter punch has many articles about that.
                  I posted about one article 3 days ago.

                  "I find it incredible that Keith Alexander can sell secrets and is free to make a huge profit without being slammed with Espionage Act charges and Snowden is stateless" Jesselyn Radack.

                  by snoopydawg on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 04:27:05 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Your recollection is pathetic (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                G2geek

                They became powerful, organized nihilistic theocrats when the US funded and organized them as the Taliban when the Soviets were in Afghanistan.

                Then there was a power struggle and Taliban split between the Norther Alliance and the Taliban. The Taliban became Al Qaida and attacked the US because they are nihilist theocrats.

                Nihilistic Islamic theocrats are beloved of Pakistan, because incompetent corrupt governments must have an external enemy. In Pakistan that is the super-scary Hindooooos. In the rest of the mideast it is the superscary Joooooooos. And also American. Where the gays have rights and the women are feminists.

                They really do hate you. Just because it is not in their best interest does not mean they do not hate you. That they hate us does not make them dangerous or not dangerous. But they are theocrats.

              •  see my comment above (0+ / 0-)

                You have the time frame wrong.

            •  if there was a crucifiable law on the books... (10+ / 0-)

              ...surely BushII deserved that fate and more. He lied us into Iraq and lied to keep us there. He lied about WMDS despite incontrovertable evidence provided by UN Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix's report to the contrary submitted to the whole world's scrutiny a week before he attacked them. He tried and failed to coerce Chief US Weapons Inspector David Kay to go into collusion with him in supporting his lies. Both Hans Blix and David Kay both refused to give Bush the legal cover he wanted them to give. Besides sending over 4,000 of our best and brightest to their deaths on his altar of war, he and Cheney are jointly and severally responsible for the slaughter of over 1.3 million Iraqis and caused another 2-4 million to flee their own land. He strafed and bombed whole cities into rubble. No one would recognize the before and after photos of Iraq today.

              He did more damage to our Constitution, the rule of law, our personal freedoms, and our credibility with our friends and enemies alike through his lies than OBL could've accomplished with multiple 9/11 events occurring simultaneously. Under Bush/Cheney, America became more like the terrorists we warred against, inflicting more damage to America than the terrorists ever hoped to succeed on any battlefield.

              If by "Mission Accomplished" he meant creating the politics of fear, perpetual preemptive wars, and generations of new terrorists, the record shows they were the best players on any future terrorists' team.

              The issue is not whether ISIS poses the same threat level of al Qaeda. It's the question of are we going to allow ourselves to get fooled again with more and bigger lies, more smoke and mirrors that scare us into believing there's a terrorist under every lampshade, and more of the same old "the sky is falling" propaganda which says, "we must fight them over there so we don't wake up to a mushroom cloud here" that got us into this quagmire in the first place. I think that's what the diarest is trying to say, at least in part.

              "I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast, for I intend to go in harm's way." John Paul Jones

              by ImpeachKingBushII on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 11:31:10 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  An editorial in today's Washington Post (6+ / 0-)

                paraphrases Condoleezza Rice:
                "Now we are fighting on behalf of the entire world, for if we do not beat them in our homeland, you'll have to battle them in yours."
                The editorial was written by the foreign minister of Iraq. The Iraqi army, as I recall, initially ran away from ISIS.

                I'm also of an age to remember the Domino Theory as a justification for the US to meddle in Vietnam. If Vietnam became communist then so would the rest of Asia. The combined forces of the USSR, Iron Curtain countries and China plus the communized rest of Asia would turn the whole world communist and we would eventually all be speaking Russian. Or worse..
                Maps appearing on TV and in whatever movie newsreels were still playing showed blocks of red spreading around the globe, engulfing the Free World.
                So pardon me if after so many years of this kind of hyperbole I'm sceptical of the extent of the danger ISIS poses to the US.

                •  Agreed (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ImpeachKingBushII

                  The middle east is a cesspool of incestuous ideologies all under one umbrella.  The problem lies in their need for a murderous leader who will terrorize, kill and torture them to keep them under control.  

                  When we took out this Sadam "monster" as we called him, the various sub-divisions of this group began to kill, torture and commit mass murder against each other.  On any given day one or another of them is on top.  With ISIS, here we go again.  

                  On any given day we must constantly adjust our support depending on who's on top at that moment.  I give up.  I demonstrated against the war and will not support more of the same no matter who is president etc...  

                  "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                  by cowdab on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:00:09 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Sometimes there really is a wolf. n/t (0+ / 0-)

                  GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

                  by G2geek on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 12:09:35 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  no, it's Ralph Nader who should be... (0+ / 0-)

                .... the subject of any such law.

                His narcissistic egotistical spoiled spoiler mentality spoiled the election.

                The rest was Newtonian physics.

                GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

                by G2geek on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 12:11:03 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  ISIS is already falling apart (24+ / 0-)

          The killing of the American journalist is a desperation move on their part.

          Think about it:  Here's someone they'd had held for nearly two years, as a bargaining chip.  (They demanded an obscenely high ransom for him, one that never would have been met even if the US policy wasn't to ignore ransom demands.)

          We're talking about a group that got kicked out of Jordan, then failed to topple Assad even with tons of backing from the Saudis, Israel, and even the US, and is now losing all the territory it gained in the Sunni Triangle -- the freaking Sunni Triangle, the place that should be most welcoming to it -- because of its assholish ways.

          Here is some basic reality on ISIS:

          http://what-is-is.blogspot.com/...

          http://pando.com/...

          And note that it's now even lost control of the dam it was going to hold for ransom.

          Visit http://theuptake.org/ for Minnesota news as it happens.

          by Phoenix Woman on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:45:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Spot on! n/t (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dallasdoc, redwagon, Phoenix Woman

            … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

            by mosesfreeman on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 11:50:34 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Israel backing ISIS? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DeniseDenefyou

            Where'd ya get that one?

            My impression is that as much as the Israelis hate the Ba'athists, they like stability on their borders more.  And the Ba'athists, while enemies, have kept their boarder well guarded, and generally have kept their UN agreements from after the 1973 war.  Conflict between Israel and Syria has been highly contained for more than 40 years.  Syria will stir things up in Lebanon if Israel does not respect its interests there.  Israel will bomb targets related to the arming of Hezbollah in Lebanon.   But neither side has gone beyond relatively small actions against the other since the mid 1970s.  It isn't peace.  But it isn't a very hot war either.

            Don't confuse the occasional back and forth between Assad's regime and the IDF for any belief that aiding the overthrow of Assad might help Israel.  Think of various Israeli and Syrian actions as the delivery of diplomatic messages by, well, other means.  

            Also:  the Iraqi Kurds have good relations with Israel.

            I'm curious what you're taking for evidence here, and I'd love to hear you produce some.  But I'm pretty sure that if you have any, you're misinterpreting it.  Israeli national interests run counter to the story you're telling here.

            Israel doesn't need and doesn't want a militant Islamist Sunni regime on its border -- compare Hamas and Gaza.  Assad is the devil they know.

            To be on the wrong side of Dick Cheney is to be on the right side of history.

            by mbayrob on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:12:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Recruiting video (0+ / 0-)

            filmed with multiple cameras, boom mics, and edited - they will continue to polish it. That's why they do it.

          •  when the first dose of antibiotics... (0+ / 0-)

            .... makes the patient start to feel better, what should they do?

            Stop taking the antibiotics now, or finish the entire course?

            GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

            by G2geek on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 12:12:34 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Actually it's their method of operation (0+ / 0-)

            They count on horrible high publicity actions such as killing of an American journalist.  And no they are not falling apart.  If anything they are gaining strength by continuing to capture military equipment.

            "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Riane Eisler

            by noofsh on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 04:48:48 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Christin (12+ / 0-)
          If you advocate ignoring them like Bush Co ignored Alqueada.  Which you are. That is stunning.
          We spend a $1tillion to have the NSA / CIA/ Pentagon up every communication apparatus across the globe while putting a spook under every rock , and then people are going to complain we are ignoring terrorism issues

          Bush's incompetence was as clear as a mountain , you are comparing THAT to dem voters reality checking the pentagon war mongers , now that is stunning

          Beer Drinkers & Hell Raisers

          by Patango on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:28:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  We knew perfectly well how dangerous (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Nada Lemming, Propter Hoc

          al Qaeda was in August 2001. Exactly how dangerous. I'd bet you were one of the assholes braying for blood right after the attack based on your fear mongering now.

          My preferred pronoun is 'They', what's yours?

          by AoT on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 11:32:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  depends on what you mean by a threat (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          G2geek

          if you mean can they attack this country in a large scale way then they are no threat.  if you mean that they can destabilize much of the middle east then i submit that they already did that.

          They are a barbaric bunch.  I think we need to take them seriously and do what we can to bust them up now.

          "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Riane Eisler

          by noofsh on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 04:26:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Other Islamic groups are backing away from ISIS (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kurt

          The latest example being the Nusra Front, which made a point today of releasing Peter Theo Curtis, a journalist they'd held for nearly two years (just as James Foley had been held for nearly two years), to a United Nations representative:

          http://www.nytimes.com/...

          Visit http://theuptake.org/ for Minnesota news as it happens.

          by Phoenix Woman on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 06:07:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  That big, bright yellow ball in the sky is pretty (24+ / 0-)

        cool, I mean hot!  Photosynthesis, baby!  Photoelectric cells!

        My father is a physicist, and when I was a little preschool girl, he took out a magnifying glass and set a tiny piece of paper on fire on the sidewalk.  He told us never to look directly into the sun, but taught us that life on earth depended on the star we call, the sun.

        I studied physics while Jimmy Carter was in office hoping to work in clean energy, but then Reagan switched the funding of scientific research and development to war implements so as to pillage the oil that is left on this raped, abused, and polluted planet.

        Thank you for this logical and sane diary amidst the chickens running around with their heads cut off and their feathers on fire.

         

        Information is the currency of democracy. ~Thomas Jefferson

        by CIndyCasella on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:42:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, although Saudi Arabia (10+ / 0-)

      originally funded the progenitors of ISIS, ISIS itself scares them half to death.

      In the event, Saudi Arabia adopted both policies, encouraging the jihadis as a useful tool of Saudi anti-Shia influence abroad but suppressing them at home as a threat to the status quo. It is this dual policy that has fallen apart over the last year.
      Almost like Neo-Cons funding the progenitors of the Taliban, and other previous American disasters in Asia, Africa, Latin America….
      The enemy of your enemy is not your bitch.

      Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

      by Mokurai on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:16:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  IS is a serious threat to the Saudis -- also to (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        charliehall2, redwagon

        Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, and Turkey. It is not a threat to the USA.

        •  It could still pull off a major terrorist attack (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          G2geek

          here in the US.

          Given the NRA's complete unwillingness to prevent terrorist wannabes from accumulating huge arsenals of weapons, we have no idea whether or not some ISIS-like group -- or some right wing Christian group, for that matter -- is stockpiling semiautomatic weapons in large numbers, totally legally. The only real surprise is that none of the terrorist groups has taken advantage of that nice leniency in US law. Yet.

          •  So the world is a dangerous place. Big deal. (0+ / 0-)

            That is no excuse for rampant paranoia in US foreign and domestic policy, and media.

          •  It would be a big change in tactics (0+ / 0-)

            These people are very good at a certain kind of relatively low-tech mobile warfare.  They combine stolen artillery with what are really just pick-up trucks with mounted guns.

            Al Queida was all about setting up terrorist cells in a variety of places, and involved long term, patient planning of spectacular incidents. Think of their leadership as managers of a sort of offensive intelligence service.  And they built their networks out of the USSR war in Afghanistan.

            ISIS, however non-conventional it may be, is mostly a light weight, very mobile, Toyota-pick up cavalry force.  They don't have networks in Europe or the US they can use.  Their people don't have great skills in large scale attacks.  I don't think that their leadership is anywhere as well educated or as elite.

            It's not stupid to worry about attacks in future. But I don't think they prevent a much greater threat to the US or Europe than any other local insurgency in the region.

            To be on the wrong side of Dick Cheney is to be on the right side of history.

            by mbayrob on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:25:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  ISIS is a threat (56+ / 0-)

      ... because the US defense industry and the Security Industrial Complex need a threat.  Without a threat, how can they hit their quarterly growth numbers and keep the stock prices up?  How can certain, uh, patriots earn a million a month in ex post facto bribes consulting fees?  How can certain powerful politicians at the head of all this shit keep telling us that we need to keep doing it, and nobody's going to look at the records of all that porn you've been watching anyway.  Don't worry.  Just don't stay too long at the demonstration, and for God's sake don't insist that Wall Street sponsors deserve some jail time.  We've given the police plenty of new shiny military hardware to deal with the likes of that.

      Buying the fear propaganda is choosing cowardice.  A cowardly people will not preserve freedom.  That is what we are, and freedom is going away.  Doesn't seem to matter much who gets elected, except to a few of our body parts.  The rest of our bodies, and our minds, are losing freedom anyway, under the Red Team or the Blue Team.  Because we let them take it away.

      The opposite of poverty is not wealth. The opposite of poverty is justice. ---Bryan Stevenson

      by Dallasdoc on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:24:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's Syria 2.0, a re-packaging (17+ / 0-)

        of what didn't sell last year. The chemical weapons meme didn't fly, in fact the cry for war failed miserably, so the MIC bided its time, as we said it would, and is selling a new and improved version. Who couldn't hate ISIS? They are the perfect villain.

        I predict we'll strike against them, but "mission creep" will allow us to turn on Assad soon enough, and anybody else on the MIC shit list. I don't necessarily oppose a few airstrikes, but if they start talking about escalation, be advised it's bullshit.

        … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

        by mosesfreeman on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:52:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They're not talking escalation, they're doing it (26+ / 0-)

          A few hundred advisors here, a few special forces teams there, and soon we'll have a few thousand Americans on the ground.  No small number of them in boots.  Anybody who remembers back a little over 50 years knows how that can turn out.

          We got tossed out of Iraq in 2011  because the Iraqis wouldn't give our soldiers the right to kill their citizens in the streets with impunity anymore.  Obama took the credit, but he merely accepted the fait accompli Bush handed him, and that the Iraqis refused to renegotiate.  Now that we have a new puppet in place, I'm sure that little difficulty will be ironed out shortly.

          The opposite of poverty is not wealth. The opposite of poverty is justice. ---Bryan Stevenson

          by Dallasdoc on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:57:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And still not a fucking clue of what happens.. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kurt

            When we leave.. I guess after we kill all the bad men in ISIS, Iraqi Sunnis will happily accept the Iraqi government? For all the differences between 2003 and today, I still don't see much of a plan.

        •  exactly - the domestic meme is grafting the EU's (6+ / 0-)

          worry about their muslim citizens going to fight onto US media and it is designed for LoFo consumption relative to defending the border with Mexico, ignoring how if anyone was going to "sneak in" there's far too many other ways they'd do it....

          There's a big CNN fear graphic on the screen right this moment asking "Does ISIS have cells in the US?"

          Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "If we appear to seek the unattainable, then let it be known that we do so to avoid the unimaginable." (@eState4Column5)

          by annieli on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 11:44:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  It's Syria 2.0, a re-packaging (6+ / 0-)

          it was August 2013 when Pelosi and Debbie W/S were hawking war on Syria with their "think of the children" and I can't get the children out of my mind"

          The chemical weapons meme didn't fly, in fact the cry for war failed miserably, so the MIC bided its time, as we said it would, and is selling a new and improved version.
          And  we are again in August 2014

          -

          _______________The DOD/ War Department, which consumes 22% of the national budget, is the world's largest employer with 3.2 million employees.

          by allenjo on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 12:26:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm sure they're using a metric to (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            allenjo, Dallasdoc, mosesfreeman

            roll out these memes - one which uses calculations of the average American attention span, at least.

          •  OMG! Did Debbie and Nancy (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dallasdoc, dfarrah, SixSixSix, allenjo

            Cry over the children in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, or any of the other the US is killing while dropping bombs from drones?
            Or did they cry for the children in Gaza Israel killed, or did they cry for those children when they all voted to restock Israel's weapons?  
            How very disgusting!  
            Oh well, Albright thought the Iraqi sanctions that killed. 5000,00 children was worth it.
            What the hell is wrong with people who have no problem when from US invasions slaughter millions of innocent people?  
            Good Gawd, that comment makes me sick!  

            "I find it incredible that Keith Alexander can sell secrets and is free to make a huge profit without being slammed with Espionage Act charges and Snowden is stateless" Jesselyn Radack.

            by snoopydawg on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 05:14:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  No American politician can cry for the children... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              snoopydawg

              Of Gaza for too long, at least without blaming them for their own murders...

              To be fair, many of our elected officials are as dumb as fucking rocks, so their lack of consistency shouldn't be all that surprising. I don't think anyone looks at DWS as an intellectual heavyweight. But yes, I agree that it's disgusting.

              •  Remember when Obama shed tears for the (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Nada Lemming, SixSixSix

                20 children killed at Sandy Hook?  
                The next day, one of his drones killed 20 children in Pakistan. I wonder if he shed any years for them or even thought about them?  
                I remember DWS from seeing her on Maddow's show. I thought she came across as an intelligent woman, but then like you wrote, I found she dumb as fucking rocks. Especially the way she is running the DLC.
                Our government has no problem sending our soldiers to other countries to kill people they haven't met and are no threat to us.
                And why do they start wars and illegal invasions?  
                So the corporations who bribe them to do their bidding can steal those Countries' resources.
                And we get to pay for it, as do the soldiers by either dying or coming home without their limbs or the minds.
                And this has been going on for centuries.
                I just don't understand why people join the military these days.
                How can they not know these wars are started for bogus reasons?  
                I wish those that are thinking of joining would visit a VA hospital 1st to see what might be in store for them.

                "I find it incredible that Keith Alexander can sell secrets and is free to make a huge profit without being slammed with Espionage Act charges and Snowden is stateless" Jesselyn Radack.

                by snoopydawg on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:31:55 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, its about keeping the stock price up (9+ / 0-)

        and the billions of government funding flowing to  the CEO and  Wall Street... and then more into the election funds  of both major parties.

        Move Single Payer Forward? Join 18,000 Doctors of PNHP and 185,000 member National Nurses United

        by divineorder on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:57:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Did our military-industrial complex (9+ / 0-)

        tell ISIS to slaughter the thousands they already have this year? Did our defense industry put the knife in the hand of the terrorist who cut off a journalist's head? ISIS is not some imaginary construct. They exist. In the nightmares of millions and in the real world as well.

        •  I just saw one in my toilet! (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Patango, mosesfreeman, allenjo, dfarrah

          I preach the church without Christ, where the lame don't walk, the blind don't see and what's dead stays that way! Hazel Motes in "Wise Blood" (Flannery O'Connor)

          by chalatenango on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:16:50 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  They do, and many others besides (9+ / 0-)

          Look at the horrors going on in the Congo, or Honduras, or myriad other places where people just as bad as ISIS exist.  The point is that we can't fix everything around the world.  We focus on the Middle East and meddle there, earning enemies galore, because of oil and the money to be made from it.  

          We are an imperial power, and as such we will always earn the hatred of those we impose our power upon.  The enmity turned on us in the Middle East is something that we have spent decades earning, and we're presently earning more.

          The opposite of poverty is not wealth. The opposite of poverty is justice. ---Bryan Stevenson

          by Dallasdoc on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:36:37 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And how many soldiers from those (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dallasdoc, dfarrah, Kingsmeg, devis1, kurt

            Countries has the US trained at the School of Americas which cost $30 million a year?  
            doc2, can you imagine what the world would be like if the US didn't invade so many countries on the false pretext of spreading democracy, or over throwing the leaders of countries that already have democracy?  
            The US has tried or succeeded 61 coups since the end of WW 2.
            And it does them so the corporations can steal their resources.
            Why can't they try to treaties or trade agreements like China does?  
            Butler told us in the 30's that he was just muscle for the corporations and we get to pay for it.

            "I find it incredible that Keith Alexander can sell secrets and is free to make a huge profit without being slammed with Espionage Act charges and Snowden is stateless" Jesselyn Radack.

            by snoopydawg on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 05:25:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  and we are also engaged in... (0+ / 0-)

            ... Central Africa, though quietly, and in the Americas, though with less notice in these pages.

            The only other country with the resources to do so on a comparable scale is China.  Shall we take up a petition to the Chinese leadership to get more engaged?

            GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

            by G2geek on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 12:24:28 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  doc2 (8+ / 0-)
          Did our military-industrial complex (1+ / 0-)

          tell ISIS to slaughter the thousands they already have this year?

          Dems allowed Head Start to be gutted to pay for the last Iraq war , shall dems take the 2% of the budget that represents SNAP to pay for this war?

          We can just add that 2% to the 65% of the budget that represents military and spook spending ?

          Beer Drinkers & Hell Raisers

          by Patango on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:38:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Did our military-industrial complex (13+ / 0-)

          destroy the equilibrium of the entire Middle East and create a vacuum that allowed ISIS to slaughter the thousands they already have this year?

          Yes. Yes, they did.

          Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters. -- President Grover Cleveland, 1888

          by edg on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:42:46 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  "ISIS" consists of punks in pickup trucks (6+ / 0-)

          That's why they didn't chase the Yezidis up the mountain.  They couldn't.  Look at the areas they took and are now losing: flatland populated by Sunnis.

          Yet they are such twits they've pissed off their fellow Sunnis and managed to get Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds united against them.

          In other words, if there finally is a united and democratic Iraq, it may well because the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds found a common enemy.

          Visit http://theuptake.org/ for Minnesota news as it happens.

          by Phoenix Woman on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:43:04 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You mean to say they might not need (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dallasdoc, dfarrah, Kingsmeg, dansmith17

            America's military? Does that mean we don't get to be "an indispensable force for good" again?

            •  Iraq arms (0+ / 0-)

              Iraq when if found it really needed some arms, bought some second hand aircraft from Russia which they delivered within a few weeks and they were in action immediately.

              They already had on order some F-16, from before US forces left, but they are still not due to be delivered for YEARS? The US wanted to sell brand new top of the line aircraft to provide work for the factory in Texas and bonus for Lokheed shareholders. If they actually wanted to get the Iraqi Air Force up to speed quickly they could have provided second hand USAF aircraft and done so at any time between 2004-14, but that was not the point, the point was to make money!

          •  Even that spokesman (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dallasdoc, Thomas Twinnings

            The Saudi who was going to "raise the ISIS banner over Washington" is dead. They are losing on all fronts, and I think they will evaporate completely soon enough, until they need to be reconstituted, that is.

            … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

            by mosesfreeman on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 11:56:01 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The ISIS losers from Europe and the US-not good (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              G2geek, dansmith17

              as ISIS implodes as it will... there will be a lot of dream deferred crazies sllinking back to their countries of origin smoldering and liable to want to do something... not a big problem but there will almost certainly be isolated "blaze of glory" incidents...

              Pogo & Murphy's Law, every time. Also "Trust but verify" - St. Ronnie (hah...)

              by IreGyre on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 03:37:31 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  they truly deserve comparison with Nazis. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          doc2

          Attempted genocide of that small Christian sect.

          Blitzkrieg tactics.

          Gratuitous brutality: beheadings and crucifixions galore.

          Rape as tactic of war: mass kidnappings of women who are subsequently "sold" to misogynist pig males.

          And I'd bet dollars to donuts that the guy who sawed off Foley's head for the camera, got a unique sexual-sadistic little buzz as he did so.  

          These people are monsters.

          They deserve to be eradicated.  

          Not for our sake, but for the sake of protecting all the people who they could do to in the near future, as they have done to many others in the recent past.

          GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

          by G2geek on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 12:22:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  It's all about creating boogeymen... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dallasdoc, dansmith17

        ISIS is obviously a terrible group, repressive and disgusting, but the idea that they present a serious existential threat to the United States would be laughable if there weren't so many people ready to believe it. It's not as if the entire region, aside from ISIS, is a bastion of social liberalism and tolerance. They may be particularly nasty, but I don't think their ideology is particularly unique in that part of the world. Hell, look at some of the horribly repressive regimes we consider allies.

    •  A modest rise in oil prices (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      divineorder, Calamity Jean, Kingsmeg

      Is exactly what the world needs right now. Bombs away!

      There's a difference between a responsible gun owner and one that's been lucky so far.

      by BeerNotWar on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:39:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  anything that reduces use of fossil fuels.... (0+ / 0-)

        .... is good.  

        GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

        by G2geek on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 12:26:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And reduces or eliminates our presence in the M... (0+ / 0-)

          And reduces or eliminates our presence in the ME...even better.

          •  except that isolationism doesn't work. (0+ / 0-)

            We should cease our dependence on Middle Eastern oil in order to remove the leverage that the OPEC countries have on us, notably Saudi.  

            But, mark my words, if the US and Europe completely disengage from the region, there will be regional wars that include the use of nuclear and biological weapons.  And there will be uses of bioweapons by terrorists against Europe and the US.  This is readily apparent to anyone who is even moderately well-read about conflicts in the region.  

            Religious fundamentalist extremism is an inherently expansionist and intolerant ideology.  When backed by state power as it is in the Middle East (e.g. Wahhabi in Saudi), it becomes weaponized and capable of waging war on a significant scale.  Think of Texas Governor Rick Perry becoming president, without a Congress to check his power, and if that doesn't make you poo in your pants go do an Ixquick search for "New Apostolic Reformation," of which he is a member.  Or imagine Sarah Palin as president.  That's what they have in the Middle East.  Lots and lots of it.  That is not something we can ignore or walk away from.  

            GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

            by G2geek on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 06:53:45 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Follow the money (9+ / 0-)

      I feel like someone's "double dipping" in ways they couldn't dream of with Al-Qaeda. For example, whomever's laundering money for ISIS is no doubt also advertising on on News Corp, right? Who's AIPAC's horse in this race? The networks seem to have lost interest in Gaza overnight.

      I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

      by CFAmick on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:42:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Before we overthrew govt in Iran in 1953, & helped (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      liberte, OCLefty, snoopydawg, kurt

      Israel against Egypt in 1973, we might have tried actual diplomacy and goodwill in various countries. Also after 9-11. We still could. It might help but if not, if you think Arabs are just crazy bastards, and we aren't, as we have been conditioned to think, in movies & various highlights of their power struggles, as with Saddam, would higher gas prices have cost us more (in money, lives and foreign relationships) than the trillions spent on the wars & military presence?  That conversation is always controlled by the profiteers and their operatives-Cheney, Wolfowitz, Elliot Abrams, many other long-term evildoers & soldiers for corporate criminals.
      I have read that oil companies like Exxon-Mobil and other global cos. outside Iraq, finally got access to those huge reserves of high quality oil, and that was the main goal in Iraq. Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Rice, et al, accomplished their goal. A tiny group of people profited, and will again. "They" (Arab countries) own the oil, through a stroke of luck. Many of those countries are on the Neocon hit list.
      People of Iraq, and Syria-lose. People of America-lose, and get agitated, and have just enough doubt to give the MIC carte blanche, again.
      I think this writer is making the point that it is not ISIS that has or will cause us trouble nearly as much as those who shape our policies. They aren't all Republican but most of them seem to be the ones doing the most damage.

       

      The US ranks 138th out of all 169 voting countries in actual voting. Since 1974, mid-term % of eligible voters who vote avgs. 37%. Democrats would dominate if they did one thing- GOTV. They never do. Curious.

      by Incredulousinusa on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:41:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We tried diplomacy after 9/11 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        G2geek

        but the Taliban wouldn't turn over Bin Laden.

        And the US tried diplomacy with Egypt and Israel, multiple times. The US bullied Israel into withdrawing from Sinai and Gaza in 1957 in return for US and UN guarantees that there would not be another war. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Israel was not going to withdraw a second time until the Egyptian government ceased to be hostile. And when it ceased to be hostile, it withdrew and signed a peace treaty.

        The Syrians and Palestinians might want to learn that lesson.

        •  and the settlements on the West bank? No (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Pablo Bocanegra

          there is no going back on those... peace treaty or no peace treaty... ethnic cleansing has become non negotiable.

          Pogo & Murphy's Law, every time. Also "Trust but verify" - St. Ronnie (hah...)

          by IreGyre on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 03:40:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Bull, Charlie (3+ / 0-)

          They offered to turn him over when Bush threatened to invade and he refused.
          Keep making up facts that suit your opinion.

          "I find it incredible that Keith Alexander can sell secrets and is free to make a huge profit without being slammed with Espionage Act charges and Snowden is stateless" Jesselyn Radack.

          by snoopydawg on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 05:33:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Re: We tried diplomacy after 9/11 (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dansmith17, Nada Lemming

          charliehall2 wrote:

          We tried diplomacy after 9/11 but the Taliban wouldn't turn over Bin Laden.
          You've got it exactly backwards.  The Taliban offered to turn over Bin Laden to a neutral third party if the Bush Administration produced proof he was involved in the 9/11 attacks.  Bush told them to go eff themselves.  Bush wanted war and he got it.
    •  Great! It would speed up the transition (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JeffW, G2geek
      I keep thinking ISIS could be a threat if our continued bombing of them pisses off their financial backers, who are supposedly our allies, and they raise oil prices or some such.
      to electric cars and renewable energy in general.  

      "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." -- Sen Carl Schurz 1872

      by Calamity Jean on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 12:29:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, from what I've read, ISSIS is doing (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      brightlights, G2geek

      very well on its own.  They are enjoying 2 to 4 million dollars a day from oil they have have taken over in Iraq.  They refine it in Syria and it is trucked out through Tukey.   Evidently, they are stealing 30 to 40 barrels a day.

       Britain and the U.S. seems to be standing alone in refusing to pay ransom to terrorists.  Our European allies have contributed to ISSIS coffers, (Spain and France) to the tune of millions for release of their journalists.

      Also, through extortion, funds by donation laundered through charitable organization, ISSIS is said to be the richest terrorist organization ever.

      I believe the threat of terrorism brought to our soil from ISSIS would be those who are reportedly members of this horrific group of killers who have American passports and/or Visas.  We don't really have to worry about them coming up from our border with Mexico because that would be too unreliable for them and their chance of being caught too great.

      The danger is flying into this country on a commercial plane because they have the proper papers, just like those that came in by air on 9/11.

      •  Don't forget the central bank in Mosul loot, (0+ / 0-)

        they got a half billion looting that.

      •  And 11 airliners just went missing... (0+ / 0-)

        ... from an airport in Libya.  

        Airliners that could be repainted to look like those of any legitimate commercial airline, and then loaded up with explosives and flown into targets.

        All the "don't worry, be happy (and hate America)" types will have pie in their faces or worse, if there's a terrorist attack.  But if the FBI intercepts the plot and arrests the terrorists, then they'll complain about "entrapment."  Watch and see.

        GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

        by G2geek on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 12:32:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  this diary from last year seems appropos: (35+ / 0-)

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    The US has a vanishlngly small number of deaths per year from terrorism, is the target of a vanishingly small number of total global terrorist attacks, and the total number of terrorist attacks and deaths worldwide is itself vanishingly small. That is the size of the "threat" that we are, as a society, peeing our collective pants over.  . . .

    What we CAN rationally argue over is how "threatening" that "threat" actually is, and how large the "response" to it should be, given the risk analysis. We've already seen that even the most alarmist estimates cite fewer than 1,000 Americans killed per year from "terrorism oh noez!!!" To put that in perspective, about 1,500 people win at least $1 million in state lotteries each year in the US (http://wiki.answers.com/....).  Yes, that's right---according to the cold hard numbers, you (as in YOU, yourself, individually, the one peeing your pants because the terrorists want to kill you oh noez !!!!) have a 50% higher chance of becoming a millionaire by winning the lottery this year than you do of being killed by a terrorist attack this year. Each and every year. Think about that for a moment.

    In the end, reality always wins.

    by Lenny Flank on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:38:13 AM PDT

  •  ISIS is a threat (7+ / 0-)

    just like Taliban-run Afghanistan was a threat.

  •  Can't help but think, "Here we go again." (13+ / 0-)

    How many mortal threats have we been pummelled over the head about in the past 12 years? Sam war, different decade. It's all a racket.

    "You are not even aware of what is possible. The extent of their capabilities is horrifying."Edward Snowden -6.62, -6.92

    by CanyonWren on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:40:39 AM PDT

    •  Yes its a racket for sure. (9+ / 0-)

      ISIS is not a threat to the US that's true.

      The cruelty and savagery of this group is what concerns me. I can't say we should do nothing. I support air strikes to the degree that they can take out larger artillery and open up roads. But I also think that Americans going in there would only create a new recruiting point for these thugs. The peoples of the region need to put this down.

      A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

      by onionjim on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:50:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree with your first statement. Endless war (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        onionjim, maryabein, native

        is our destiny I'm afraid, whether there is a threat or not. Expect new tightened security measures "in the interest of National Security" in 3, 2, 1…….

        "You are not even aware of what is possible. The extent of their capabilities is horrifying."Edward Snowden -6.62, -6.92

        by CanyonWren on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:58:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Who is a threat to the U.S. over there? (0+ / 0-)

        Are there ANY groups involved in bombing and killing and at war with other groups in the Middle East a threat to the U.S.?  We sure as hell get involved in some of those things through direct military involvement, funding our "Islamic friends" in some of those areas and in providing military equipment to those we choose to side with.

        So, why is it that ISIS isn't a threat?  I'm pretty sure our military and CIA folks have a very close eye and probably are developing a strategy how to handle this group.

  •  "hand over freedoms for an illusion of safety" (22+ / 0-)

    Al Qaeda succeeded 100%.  And now ISIS.  The military/intelligence/industrial complex is champing at the bit.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action. UID: 9742

    by Shockwave on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:43:02 AM PDT

  •  Sept 11 was 13 years ago and yet (8+ / 0-)

    we haven't killed all the islamist radicals. I'm starting to believe that goal is impossible... but what do i know? I mean, we killed all the nazis and they've never been heard from since!

  •  Well said (13+ / 0-)

    ISIS is to the middle east as the Gambino family was to New York - an organized crime family, and little more.  Did the Gambino family pose a threat to the existence of the United States?  No.  Does ISIS?  Even more no, because of the distance factor.

    You used the right term: thugs, not "revolutionaries" or "jihadists".  

    As a side bar note, I still don't understand why Obama picked a Republican to run the military establishment in the U.S.  I just don't.  Wesley Clark wasn't available?

    It will not get easier before it gets harder. But the harder it gets, the easier it will be.

    by Richard Cranium on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:44:44 AM PDT

  •  THE MOOOOOOOOSLMIIIMS ARE COMING!!!! (9+ / 0-)

    Yet again. And again, and again, and again.

    Next Boko Haram is going to have plans to kidnap people in the US I'm sure.

    The press never refuses to be Islamophobic about these things.

    My preferred pronoun is 'They', what's yours?

    by AoT on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:44:54 AM PDT

    •  The world (most of us at least) (6+ / 0-)

      is aware that there is a particularly dangerous and brutal form of a religion that is a threat to all peaceful people. The fact that there are people who hype the danger of Islam in general or even of the present threat to the US of ISIS does NOT mean that ISIS is not a very real threat if not checked soon.

      The press does not have to do much hyping when the world gets to watch a European Moslem fanatic take a knife from his pocket and happily decapitate and peaceful journalist. Wake the fuck up.

      •  No, you and others are overly afraid (9+ / 0-)

        of a small group of people who have never had significant amount of power.

        The press does not have to do much hyping when the world gets to watch a European Moslem fanatic take a knife from his pocket and happily decapitate and peaceful journalist. Wake the fuck up.
        Yep, they've got good PR and you're buying it. Congratulations? You believe about them exactly what they want you to.

        Is it a group of abhorrent men doing abhorrent things? Yes. Is it any sort of threat to the US? No.

        I have my eyes open and I'm well awake.

        My preferred pronoun is 'They', what's yours?

        by AoT on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:22:30 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm sure (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Jon Says

          Your sources at the Cia keep you informed.  You have no clue if they are a threat or not period. Or do you know something top secret that the rest of us on this blog don't seem to know about. Or did you think AL quaeda was not a threat either and anyone could have pulled off nine eleven. But the most ridiculous thing I have read in this diary of nothing more than one in the sky opinions is you skating that because people know that all Qaeda and Isis are sociopaths sick murderers and threats to this country and their own.... Means they are practicing fear and hatred of Islam and mislead.  That is ridiculous and utterly false.  If not a bizarre thing to say.

          "Is a dream a lie if it don't come true...Or is it something worse... That sends me down to the river... Though I know the river is dry". The Boss.

          by Christin on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 11:00:20 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, the CIa says we should be afraid for (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Nada Lemming, Pablo Bocanegra

            our lives. I'll take that under consideration given their past history of lies. And yes, in spite of what you might claim, this sort of fear mongering is Islamophobia. I don't see anyone attacking the Turkish government for it's treatment of the Kurds. In fact, the only time I see people criticize the Turkish government has been about the actions of the current Islamist government.

            There's angry Arabs/Muslims and the Media will make damn sure we know about. Too many here do their part to help.

            My preferred pronoun is 'They', what's yours?

            by AoT on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 11:27:16 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  I'm not afraid (3+ / 0-)

          but I'm not turning my back.

          Some people here thought the Tea Party was a joke, harmless, foolish, doomed to fail. They may yet fail, if they haven't already, but in the meantime, they sure have left their mark.

          It doesn't hurt us to be eternally vigilant.

  •  The threat from Ebola and Malnutrition (17+ / 0-)

    in America dwarfs the threat of terrorism, not to mention the probability of being wounded or killed by stray bullets flying around by cop or non-cop.

    Let's get real. The existential threat to our way of life is HERE as our corporations continue to invest elsewhere.

    And yet, somehow we manage to spend a trillion a year on non-threats and next to nothing on real threats. Time for a complete attitude adjustment in America.

    Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

    by OregonOak on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:45:04 AM PDT

    •  "OUR corporations"? (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Bronx59, k9disc, Orinoco, Calamity Jean

      LOL!

      OUR corporations...how quaint and naive.

      don't always believe what you think

      by claude on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:58:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, "Our." (5+ / 0-)

        If anyone cares to read the charters for these US based corporations, they would see that they have been issued by the US Government and the IRS.

        If they want to move entirely, then yes, they should go. And if they try anything such as usury or robbery from foreign soil, then we will deal with them for what they are; international terrorist cabals threatening US economic interests. But we dont have to pay them to use us and rob us.

        Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

        by OregonOak on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:08:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, the charters are almost exclusively issued (0+ / 0-)

          by states, especially Delaware, which maintains the best system of contract law courts in the country, but tends strongly to favor corporations over natural persons.

          Well, there is a very small number of Federal corporations carrying out Federal functions like the Fed, USPS, FDIC, Freddie Mac, and Fanny Mae. Corporations in DC had to have Federal charters before 1800. Congress used to chargave it up in 1992ds, and other corporations, but gave it up in 1992.

          Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

          by Mokurai on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:11:24 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And States are Our States in the United States. (0+ / 0-)

            My point being that Federalism need not trump Federal Law in the case of Corporate Tax Law. Technically, most charters are granted by the States, but the tax benefits are both at the expense of State and Federal income.

            Regardless of the proportion of income lost, there is no need to split hairs. We are talking about a Corporate Governance and Taxation structure at the State level AND the Federal level which has become the Cookie Monster of the United States, gobbling up every possible avenue of social good which we used to be able to provide. States can claim back the Corporate Tax system IF the Federal Government provides leadership, incentives, outright bans on certain practices, and administrative functions which will put Our Corporations back in a framework of Democracy, instead of being a Shadow Plutocracy Government running a Puppet Democracy.

            Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

            by OregonOak on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:48:52 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I have no such faith in the states (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              OregonOak

              I'm holding out for taking the House again, and nuking the filibuster on legislation, so that we can take up Progressive policies that the public already approves of, including much more effective financial and industrial and labor regulation.

              Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

              by Mokurai on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 12:32:18 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I agree. The Federal Government must LEAD. (0+ / 0-)

                For the first time since JFK and LBJ, Democrats in the Executive and Legislative need to lead the states in this United States of America.

                Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

                by OregonOak on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 01:02:47 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Hm, link damage (0+ / 0-)

            It was meant to be something like

            Congress used to charter banks, railroads, and other corporations, but gave it up in 1992.

            Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

            by Mokurai on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 12:29:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  There is no threat from Ebola in America (3+ / 0-)

      Ebola, malaria, and malnutrition in Africa, without question. Malnutrition in the US, yes. Police killing several hundred civilians a year, also yes. Where is that Diary? Oh, yes.

      American police kill one suspect every day

      Also, see my comment with more data in

      Police killings. No one is tracking this?

      where the title turns out not to be the case. It remains true that the US Government does not track police shootings with any accuracy or completeness.

      Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

      by Mokurai on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:00:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There is an economic threat.. (0+ / 0-)

        posed by the widespread belief that travel and business abroad are not safe, and that people who travel abroad are not safe to do business with.

        Ebola itself requires conditions which MOSTLY do not apply in America, although there are some places which approach the transmission vectors, such as homeless communities, communities of sexual exclusion, sex workers, and other kinds of close frequent contact which one can envision having an infection rate which we would not want to see here.

        So, narrowly speaking, you are logically correct that it is unlikely, yet my point is that we are spending a pittance on the  spread of the disease compared to threats which are not even remotely possible, such as ISIS gaining a foothold in our cities and having large weapons here at their disposal.

        My point is about proportionality of threat, and I do believe that Ebola is a threat economically, and in some local communities, physically. No panic button, but lets spend some real money there. It beats weapons.

        Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

        by OregonOak on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:42:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I say, bring back the sabertooth tiger (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blue aardvark, Pluto

    Something will have to hunt the reconstituted mammoths.

    And God said, "Let there be light"; and with a Big Bang, there was light. And God said "Ow! Ow My eyes!" and in a flash God separated light from darkness. "Whew! Now that's better. Now where was I. Oh yea . . ."

    by Pale Jenova on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:45:31 AM PDT

  •  You seem to be very, very confident (26+ / 0-)

    that ISIS is not a threat now or anytime soon, that they are not planning attacks on the US or Europe and that if allowed to expand and grow in power that we will never regret allowing them to do so when we could have relatively easily destroyed them. You may be right. But the level of your certainty is a bit off-putting. This is a question of risk versus reward. There are real risks associated with doing something and with doing nothing, though you seem to view the risk of doing nothing as a joke. As these guys run around Syria and Iraq beheading their enemies, raping and killing their wives, murdering Western journalists, and doing various other unspeakable things, I don't think "calm down and have a scone" is really the best advice progressives who are against human suffering can offer.

    •  The war on terror... (12+ / 0-)

      is MAD for human rights. And we seem intent on firing first.

    •  +1 (4+ / 0-)

      The internet and Twitter have everybody thinking that we can know the truth instantly. That's not the case. We can only know what people want us to believe instantly.

      by SpamNunn on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:52:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You know what? (6+ / 0-)

      You're right.

      We should just bomb into obliteration all these countries who won't do what we tell them to do, like Russia, the Middle East, Gaza, South America, and Africa.

      Just do it and get it over with.  Then, we can control all of the resources in the world without any other pesky governments/people getting in the way.

      [snark]

      The banks have a stranglehold on the political process. Mike Whitney

      by dfarrah on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:54:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I agree with Mark that we often overreact. (8+ / 0-)

      The Patriot Act is a case in point.  However I'm not so sure ISIS is exactly harmless to us and it is certainly not harmless to some of our allies and neighboring countries that are not necessarily our allies, but are needed for stability.

      If ISIS is a prototype of a corporate entity of the future, I'm not so sure I want to remain on this planet. They may have banal aspects (as did Adolf Hitler), but their actions are quite evil and we to some extent or another helped to manufacture them with the war in Iraq.

      That said, I was never that afraid of al-Qaeda.  People get the risk levels very wrong.  It is MUCH more dangerous to drive than that level of danger posed by terrorists, black widow spiders, lightening, or bears, although lightening is probably a more serious threat than any of the others I mentioned.

      Still, an organization that wants to place all Muslims under their control and have all who are not of their same belief system put to death in most unpleasant ways is, at best, a good one for violent psychopaths and needs to be opposed, preferably by the UN as a whole. In fact I'd say that Russia and China may have more to fear in the long run as they have populations that might ally themselves with ISIS if they are successful.

      •  Yes, we do usually overreact. (10+ / 0-)

        That is true. And Dick Cheney is almost always wrong. And there is too much fear of our neighborhood Imams.

        But none of that means that ISIS is not a threat to us and to peaceful people everywhere, and that we should not take action against them. And certainly none of that could lead a thinking person to the conclusion that ISIS is "zero" threat, none, and that we should all just calm down and ignore them.

        •  I agree. (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          waytac, doc2, delver, marina

          We have to take them seriously and at the same time we cannot allow ourselves to be panicked by them.  There is something to be said for a middle way here.

          I don't think we can ignore them completely and have things turn our well.  I fully support the attacks on ISIS that we have launched so far.  If the Kurds had an air force I might think differently, but I don't think that we can ignore such barbaric acts as ISIS perpetrates and call ourselves civilized.  At the same time we must be very careful about this as the whole area is a quagmire.  Against ISIS we have very strange allies - the Turks, the Israelis, Iran, the European Union, the Syrian government (if you can call it a government) and probably Russia and China, who have more to loose in the long run than we do.  I gather that some of the groups we call terrorists are afraid of ISIS and some of our so-called allies like Saudi Arabia Kuwait, and Qatar, are supporting them under the table, sometimes not so clandestinely. You need a program to figure who is supporting who in a given international crisis.

          It is a mess and caution is very important, but no I don't think ISIS is harmless to us.

      •  They Are Extreme Wahhabists Fanatics Set Up & (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        maryabein, divineorder, dansmith17

        by Saudi Arabia just like al Qaeda and the Taliban. Reportedly there are less than 20K (max.) ISIL fighters. Most of the earlier reports said their numbers were less than 10k.

        Since the Shrub removed U.S. troops from Saudi Arabia in 2003, as bin Laden had demanded, there haven't been any elaborate attempts here - and I don't believe such an attempt would have been kept secret.( I'm discounting entirely the rag-tag shoe bombers or FL dupes too poor to get to their target in Chicago.) IMO unless we commit similarly grave offenses against the Sunni extremists, why would they bother? They've got Shia to kill.

        Our politicians will not openly discuss the Saudis as the root of radical Islam. That being so, all the anti-terrorism furor is a sham. No matter what we do, Riyadh will continue plotting and gunning for Teheran (the Shia).

    •  "Relatively easily destroyed them" (7+ / 0-)

      Could you define "relatively easily" for me? Is the price tag on that in the hundreds of billions, or merely tens of billions? Is the butchers bill in six figures, or only five? What's the time table for this operation? One year? Five years? Ten?

      And while you're doing that calculus, tell me the odds that, when we've completed this relatively easy task, the result won't be the rise of some group worse that this one, inspired by the death of thousands of more parents, children, friends, and neighbors to hate us even more. Or that the result at home won't be the expansion of invasive oversight, the diminishment of privacy, and the starvation of vital programs to feed the cost of this relatively easy task.

      Then tell me how certain you are that "calm down and have a scone" is a less progressive message than proposing to definitely kill people on the far side of the world on the off chance that someone, somehow, at some time might try to hurt us.

      •  Money? That is your primary concern, (5+ / 0-)

        money? And we complain about the corporations, and about our interest in the oil. Who gives a fuck about ten billion dollars if attacking them is the right policy decision?

        Now, when it comes to that decision, you are correct that it is not obvious whether the blowback of a "go" decision could end up worse for humanity than the blowback of a "no go" decision. That should be the debate, and a lively one at that. It is a VERY tough decision. But your diary says the opposite; you proclaim that ISIS is no threat to us, absolutely zero.

        That is an extraordinary claim, and that is what I find embarrassing for Dkos about your diary (in addition to the mocking tone). There are well-financed religious fanatics taking over villages and committing unspeakable atrocities on men, women, and children as we speak. Calm down and have a scone is a disgustingly dismissive attitude toward active genocide. Seriously, is this what you want permanently stored on the internet under your name?

      •  Don't be so pessimistic. Bombing and (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mokurai, gzodik, slinkerwink, charliehall2

        droning ISIS is Iraq and Syria can have an impact.  The Kurds and the Iraqis want us to.

      •  Relatively compared with trillions of dollars (0+ / 0-)

        spent making the civil wars worse in Afghanistan and Iraq, with thousands of US military deaths, uncounted local civilian deaths, and millions of refugees. Perhaps comparable to Libya or bombing Serbia or intervening in Rwanda.

        Relative is not a number. It can be a comparison, or a ratio.

        As to the scone, yes. One of the best pieces of military advice I have ever seen, reported in The Psychology of Computer Programming, by Gerald Weinberg, is that when faced with a possibly catastrophic systems failure (not in combat and not involving possible nuclear launches), the first thing to do is to have a cup of coffee. The idea is to start thinking and if possible sharpen the thought process, rather than dive in and make the situation worse.

        Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

        by Mokurai on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:25:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I don't like agreeing with you. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      marina, charliehall2

      It doesn't sit well.

      But i do.

      "Fighting for us, good. Winning, better. Talking about fighting? Not so good."--Atrios

      by andrewj54 on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:59:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Funny that you care more about a supposed threa... (0+ / 0-)

      Funny that you care more about a supposed threat on the other side of the world than our own militarized cops killing unarmed American teenagers. Did I say funny? I meant scummy.

  •  We need MRAPS in US cities because mines (7+ / 0-)

    ...in Afghanistan.

    When I heard some sheriff on TV a few weeks ago defend MRAPS because people use mines now I thought, is this the end result of a media raised nation?

    Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

    by darthstar on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:46:53 AM PDT

  •  Just Chuck Hagel? (10+ / 0-)

    Every time I turn on the TV "Those western passports will be in American shopping malls with assault weapons"  or "We can't defeat them from the air." Then there are these fantasy horror stories that so remind me of Bush and Cheney making shit up to attack Iraq. "It's going to come home to roost" is the catchphrase.

    It's like the pundit's mission to green light another war by convincing a war weary nation and President that if we don't go boots on the ground right now, then brown people will be blowing up our children soon. I'm so fed up with their warmonger bullshit.

  •  This is they same type of limited thinking that (6+ / 0-)

    allowed GWB to take over all aspects of govt, and subsequently run it into the ground (aided by the events of 9/11).  Security is a voting issue.  Terrorist attacks radicalize the American public.  All ISIS has to do is have a recruit from the U.S., or EU take an AK-47 into an American school (a low tech attack) and voters will turn over the govt to the most anti-Muslim candidate that will stoke their anger.  Leadership requires that the Administration neutralize this threat if for no other reason, to minimize this voting issue.  We don't even have to address the moral issues of intervening to stop mass murder.

    "Because I am a river to my people."

    by lordcopper on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:47:51 AM PDT

  •  Fear must drive TV ratings (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bronx59, divineorder

    Cable news seems to about fear and sensationalism.  Common sense says that there is a lot of bad things that can happen, might happen, or could happen.  However, we have little idea which disaster is going to get us.  Usually the one that hits was not anticipated by the vast majority of us and is way out of our control anyway.  If we really thought about all the bad that might happen, we would be paralyzed from fear and stuck in front of our TV screens.    

  •  That's what they said about Al Qaeda. (12+ / 0-)

    This dismissive rhetoric evidences the same careless attitude that allowed 9-11 to happen.   Have you learned nothing from history?

    You know how much threat ISIS represents to the United States? None. That's how much. Exactly none. If there was a value less than none, then it would be that, but there's not, so none is the answer.

    The internet and Twitter have everybody thinking that we can know the truth instantly. That's not the case. We can only know what people want us to believe instantly.

    by SpamNunn on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:51:16 AM PDT

      •  Huh? You agree with that bullshit rhetoric? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        maryabein, Calamity Jean
        This dismissive rhetoric evidences the same careless attitude that allowed 9-11 to happen.  

        I thought Bushco ignoring security warnings was the cause of it.
        http://www.nytimes.com/...

        The Deafness Before the Storm
        By KURT EICHENWALD
        Published: September 10, 2012 913 Comments

        Move Single Payer Forward? Join 18,000 Doctors of PNHP and 185,000 member National Nurses United

        by divineorder on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:15:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  divineorder (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          divineorder
          I thought Bushco ignoring security warnings was the cause of it.
          That and a lack of real security on air planes , people are crying that it cost to much to secure air planes once again , you will find many of these same people saying lets go spend another $1trillion in Iraq because they are frightened  

          Beer Drinkers & Hell Raisers

          by Patango on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:23:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I know of several ways to get weapons on planes (0+ / 0-)

            that current security could do nothing about, and I know of people who know even more methods and even more weapons. I'm not telling, however. You just be grateful that terrorists are actually ignorant and stupid.

            At one time I worked in computer security, on contract with VeriSign, so I also know something about how vulnerable your computer and almost all of the Web sites you talk to are. Computer criminals are a lot smarter and better-informed than terrorists.

            Have you changed any of your passwords lately?

            Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

            by Mokurai on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:06:04 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  It's a miracle! (0+ / 0-)

        The internet and Twitter have everybody thinking that we can know the truth instantly. That's not the case. We can only know what people want us to believe instantly.

        by SpamNunn on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 11:20:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  yo, go sign up right now. (4+ / 0-)

      What's that you say?  Send someone else's kid to die?

      Right.  Got it.

      don't always believe what you think

      by claude on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:04:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You're so right... (12+ / 0-)

      al-Qaeda destroyed the United States. That's why we're all speaking Arabic.

      No. Just no.  This is the kind of action that created al-Qaeda, and fueled their successors.

      Of course there are terrorists. Of course they can do horrible things. And of course we should be vigilant about plots to bring those attacks to our shores (all of which, I believe, I mentioned above). But if you reach the point where you're willing to snuff out the lives of thousands of people because you're scared of what they might do, then the terrorists don't even have to attack.

      •  Threats and Existential Threats (5+ / 0-)

        People seem to be missing your point: ISIS can hurt some of our citizens but it can't, by itself, threaten the very existence of the US.

        As bad as 9/11 was, the worst effects it had on the nation were all self-inflicted. Rather than a leader that would stand up and reprise FDR's "Nothing to fear but fear itself" speech -- we got a fearmongering coward who took us down the path of financial ruin chasing Al Quaeda ghosts all over the globe.

        Al Quaeda and ISIS can not, by themselves, destroy us. In a fight with these miniscule forces, only we can do that.

        There's a difference between a responsible gun owner and one that's been lucky so far.

        by BeerNotWar on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:57:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  How is the fact that ISIS cannot (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gramofsam1, gzodik

          ever conquer America and end our existence an interesting point? It is a red herring, as nobody in the Administration or on these pages is saying any such thing. It's as if you think that ISIS not being an existential threat should guide us in our policy decisions.

          •  Not the Administration, and not these pages (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jarneys dad, Pablo Bocanegra

            RWNJ talking heads, led by John "Bomb Bomb" McCain, stirring up the crazies all over again. Don't you even know who the enemy is?

            Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

            by Mokurai on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:09:06 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The diary implores us not to be (0+ / 0-)

              obsessed by ISIS. I'd say that some here should stop being obsessed by John McCain and the GOP. We should be able to discuss world affairs intelligently without being overly concerned for what McCain's input is.

              •  That's funny in a Diary about not freaking out (0+ / 0-)

                that inherently invites us to consider who actually is freaking out, and always has been.

                No, I am not freaking out about McCain. I don't do freakout. I gave him as an example.

                Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

                by Mokurai on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 12:24:44 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  They are doing horrible things... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gzodik, delver, SpamNunn, jarneys dad

        with our weapons. That at least is our responsibility.

        Well, now you are just trying to be reasonable...and I'm in NO mood to be reasonable!

        by quiet in NC on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:05:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Assume there is a credible threat. (0+ / 0-)

      Is our intelligence reliable? Has this been checked and double checked? Because I don't want anymore slam dunks.

      Let's say we clear all that and we have a real, serious, imminent threat to American....I repeat AMERICAN...security. What's the best way to deal with that? Invade Iraq and Syria? Or would targeted special operations be better? These types have been dealing with air strikes for years. Doubt that alone will deal with the threat.

      I'm not convinced we have a real problem on OUR hands. Certainly not from anything I've seen in our media. When I'm convinced of that, then I think a response appropriate to the threat is merited. But let's not go into crazy mode just yet.

  •  I posted this in an earlier Diary! (15+ / 0-)
    I wish there was a Place that the ignorant right-wing  Christian fundamentalists could go to fight their holy war with the ignorant, right-wing, Islamic fundamentalists and leave all the rest of us alone..

    If Money is Speech, Speech isn't Free! I wonder what it is about that that Antonin Scalia cannot understand?

    by NM Ray on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:52:08 AM PDT

  •  Our priorities are screwed up (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VeggiElaine, divineorder

    I voted Tuesday, May 6, 2014 because it is my right, my responsibility and because my parents moved from Alabama to Ohio to vote. Unfortunately, the republicons want to turn Ohio into Alabama.

    by a2nite on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:53:26 AM PDT

  •  Why Am I Not Surprised? (12+ / 0-)

    At this kind of commentary?
    Of course ISIS is not a threat - at least not to you.

    The world rarely acts to protect people facing genocide -
    Whether in Armenia in 1915 or at Evian in 1938 or in Rwanda in 1994.

    The world DOES react to protect oil, investments, and power.

    <<<>>>

    Which side would you prefer to be on?

  •  Yeah. (22+ / 0-)

    They are not a threat to me. I'm fine. No one is burying my kids alive. Think I'll pop out for a scone.

  •  I'd substitute a "rational watchfulness" for (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bronx59, Egalitare, rhauenstein, Jilly W

    "freaking out" but these days that's too rational to ask for.

    "The soil under the grass is dreaming of a young forest, and under the pavement the soil is dreaming of grass."--Wendell Berry

    by Wildthumb on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:55:53 AM PDT

  •  Freaking out doesn't help (4+ / 0-)

    I agree.  I don't see that it is politically or economically feasible to put large numbers of US ground forces back into Iraq.  So stop beating the war drums.  We are going to have to count on the Iraqi/Iranian forces to mount a counter-offensive.  With some air support, I don't see why a counter-offensive can't roll ISIS back as fast as ISIS came in.  As I see it, the 40-60 sorties per day that the U.S. is flying now around the Erbil area is about right, because the effect of that is cumulative.    

  •  One of your best posts ever. I completly agree. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    divineorder, Pluto

    One of your best posts ever. I completly agree.

  •  I think there's a contradiction here, though. (6+ / 0-)

    You say this, and you're right:

    Is ISIS planning to follow the al-Qaeda script for world domination? Eh, no. But let's say they are. So why don't you get bin Laden on the phone and ask him how poking big dogs with a pointy stick worked out for him. Unavailable? Well, check al-Qaeda's No. 2 man, or the other No. 2 guy, or that other No. 2 guy. Hmm.

    The day before 9/11, al-Qaeda had a well-defined leadership structure, bank accounts around the world, a country where they were welcome to set up their terrorist jungle gyms, and dreams of world conquest. How much of that is left?

    But all of that is the result of US policies that at the time, and sometimes even in retrospect, are denounced by progressives as disproportionate, immoral, or otherwise ill-advised.  You make it sound like AQ self-destructed and that ISIS should therefore be left alone to do the same.  But apart from the debatable morality of that strategy--the big unspoken thing in this diary is that while ISIS is no threat to the US it's quite a threat to people, it could be argued, we owe some more-than-minimal duty of protection--the reality is that it was US military force that reduced AQ to its current irrelevance.

    It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

    by Rich in PA on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:01:14 AM PDT

    •  I forgot to reference your first sentence. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joe from Lowell, Jon Says

      That's actually the part where you're on shakiest ground.  I'm assuming your only case for saying ISIS's aims are territorially more limited than AQ's is their name, and that's a little tenuous in my opinion.  ButI don't see the question as important, since the nominal AQ goal of worldwide domination was always delusional and any ISIS goal along those lines would be the same.  But it's never been their maximum territorial goals that mattered, but rather their real area of influence and whether the goals themselves were tolerable.  

      It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

      by Rich in PA on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:04:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I disagree with you on this. (12+ / 0-)

    With groups like ISIS, it's best to cut it off at the base before it grows into a bigger organization. Terrorists like ISIS can't be ignored.

  •  ISIS is recruiting a lot of terrorists and that's (7+ / 0-)

    a big problem. Obama is addressing it, putting serious pressure on ISIL. If we keep pressure on the organization ISIL, they will lose momentum.
    But that doesn't mean ISIL sympathizers will be intimidated, may even be encouraged.
    I think the pressure will increase until
    ISIL suffers a major blow, but that always takes time.

    Politicians and the media stupidity machine do use fear to increase their power but that's part of the game.

    •  No, the USA recruited the Terrorists with the ... (0+ / 0-)

      Unjust Iraq invasion. If Saddam was still in power, none of this would have happened.

    •  Whether it's a lot, or a few, much (0+ / 0-)

      depends on their sophistication. ISIL is great at PR, veryu good at killing unarmed civilians, great at creating an image of terror in the Heath Ledger "Joker" sense of the word, we'll see how good they are at pulling off terrorist actions abroad.

      Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther

      by the fan man on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 05:04:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  From the wayback machine (6+ / 0-)
    "The solution to terrorism is not going to be found in bullets. It's not going to be found in precision ordnance or targeted strikes. It's really going to be found in changing the conditions. It's going to be found in establishing a global safety net that starts with security and goes to economic development and political development and the kinds of modernization which let others enjoy the fruits of modernization that we as Americans enjoy."

    ~ Gen. Wesley Clark, October 17, 2001, Annual Lecture sponsored by the Center for the Study of Force and Diplomacy at Temple University.

    We sick an' tired of-a your ism-skism game - Dyin' 'n' goin' to heaven in-a Jesus' name. Bob Marley

    by BOHICA on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:06:09 AM PDT

  •  The only thing concerning about ISIS is how (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blue aardvark

    easily the Iraqi powers that be folded when they showed up.

  •  I wish the would-be Crusaders in the U.S. (0+ / 0-)

    would all go fight in KSA, the source of this.

  •  Neocons Want Perpetual War So Fearmongering (4+ / 0-)

    is their best tool.

    The lame stream media and the military industrial complex are selling security at the expense of liberty and denying both.

    Go back to anxiously craving an Apple iPhone 6 to distract yourselves because ISIS can't gain entry to any western country without governmental permission.

    Corporate Amerika, our influence-peddling, bribe solicitting Congress, and the tax evading, fascist oligarchs are much more dangerous.

    •  I think there is much confusion here. (7+ / 0-)

      The term Neocon does NOT apply to every person who believes that the military is sometimes called for. Neocons do not have a monopoly on the use of force. Either people here don't understand that, or they do but realize that by tagging all interventionists as neocons that they will win some points here.

      •  Irony: paleocons only for fighting invasions (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        doc2, charliehall2

        That's one of the ironies here - it's actually an old-line conservative position to be isolationist and only defend the US from direct threats. That's why the other "conservatives" are called neo-cons! The OL position is also classic conservative "self-interest" focus and to hell with other people, as many have noted as being inconsistent with true progressivism.

        2. Again, false dichotomy is a fallacy. We don't have to either do nothing, or go all in. Obama's policy so far has been careful strikes to nudge the balance of power, and it has already helped the Yazidis, the Kurds, pushed ISIS back, apparently scared off their leader, etc.

  •  This diary makes too much sense: (8+ / 0-)

    Its historical citations are sound, the advice is spot-on, the sentiment is universal, its context correct.

    That said, you think anyone politically to the right of Minnie Mouse will hear any of it?

    Hell no.

    All throughout WW2, Roosevelt and his administration put down extremely stringent rules to American business in order to reign in war profiteering on everything from the price of eggs and tires to stock transactions, citing historic lessons taken from previous conflicts. After Roosevelt's death and the end of the war, American business was addicted to the handsome revenue that massive bloodletting on foreign shores created.

    Ever since - from Saol in the '50s to today's Kabul, there has not been a single war in which the United States has been engaged where there has been a clear, present, direct threat of invasion and iminent mass destruction to prople living on American soil. Each and every "war" has ultimately been waged on the basis of geopolitical differences, the continuance of raw materials access or pure profit motive.

    This brand of 21st century American capitalism will eventually be the last nail in this country's coffin; we're well on the way to pissing off someone bigger than us with far more disposable income to develop way bigger weapons of mass destruction. Unless some very fundamental things change in this country, the outcome is inevitable: the Roman empire, the Spanish empire, the British empire.... how many damned examples from history do we need?

    •  The Only Important Raw Material is Dirty Carbon (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Egalitare, divineorder, Anakai

      and not only do we know how to begin replacing much of it now, humanity needs us to stop using it.

      The entire justification for a superpower defense is so that we can continue committing murder suicide of civilization by poison.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:23:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  50 million citizens of South Korea (0+ / 0-)

      would object to your analysis.

      •  Maybe so. But we did such a great bang-up job (0+ / 0-)

        there that 60 years later, there's still a 38th parallel, there's still an almost yearly threat from the goons in the north and the north is the only country that exports almost more weapons to America's adversaries than Russia. Yay for us.

        My point is that had the Korean "police action" been handled with the same intensity as the conflict that proceeded it, there'd probably be no issues with the Korean peninsula today - or either Russia or China for that matter. (And yes, I'm one of those nut jobs that thinks Truman screwed up the entire future of American foreign policy by dumping MacArthur.)

        It might have started being about the Korean people and their long-term future - but it ended up being about the profits for the armament manufacturers to be made at the expense of someone else's blood. It even apalled Eisenhower at the end of his presidency to the extent that he gave it a label: the "military industrial complex".

        And it's gotten several orders of magnitude worse over the decades.

        •  Same intensity? (0+ / 0-)

          You really think it would have been good to start WW3????

          •  Actually, it already WAS WW3. (0+ / 0-)

            China was providing ground troops and other support and the Soviet Union was providing aircraft, training and weapons supplies to the north while the rest of the world (ie. the U.N.) was supporting the south.

            And, as has now become the standard operating procedure in such matters, coalition countries provided soldiers and support staff while the U.S. provided draftees, weapons and command/control.

  •  They are all such fking Cowards. (4+ / 0-)

    Ooooo there are bad people in the world, Ooooo I'm so skeeered.

    Hey, if these shitheads ISIS are so dangerous and pose such an existential threat to the West .... GO KILL THEM.

    You don't occupy, you simply run around the countryside looking for confrontations KILL the enemy and move on.

    With massive air cover, special forces bands, Company sized patrols scouring the land for ISIS assholes to pop up and fight .... annihilate them and move on.

    It is Target Practice, we live for this shit, go get them. They present the perfect live fire training for our soldiers, target practice for our Air Force, practice for our reconnaissance and intelligence operations.

    We spend $million/$billion on practice and simulations, and here we have live targets to train against .... gee thanks .... now go GET THEM.

    As for any returning back to the UK, US, etc .... SECRETLY start screening for Gun powder residue on travelers from the area .... if the idiots don't thoroughly clean themselves, they will give themselves away simply by having fired weapons recently.

    But for crying out loud, enough with the panic and fear mongering, we pay you to protect us not to cower in fear and fear monger us.

  •  I think you're forgetting the question... (9+ / 0-)

    ...that Sec. Hagel was asked.

    Of course ISIS isn't an existential threat to the United States. Sec. Hagel was asked if ISIS was a 9/11-level threat to the US, which is a much lower standard. And, given their (a) fundraising and (b) propensity for attacks with lots of flash that make a huge media impact, I think it's safe to say they're a 9/11-level threat. I think they're going to try a major attack on the United States in the next sixteen months, and that this will force a re-invasion of Iraq. Maybe this time we won't fuck up the follow-up quite so badly.

    ‎"Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." - Norman Mailer
    My Blog
    My wife's woodblock prints

    by maxomai on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:11:35 AM PDT

  •  This diary (8+ / 0-)

    is about the United States, and more specifically about domestic politics.

    It has absolutely nothing to do with the Middle East, about the Sunni-Shia divide that is affecting the entire Middle East, or the growing regional war, or what will ultimately happen to Syria or Iraq.

    Now opinions may differ about our role, and the international community's role. There may be ways of dealing with this short of a massive military response.

    But this diary is not the place to discuss them. This is about being pissed at Republicans and labeling some Democrats as neocons, and hoping that we can ignore things abroad, because God knows, those people over there don't matter one way or another.

    “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

    by ivorybill on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:14:21 AM PDT

    •  actually (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      maryabein, jarneys dad, begone

      this diary is attempting to separate the reality of isis from the fearmongering. mark didn't say or even hint that the people over there don't matter. what he did say is that people here shouldn't be afraid.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:53:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree that people shouldn't be afraid (9+ / 0-)

        But I absolutely disagree that we should ignore ISIS or what is going on in Syria and Iraq, and I completely reject the idea that the world should disengage no matter how many people die in Syria.

        It's generally a mistake to make policy or decisions based on fear. It is likewise not a great idea to make decisions based on disgust. No matter how repulsive the Bush Administration may have been, we now have a Middle East in the midst of a major transformation, far more important and with far more deaths than the Israeli attacks in Gaza.

        So this diary is indeed about domestic politics - ISIS does not present an existential threat to the United States, and although it is completely possible that jihadis from this conflict will commit acts of terrorism in Europe or the US, that's not the point. Again that's about domestic politics.

        But the establishment of an extremist Salafist entity in Syria and much of Iraq is a serious matter. It's not the US's problem alone; nobody is saying that. But to assume that because ISIS is not an immediate threat to the US, that we should simply disengage and ignore the problem is really not an answer. That's Rand Paul territory. What's happening right now will affect the Middle East for decades and its too important to reduce to throw away diaries about how ISIS is a moldy peanut of no concern. Anyway that was a funny analogy, as moldy peanuts produce aflatoxin, one of the most potent carcinogens known.

        “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

        by ivorybill on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:17:14 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  There is no direct short term danger from ISIS (5+ / 0-)

    Indirectly there is however, in the form of "returning islamic warriors" from primarily europe. They could attack western targets, in fact they have, in Brussels four people died from an attack on a jewish museum from an ISIS member who fought in Syria.

    Furthermore the caliphate motivates disgruntled young extremists to attack western targets in the name of the caliphate.

    Admittedly, unless they somehow manage to hit a nuclear facility or chemical factory the number of deaths of these attacks will likely be manageble, although the psychological effect of terrorist attacks can be huge as we've seen in 9/11.  

    Long term however, the danger of ISIS is another story. If succesfull, and if they manage to form a permanent caliphate that keeps growing on the resentment of politics in the arab world it's unclear how dangerous ISIS could become. With the arab spring in mind it is not unthinkable that we are at the beginning of some kind of hardline islamist revolution. While it may take a while before such a state gets it hand on nuclear weapons, such a state would be a direct danger to its neighbours and have a devestating impact on energy prices.

    I think it's for that reason that the fear machine is being utilised by the pentagon and the white house. Isis forms a mortal threath to the region, and the US must act. The American people are being prepared for the steps to be taken by this "fear campaign".

    It's really that simple.    

    Card-carrying member of the Illuminati.

    by DarkOmnius on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:14:54 AM PDT

  •  ISIS threat to USA = 0. Exactly. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TJ, Pluto, dansmith17

    They are not going to drive their stolen Toyotas to South Carolina. They pose the same threat that Saddam's regime posed to US territory = 0. Most of ISIS could not likely find the USA on a map, let alone get there. They are vicious lunatics, but they are not going to actually find their way to hiding under Senator Graham's bed.

    We have only just begun and none too soon.

    by global citizen on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:19:37 AM PDT

  •  I'm having a difficult time keeping track of... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto, jarneys dad

    ...all our Existential Threats/Enemies.

    What ever happened to the Haqqani Network, that was so highly touted just a year or so ago.?

    So now it would appear that the new, new, new Existential Threat is ISIL or ISIS or IS or whatever-the-hell-the-acronym they're using.

    I wonder if Secretary Hagel held a breathless press conference and declared Hannibal and the Carthaginians to be the latest Threat, if anyone would call him on his bullshit.

    It's times like these wen I really miss the Soviet Union. Oh right, Putin, never mind...

    History has taught me a valuable lesson: Genghis Khan but Immanuel Kant.

    by Metro99 on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:20:11 AM PDT

  •  GOD (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto

    "All hail the God of the world FEAR"

  •  Absolutely SUPERB Writing, Mark !!! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto, divineorder, jarneys dad

    Well argued descriptions of both our false and our true threats, and how we should act (or not).

    [However, don't underestimate Loony Louie Gohmert, the one-man sleeper cell (grin).]

  •  I'm not freaking out about ISIS (3+ / 0-)

    I'm extremely sadden by the fact that we (the US) have not figured out the war is not the answer but that we love war.  

    War IS the enemy.

    We could do so much good in the world if we would release our energies for good instead of always launching death and destruction.

    We sick an' tired of-a your ism-skism game - Dyin' 'n' goin' to heaven in-a Jesus' name. Bob Marley

    by BOHICA on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:25:27 AM PDT

    •  Uh, why are you so sure (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dr Swig Mcjigger, gzodik, andrewj54

      that "releasing our energies for good" and killing murderers are not sometimes the same thing? Sometimes death and destruction of evil people is what is required.

    •  Meanwhile - (9+ / 0-)

      Tens of thousands of people who are at the brink of extermination are praying that someone will help them.

      And I don't really care whether they are praying to Allah, God, Jehovah, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. But for their prayers to be answered, somebody, somewhere has to respond. Who might that be?

    •  Thanks for sharing that BOHICA. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      schumann, jarneys dad

      All in with you on that.

       And with Alan Grayson on this:

      Today’s USA Today: “When It’s Our Money and Blood, It’s Our Decision.”11 August 2014 - 4:57pm
      Rep. Alan Grayson: American people say, 'No'

      Alan Grayson, 8:03 p.m. EDT August 10, 2014

      “Mr. President, when it's our money, and it's our blood, then it's our decision.”

      Who is right on military intervention in Iraq: President Obama, or the American people? I say that it's the people.

      A recent Pew Research Center poll asked Americans, "Do you think the U.S. has a responsibility to do something about the violence in Iraq?" "No!" said 55%. Fewer than 40% said yes. Most Democrats, Republicans and independents are opposed.

      We all know the history: U.S. soldiers invaded and occupied Iraq, looking for "WMDs" that weren't there. That 10-year war cost us the lives of 4,425 American soldiers, left roughly 250,000 with permanent brain abnormalities from IEDs, etc., and cost us $2 trillion — approximately 2.5% of our national net worth, accumulated over 200 years.

      Isn't that enough?

      We left when the government of Iraq refused to extend the Status of Forces Agreement. Now Iraqi leaders want our help again. But the U.S. military is not a yo-yo.

      The stated "mission" of the Iraq War was to build up a million-man armed force to defend Iraq. We did that. That force is fed by $100 billion in oil money each year. Yet it has been defeated, again and again, by what one Arab official called "a few hundred psychopaths." Iraqi soldiers outnumber the Islamic State by more than 100 to 1, but they won't fight.

      In one town, a band of ISIS fighters announced their approach with a devastatingly effective weapon: a bullhorn. Iraqi soldiers fled.

      If the Iraqis won't defend themselves, then why should we? And when will we start solving our own problems?

      This effort makes a mockery of the Powell Doctrine. No national security interest is threatened, we don't have a clear strategy, we're not using overwhelming force, and we have no way out.

      We have to get past this bizarre notion that every time there's something in the world we don't like, we bomb it.

      Mr. President, when it's our money, and it's our blood, then it's our decision. And now, the American people are saying "No!"

      "Ain't gonna study war no more.
      Gonna lay down my sword and shield.
      Down by the riverside."

      — Down By the Riverside (1918).

      Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., is a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

      Peace,

      Rep. Alan Grayson

      Move Single Payer Forward? Join 18,000 Doctors of PNHP and 185,000 member National Nurses United

      by divineorder on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:33:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  unfortunately (0+ / 0-)

      love doesnt solve everything, and violence sometimes does.

  •  Invasion isn't the answer to this problem, (10+ / 0-)

    but I don't know of anyone who's arguing that we should invade that deserves to be taken seriously.

    And I do think that Genocide, which is a stated goal of ISIS/ISIL/IS, and something they've been acting on, is a global problem.

    But there's a huge gulf between invasion and isolationism, and there are a lot of options in that gulf that we really should consider.

    Yeah, this wouldn't be a problem if we hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place.

    But we can't choose to live in a world where we didn't invade Iraq.

    Now, the middle east is more broken than it ever has been, the Ba'ath party is gone, and now this thing that is even worse is rising up in its place.

    It's a global problem, and something that the world needs to fix. And unfortunately, there isn't a lot of trust in populations, worldwide, in the US on military action.

    This is one of those situations where I'm glad Barack Obama is president.

  •  whenever a govt (0+ / 0-)

    any govt can scare their citizens into thinking that the boogey man is out there and is a danger no matter how slight govts can do what they want concerning rights and spending or stealing the wealth of said nation.

    america is actually worse when it comes to govt excess because americans have more to lose rights and financially speaking, well we had more too lose once upon a time.

  •  ISIS killed James Foley precisely because (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    joe from Lowell, Catte Nappe

    our bombing campaign in Iraq was hurting their efforts to establish a ... well, let's call it a nation for lack of a better word. Air power can't win war on its own, but it can certainly be a damned inconvenience if every time your troops attempt to travel from point A to point B, bomb C pays them a visit.

    And our efforts in Iraq use an inconsequential portion of our military. No troop call ups, no requests for additional funding, nada.

    In other words, we can keep them busy in Iraq and Syria for decades without much effort at all. The most likely fate for ISIS is that eventually someone else will win the Syrian civil war and cooperate with the Kurds to crush ISIS between them.

    In the mean time, it very much sucks to be living in that part of the world. That's something the United States needs to be concerned with, not the threat posed by a bunch of guys with no international infrastructure, no economy, and no diplomatic recognition.

    Purity is for primaries; in the general, our worst are better than their best.

    by blue aardvark on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:27:23 AM PDT

  •  And to think none of this would be happening (0+ / 0-)

    if Bush wouldn't have had such a daddy complex and taken us in there. The whole slimy lot in his cabinet should be rotting in jail right now for war crimes.

  •  Once again stupidity is to blame. The US ... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mr Robert, protectspice

    helped arm ISIS because they were anti-Assad. The Law of Unintended Consequences is alive and well.

    When will learn to stop meddling in the affairs of others??

  •  ISIS (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TJ, divineorder, jarneys dad

    I agree almost 100% with the authors take on ISIS in the post, however, the following sentence struck me,

    "Is ISIS planning to follow the al-Qaeda script for world domination?"

    it kind of illuminated why the propaganda of the powers that be always works, because they pound it constantly and repeatedly and are so persistent that even knowledgeable people with a good deal of cynicism like the author soon begin to incorporate the lies spewed by the propaganda in trying to fight that propaganda and thereby reducing the effectiveness of countering the propaganda.

    AL-Qaeda never propounded a script for world domination to my knowledge. I believe they had a beef against the US for 1) betraying them, 2)were occupying "their Muslim lands and holy places,  3)wanted to maintain their "god given rights", to enslave women and chop of the heads of people who went counter to their perception of the teachings of Allah in their domain.

    Those wishes are egregious but fall far short of seeking world domination.

    They attacked the US because of the feeling of betrayal and a post love affair anger, not out any any stated desire to dominate the world.

    We are the ones killing out of a desire to dominate the world absolutely, but mask that desire by ginning up "mortal threats", like Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Russia, Gaddafi", annd they also help us divert attention from the genocide by carried out by Israel in Gaza and the loss of our freedoms and police militarization and brutality.

  •  I strongly disagree (10+ / 0-)

    If ISIS manages to create the sovereignty it aspires to, it would be a dangerous laboratory for global terrorism.  It would also further destabilize the Mideast and escalate the Shia/Sunni conflict, which could draw us in by various avenues.  I'm not advocating a major military effort against this threat as John McCain might have it, but I think you have your head in the sand on this one.  

  •  Thank you. This is the diary I didn't expect to (6+ / 0-)

    see on the front page of Daily Kos.  It's heartening to see an unambiguously anti-war viewpoint get the exposure it deserves on a progressive site.

  •  Al Quaeda succeeded in several ways (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maryabein, jarneys dad

    One of its missions was to ensure that the US removed its bases from Saudi Arabia. As Bush declared just a day or two after the bases were removed: Mission Accomplished.

    Also, Bin Laden wanted to have America chasing shadows all over the world in order to waste money and crash the economy. Now Al Quaeda under its new name ISIS (New! Lemon Scented!) is trying to get us to deploy thousands of troops to Iraq/Syria. Are we seriously going to fall for this crap?

    There's a difference between a responsible gun owner and one that's been lucky so far.

    by BeerNotWar on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:43:54 AM PDT

  •  effing (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    divineorder

    brilliant!

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:44:55 AM PDT

  •  Confused (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    joe from Lowell, delver

    Generally liked the column, but "[some place], Iowa" doesn't have to worry because....."your local police force probably already has more armor on hand..."

    I thought Mark didn't like the idea that local police forces had 7,000 machine guns on hand, but here it's a reason not to worry!

  •  I look at it this way (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doc2, delver, Catte Nappe

    There are all sorts of crazyass psycho whackjobs in this country and the world who seek to harm Americans for no reason other than that they're crazyass psycho whackjobs who seek to harm Americans.

    Then there are all sorts of crazyass psycho whackjobs in this country and the world who seek to harm Americans for what they view as legitimate reasons, be it what they view as defending their heritage, culture and way of life, attaining power, making money, boosting their egos, and so on.

    To the extent possible and necessary and in keeping with our laws and moral and ethical codes (as it were), we should keep and eye on them and, if and when necessary, interdict, appropriately. Whether this means ISIS, what's left of Al Qaida, Hamas, Hezbollah, eco terrorists, the Mafia, the Russian mob, the KKK, skinheads, neo-Nazis, psycho shooters or Karl Rove's dad, I don't care, so long as we deal with them. Is ISIS a threat here? I have no idea. If they are, deal with them. If not, keep an eye on them but otherwise do nothing.

    We elect and pay people to deal with this shit. Let's make sure they do, and do it right, and don't abuse this power for self-gain.

    "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

    by kovie on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:47:43 AM PDT

  •  Reminds me of global warming denial. (4+ / 0-)

    Arguing against the existence of a threat because none of the solutions are ideologically acceptable.

    Art is the handmaid of human good.

    by joe from Lowell on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:49:53 AM PDT

    •  ISIS can't do 1/1,000,000th what GW can (0+ / 0-)

      It's a "threat" but not an existential one.

      There's a difference between a responsible gun owner and one that's been lucky so far.

      by BeerNotWar on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:01:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, not an existential one, but not zero either. (7+ / 0-)

        The diarist claims it's zero, and that's just silly.

        Anyway, the comparison isn't between global warming and ISIS, but between the arguments made by global warming deniers and those made in this diary.

        Art is the handmaid of human good.

        by joe from Lowell on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:03:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Not according to the diarist. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gzodik, andrewj54

        It is not a threat, at all. Why are you even bringing up this "existential" bullshit. Since when are any threats from hostile enemies existential to Americans?

      •  Discrimination against gays, (0+ / 0-)

        wife-beating, cops killing innocent kids, all of these issues are important ones we fight for every day. None of them are existential threats to the United States. Since when, exactly, did whether or not a threat is "existential" become worthy of being a discussion point?

        •  Semantics (0+ / 0-)

          The diarist is talking about an existential threat. He says so, if you care to read it. I don't think, and I don't think the diarist thinks, that ISIS can't do harm to some people, including Americans. His point that I back up is expressed in this quote:

          "Let me say it again: Danger ISIS represents to the power, democracy, and freedom of the United States = 1 peanut. A moldy peanut. One with a nut missing. Danger from the United States reaction to ISIS provocations and the renewed drum-beat on the right = Barnum & Bailey's full set of elephants."
          I don't think we disagree very much at all. I'm not in favor of doing nothing or ignoring ISIS, but we do not need an effort any where near the scale of the Iraq or Afghanistan invasions of the 2000's. Much closer to Libya in my opinion. And if anyone suggests we need to impose security restrictions in the US that would threaten civil liberties because of ISIS, they can take a hike.

          There's a difference between a responsible gun owner and one that's been lucky so far.

          by BeerNotWar on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:51:40 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No, the diarist (0+ / 0-)

            explicitly says that ISIS is zero threat. And no one has said that they are an existential threat, nor that an Iraq-sstyle invasion is in the works. There is a real conversation taking place in this country, but here at Dkos we're content to invent red herrings and then mock them.

            •  Zero existential threat. He makes this clear. (0+ / 0-)
              ISIS could no more threaten the United States than Lindsey Graham could punch God in the nose. The existential threat level is green. Or at least, it should be.

              There's a difference between a responsible gun owner and one that's been lucky so far.

              by BeerNotWar on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:16:56 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Define "threat"... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dr Swig Mcjigger

    Could ISIL cobble together a mass casualty attack in the United States?  It depends on the definition of "mass casualty":  a dozen casualties, a gross, a thousand?  I suppose the required magnitude of pain depends on whether or not one's own are on the casualty list.

    Not to say that overreacting is a good idea--the Patriot Act was an amazing bit of stupidity that validates an age-old terrorism goal of getting the target to destroy itself by alienating its own citizens.  THAT kind of reaction we ought to avoid regardless of cost.  Is striking ISIL military targets in Iraq the same thing as taking a giant crap in the Bill of Rights?  Not so much.  

    One could argue that airstrikes serve as an ISIL recruitment tool, but the absence of airstrikes allows ISIL a string of globally visible military successes that also serve as recruitment tools.  Thus, the recruitment argument is a wash unless one weighs the de-motivating impact of military setbacks against the recruitment value of the airstrikes themselves.  Does bombing hurt ISIL more than it helps ISIL, or vice-versa?

    If atheism is a religion, then "off" is a TV channel.

    by DaveinBremerton on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:54:20 AM PDT

  •  The sanest voice on the front page (4+ / 0-)

    Mark Sumner

    Making it easy to see who the terrified wackos are at Daily Kos.

    I'm making a list.



    For an idea that does not at first seem insane, there is no hope.
    - Albert Einstein:  Leftist, socialist, emo-prog, cosmic visionary.

    by Pluto on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:56:26 AM PDT

  •  where`s an FDR when we need him? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maryabein, Mr Robert

    We have nothing to fear but fear itself.  Stoking this fear is destroying the US and the people we bomb in the name of fear.

    The thing about democracy, beloveds, is that it is not neat, orderly, or quiet. It requires a certain relish for confusion. Molly Ivins

    by MufsMom on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:56:41 AM PDT

  •  yeah sorry can't agree (10+ / 0-)

    For a couple of reasons:

    1. They are a threat. Are they a threat that requires ground troops in the ME? No, of course not. Are they a mortal threat? Well duh no, there really are no mortal threats to us in existence, as it would probably take a fair percentage of the world united against us militarily to do that, and even then it's iffy.

    But does that mean they are insignificant? OF course not. Your diary would make more sense to me if the argument was ISIS is not the level of threat to justify X or Y move (like e.g. troops on the ground, or heck even air strikes (I'd disagree on the latter, but it would be a fair argument to make)).  Nevertheless, a well-funded operation such as they are, better than AQ with a decent number of Western/British acolytes is some level of threat to the West. You are using hyperbole, maybe intentionally so, to describe them as no threat, when reality (they are a minor threat to us, but a major threat to the region) works better.

    2. Regardless of their threat to us, they are a significant threat to a whole lot of innocent people in the ME right now. And from where I sit, the folks in the region appear unable to deal with them (either militarily or politically). Thus, there are some things we can do to level the playing field to make it easier for those folks to finish the job.

    3. Let's say some who argue "we created ISIS" are right. Then that's all the more reason why we are responsible for fixing what we created.

  •  Seriously????? (10+ / 0-)
    Still, you can't say that al-Qaeda wasn't extremely successful. Not at killing Americans. We managed more of that in Iraq. We manage to kill more Americans every year by refusing to wear helmets when we ride motorcycles. You could probably make a compelling case that corn syrup is more deadly to Americans than all the terrorists who ever lived.
    So you are essentially saying that, if ISIS continues unabated and in a couple of years the best they ultimately can manage is another 9/11, then no big deal -- it's only a couple of thousand people they'll kill here in the U.S.  

    You lost me right there.  

    •  Agreed- I'd say (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coffeetalk, Pi Li, johnnygunn

      that blowing up or incinerating 3000 people, one of whom was my daughter's best friend, was a pretty good example of success in killing Americans.

      Another attack, even if not on the scale of 9/11, would absolutely guarantee another wrong-headed ground war, not to mention the further restriction of what's left of our civil liberties. Which is a good reason to take this seriously and do what we can to prevent another attack.

      •  I doubt it (0+ / 0-)

        Not a ground war. After 10+ years, trillions of dollars, thousands of Americans lives lost no one has the stomach for another ground war. At least not the 'nation building' or occupying them kind.

        If we did go in, it would be strictly punitive or teach them a lesson they'll never forget kind of thing.

        Something on the scale of a 9/11 or greater might cause the release of the Instant Sunshine. God help us.

  •  Uh No (8+ / 0-)
    You know what ISIS is? A bunch of politicians. People trying to build a power base
    Poliicians who go around beheading, raping, crucifying, destroying historic sites?
  •  I have said it before I say it again.We treat t... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OCLefty

    I have said it before I say it again.We treat these people like they are the Joker, Lex Luthor and a Bond villian rolled up in one.I've read comics for 40 years.I don't think we should set national policy as if we live in one.

  •  Truth and perspective... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jarneys dad

    Wow, this is a well written diary.  Daily Kos writers continue to deliver a voice of clarity and intelligence.   Thank you for doing the heavy lifting of getting to the truth.

  •  Republished to Group W (0+ / 0-)

    That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

    by enhydra lutris on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:39:59 AM PDT

  •  Elegant, thoughtful, cheeky, intense and for-a-... (0+ / 0-)

    Elegant, thoughtful, cheeky, intense and for-a-refreshing-fucking-change logical argument.

    Bravo.

  •  ISIS (0+ / 0-)

    We need to give up more of our freedumbs because of Beghazi!!

    You can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead.

  •  "Does ISIS have cells in the US?" (0+ / 0-)

    If CNN is asking are there folks in the US who want a Theocracy in which they can perform their basest desires with impunity against those they don't like? Yes - see the rhetoric from Christian Extremists!

    Teach a man to play Rugby and he'll never go hungry.

    by CaptainBlueSky on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:50:37 AM PDT

  •  Well, the front page of DK says ISIS isnt a threat (5+ / 0-)

    I feel better already.

    Dammit Jim, I'm a lawyer, not a grammarian. So sue me.

    by Pi Li on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 09:52:21 AM PDT

  •  ISIS (0+ / 0-)

    Is a ruthless, radical, apparently well funded insurgency that has taken over some parts of  Iraq and Syria.  True enough. But are they a major threat to the West and particularly the U.S. Not yet, I would guess.

    From what I've read they are roughly equivalent  to the 2001 version of the Afgan Taliban. Lots of dudes riding around in Toyota pickups with machine guns and an extremist, religious based doctrine that is particularly intolerant to non believers. (Sure they've captured some advanced weapons, but can they really keep a Syrian t55 or Iraqi M1 running for more than YouTube videos without the proper infrastructure to support these complex weapons? )

    The U.S military, law enforcement and intelligence community  has spent the years since 9/11 gearing up for just this type of threat. Just a few weeks of limited air strikes and the probable involvement of lots of assets from our intelligence and special operations troops have stopped and pushed back ISIS around the Kurdish areas in Iraq.

    Think back to the fall of 2001. With just weeks of preparation the United States was able to deploy a few CIA and Special Forces teams, who hooked up with friendly locals and were basically able to leverage U.S airpower to crush the Taliban. And all this was without today's very advanced drone technology.

    Now besides pissing off America, they've got the Iranians, The Turks, the Kirds, most of the rest of the various Syrian factions, NATO, lots of other Arab countries, the Israelis and the whole Shiite  world gunning for them. With that pretty amazing list stacked up against you, I can't imagine that your future is anything but dark.

  •  This post is incredibly offensive (10+ / 0-)

    Not in substance (where an argument does exist that interfering will only make things worse, although most progressives would disagree vehemently) but in tone. It's offensive to a wide variety of people being threatened by ISIS and other totalitarian movements. Its tone is flip and arrogant, even trying to be funny about events that just aren't, like laughing at the Tutsis killing all those Hutus in Rwanda, like what business is that of ours? I expect much better of DK.

  •  ISIS has managed to capture (5+ / 0-)

    a third of Iraq in a breathtakingly short amount of time.

    They were underestimated by EVERYONE, including the President of the United States (JV team? hello?).  They seem to have a better grasp of STRATEGY than anyone credited them for.

    Several hundred westerners have joined the cause.

    They have crazy-ass sympathizers in the West who have not joined up but could likely be eliminated.

    They have demonstrated their appetite for genocide, and not just genocide, but genocide-as-spectacle, and for snuff.

    Panicing is never a good idea, but neither is complacency.

    Keep Calm and Deal With ISIS.

    What we should do.

    "Fighting for us, good. Winning, better. Talking about fighting? Not so good."--Atrios

    by andrewj54 on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:08:40 AM PDT

  •  Interesting from Stars & Stripes (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe
  •  So weird, that to so many here (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    andrewj54, Catte Nappe
    Don't freak out
    as the NeoConMen did means
    Don't take any action
    and
    Don't take the time to figure out what might work
    We know that targeted airstrikes can have great military effectiveness, as in Libya, and no political effectiveness. So we didn't attempt to help Iraq against ISIS militarily until it agreed to take the first political step, ousting Maliki in favor of a negotiator and compromiser, Haider al Abadi, with the promise of bringing Sunnis and Kurds into government. Iraq is also conducting joint military operations with Kurdish forces for the first. Whether that is enough even to start seriously on healing the country remains to be seen, but we have the opportunity within Iraq to
    Give peace a chance
    The humanitarian operation to help the Yazidis was a success only because Syrian Kurds were willing to do the actual rescue.

    We tried a hostage rescue mission that might have worked except that the hostages had been moved before our forces got there.

    None of those actions came from freaking out. We will assuredly do more, and Obama assuredly will not accept the RWNJ freakout.

    Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

    by Mokurai on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:31:33 AM PDT

  •  THANK YOU! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dservgun

    I have been so tired of listening to all those whiny COWARDS out there screaming about how some awful people are out there and want to kill us. People have always been around to kill other people, boys and girls. This isn't a Disney film. You do your best to protect your people and get on with life.

    But then we elected a bunch of people too STUPID to even maintain the competent level of security of the Clinton administration. Instead, they let a bunch of clowns with box cutters take over Jet Airliners and kill thousands of people with them, when a simple deadbolt on the door of the cockpits would have prevented almost all of the killing. Then, to cover up their total incompetence, they took advantage of the 9/11 horror and fear to distract us from it and make some billions in profit for their friends. Grift on a scale not seen before.

    Always act so as to elicit the best in others, and thereby in yourself.

    Felix Adler

    Always act so as to elicit the best in others, and thereby in yourself. - Felix Adler

    by Wittcraft on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:34:02 AM PDT

  •  None? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    delver

    I wouldn't say that.
    Sure their main concern is other muslim nations, and their immediate targets are all in the mid-east, but saying they are no threat isn't correct either.

    "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

    by gjohnsit on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:38:36 AM PDT

  •  But.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dservgun

    How are we going to get the next war going if we don't freak out over ISIS?

    (When the hawks want a war, they'll use any excuse for a freak-out.)

  •  Great diary, Mark. (0+ / 0-)

    But for the record, the Germans did use quite a large amount of armor to overrun Belgium ;-)

    I ride the wild horse .

    by BelgianBastard on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 11:05:13 AM PDT

  •  such a vapid article (3+ / 0-)

    Really, ISIS poses NOOOOOOO threat? How in the hell do you define the term "threat"? An American has had his head chopped off on camera with the executioner literally THREATENING to do more. I may agree that corps and the military want to use any pretext to ramp up their profits and their budgets - especially for more Wall Street/US imperialism. But to say that they are no threat in any way or capacity is to stretch credibility. I think even one ISIS inspired terrorist attack in the US or on US citizens/interests abroad constitutes a "threat". And such an indifferent response to the death of a fellow citizen - I imagine James Foley and his family doesn't think that the threat of ISIS is nothing but a "moldy peanut". I seriously can't tell if you are that insensitive or just trolling. Invite ISIS over for dinner at your house and you tell me how much of a threat they are not - they are barbarians who have created a death cult based off a religion with the desire to spread their world view and influence - they are not just scamps running around in pickup trucks with old weapons. Till you go and meet them and see their brutality, then have a little respect for the humans that are being slaughtered and at least call them what they are - a threat to the lives of millions around the globe - including US citizens. Will they overthrow the United States a la "Olympus Has Fallen" - of course not. But something can be a threat without the utter desolation of our country. Romney winning in 2012 would have been a "threat" to all the progressive actions of the last couple hundred years in the US, but the country would have survived. Does that lessen the damage he would have done or the pain felt by millions if he had been elected? I think not. So we can agree that there does not need to be a ground war, escalation, or over-hyping of the issue without resorting to downplaying the actual threat posed by ISIS.

  •  I'm actually way more (0+ / 0-)

    worried about what the GOP/Congress, in general has done, is doing and what they will do in the future at this juncture, personally.
    Not that we should ignore or look away from ISIS--but that we have way more pressing issues here at home, imo.

  •  This diary is asinine. (5+ / 0-)

    Sure, ISIS isn't an existential threat, but these barbaric psychopaths, hiding behind religious zealotry, need to be put down, with extreme prejudice if need be.

    Such cruelty and inhumanity can't be allowed to fester.

    Be of good comfort, Master Ridley, and play the man; we shall this day light such a candle by God's grace in England as shall never be put out.

    by Bollox Ref on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 11:34:49 AM PDT

  •  Finally. (0+ / 0-)

    "Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops." General Buck Turgidson

    by muledriver on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 11:56:57 AM PDT

  •  every warhawk in congress (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    protectspice
    You know what does represent a threat to the the United States

    _______________The DOD/ War Department, which consumes 22% of the national budget, is the world's largest employer with 3.2 million employees.

    by allenjo on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 12:17:22 PM PDT

  •  if they are no threat (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    johnnygunn

    that certainly makes our decisions easy. So, because we want or decisions to be easy, let's declare that they are no threat.

    Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

    by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 12:24:00 PM PDT

  •  I found the title and tone of this article (5+ / 0-)

    "Find a coffee shop. Eat a scone" quite off-putting and out of touch considered the horror and evil that ISIS is spreading.

    I may agree that they are not a fundamental threat to the US or other Western countries; it's the local people who are experiencing the terror and will continue to do so. But that ought to be enough to avoid such a lightweight tone. On an emotional level we should freak out of what is happening.

  •  you are so wrong (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    brightlights, delver, johnnygunn

    clue less. You underestimate the danger from ISIS to the region, to Europe and to the US. It is all going to blow up in our face if the world doesn't responds with unity

  •  I don't think the lack of a threat to us is enough (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mariken, Catte Nappe, andrewj54

    to take military action by us off of the table completely.

    I personally think a good case can be made that we get out of there, give up the freaking oil, and let the locals sort it out. Any extremist theocracy in our world today is doomed without us doing anything, if not to violent revolution or invasion and annihilation, then to becoming gradually more moderate with the passage of time.

    And yet, those extremist theocratic warriors are doing some very bad things to a bunch of people who genuinely don't like it, but are powerless to prevent it. That sticks in our craw.

    We can just stay here behind our frontier and let the “others” duke it out, and in most cases that's probably the wise thing to do. But genocide, which is one of the very bad things the extremist theocratic warriors are doing, simply isn't acceptable. If we have the power to make it stop (do we?), well, then a very good case could be made for stopping it. There have been any number of occasions when we have stared past ongoing genocide and done nothing. I believe that that has diminished us as a nation and as human beings.

    So, maybe we should do the minimum that we can do to protect our citizens who are directly and imminently threatened and to eliminate the war crimes and crimes against humanity, but beyond that, let the locals sort it out. Sort of a half-assed compromise-y pragmatism, but maybe it's the best we can do.

    Incidentally, I think that this is close to what President Obama's goal has been all along.

    •  Recent op-ed from Romeo Dallaire (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      andrewj54, delver, johnnygunn
      In 1994, I was tasked with stopping a genocide waged, in part, by children and youth.

      At the time, I was the United Nations Force Commander for the UN Assistance Mission to Rwanda.

      Despite my efforts, 800,000 people were killed in just 100 days. Preventing this genocide was possible; it was our moral obligation. And it’s a failure that has haunted me every day for the last 20 years.
      And when we fail to intervene, especially when children are being indoctrinated into the war, we must be prepared for prolonged conflicts and cycles of violence that become more difficult to address for generations to come.
      Shirking our responsibility now will lead to many more generations of intense oppression that we will not be able to ignore in the future.
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

      “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

      by Catte Nappe on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 01:03:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Just because ISIS isn't as well organized as AQ (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BarackStarObama

    doesn't mean that they won't try to pull off something like AQ did. Especially when the US is (correctly) attacking it in order to prevent genocide.

    It isn't worth starting a scare campaign, but it is worth keeping an eye on them. This is why I support the NSA surveillance program! If we know what they are up to we can react. If someone in the US is talking to or sending email to an ISIS member in Syria or Iraq, I want the US government to know about that.

  •  AMEN!!!!!! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mr Robert

    Today's WashPost editorial page (Sunday, 24 August) carried an op-ed by a guy named XXXX Zehari, a Kurdish ex-pat or something like that.  In the middle of the article, he warned that if we don't defeat ISIS in Iraq, we'll have to fight them here in the USofA.

    HORSESHIT.

    As a young Army lieutenant in 1965, I was told if we didn't stand up to the Commies in Vietnam, they'd take over Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, . . . . and we'd be fighting them in the streets of San Francisco.  I believed it for a while then I went to Vietnam -- twice -- and came home very pissed off at the "best and the brightest" who killed 60,000 of us and left many more thousands of us wounded, both physically and emotionally.

    Then there was most of the 20th Century where we were told we had to spend zillions of $$$ to stop the Ruskies in Europe and anywhere else they raised their evil heads.  Then they collapsed and no one said much.

    And now it's the "Mooslim terrorists" who will soon be marching down every Main Street in the USA.

    You know who the enemy is?  The REAL THREAT TO THIS NATION IS:
    -- A Supreme Court that has turned our political system over to the highest bidder
    -- A cowardly Congress and cowardly state legislatures who mistake the Second Amendment for anarchy
    -- State legislatures whose gerrymandering makes our national legislature a permanent do-nothing class.

    In the words of that eminent philosopher, Pogo: "We have met the enemy and he is us."

  •  this post is so NUTZ that .. (3+ / 0-)

    you gotta' be kidding! I'm as Liberal as anyone here, probably MORE, and I want ISIS defeated, right where they stand. I think we should lay off, perhaps even ally with Assad, rebuild the Iraqi Shiites, give an OK to Iran to step in, arm the Kurds, and KILL ISIS. Create a "honeypot" where Jihadists immigrate to, then kill them . Make it last 5 years, and draw in lots of Jihadists, and kill them.
    And it won't be us doing it. It will be other Muslims.
    Assad, while a dictator, allowed Jews and Christians to live in Syria, ISIS will kill them.
    I actually trust Iran. I trust the Kurds, but they need more autonomy. I may be for dividing Iraq into 3 parts, too bad the Sunni part will have no oik, LOL!
    As for oil prices, this physical World, this World under attack, this Warming World, NEEDS $200+/barrel oil. Make it too valuable to burn. Using one-forth what the World burns now at twice the cost (net is half as much spent on the stuff) is a good thing.

  •  ISIS IS an existential threat (0+ / 0-)

    to Western journalists who want to report from the Middle East.

    But that's not very important, is it?

    "Fighting for us, good. Winning, better. Talking about fighting? Not so good."--Atrios

    by andrewj54 on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 02:08:34 PM PDT

  •  Um.... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jon Says, andrewj54, delver

    "The day before 9/11, al-Qaeda had a well-defined leadership structure, bank accounts around the world, a country where they were welcome to set up their terrorist jungle gyms, and dreams of world conquest. How much of that is left?"

    Yeah, AQ didn't just decide to pack up their bags and quit. Making them almost irrelevant was a very costly and planned out endeavor.

    Grew up in southern VA. Have worked in 9 states across America. Managed races in NM/VA/DC. Was Deputy Political Director at DGA for the 2012 cycle. Follow me @bharatkrishnan if you want to be my friend. Currently managing Catherine Begaye for NM-HD 23

    by Bharat on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 03:26:24 PM PDT

    •  ISIS has done something that AQ was never able to (0+ / 0-)

      do.

      They've re-established the caliphate in an area that is geographically larger than the UK. They control a region of over 4M people that spans multiple countries. I think the situation calls for some concern.

      Grew up in southern VA. Have worked in 9 states across America. Managed races in NM/VA/DC. Was Deputy Political Director at DGA for the 2012 cycle. Follow me @bharatkrishnan if you want to be my friend. Currently managing Catherine Begaye for NM-HD 23

      by Bharat on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 08:09:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  So suddenly beheadings are the WORSE THING EVER... (0+ / 0-)

    So suddenly beheadings are the WORSE THING EVER! Seems to me the Brits can speak of unspeakable terror because they have some experience beheading people.

    I hate to break the grim news, but chopping heads off isn't some new idea that ISIS just cooked up in some Dr Evil lab.. The French did it for quite some time..

    A few years ago it was Saddam Hussein taking newborn babies out of incubators! *GASP!*

    So the propaganda machine is busy cranking out 'unspeakably bad guys' and of course ISIS is the worse of the worse and nobody can ever think of anyone worse EVER! By golly, even hanging and lynching people isn't as bad as ISIS because our government says so.

    I'm waiting to hear ISIS has a million nuclear weapons aimed at Cleveland and they're kidnapping pink white CHRISTIAN babies and have them chained to nuclear warheads with GRANDMA DEATH PANEL CAMPS in MEXICO!...not that that could EVER be worse than a beheading.

    It's part of the demonization leadup to war folks..

    •  Iraqis never took babies out of incubators (0+ / 0-)

      that never happened.  The 13 year old girl that said it happened was an Ambassadors daughter.
      Lauri J.  Fitz-Pegado of Hills & Knowlton cooked up that lie.

      80 % of Success is Just Showing Up!

      by Churchill on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 01:03:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sorry but I have to do this (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BlackWolf

    I honestly do not mean to hijack this diary but this ran an arrow right through me.  As it has many times before here on dKOS. I apologize to any who disagree but I feel very strongly about this subject.  If you were in my lifestyle sub-group then you would feel the same way.

    ISIS is a ragtag organization on the far side of the world, armed mostly with the discards we either sold to the last set of thugs (note: proper use of the term) who used the gear to cow their relatives, or the stuff we left sitting around because bringing the old stuff back threatened all those contracts for building new stuff.
    Now most of the folks here on dKOS know that I am a thug.  So I feel I can speak for all of us thugs.

    I do not care about any so-called "internet" definitions found for the word, but its use in this diary is wrong.

    A thug is a person who likes to fight (physically, with fists, not guns).  That's it.  Plain and simple.  Most of us thugs fight for a cause.  As I have said many times, someday when you least expect it you will hope a thug is somewhere nearby to come to your assistance.

    The term thug comes from India and is a term used to describe a sect of assassins who follow the Hindu goddess Kali.  In theory they have not existed in India since the mid 19th Century but due to the way they did their trade the term "thug" was picked up by the British during the Indian Colonial period and made its way into the English lexicon as a person who fights or who likes to fight.

    The proper word to use in this diary is despot.  A despot can be a despised ruler of absolute power or someone, or group of people who want to rule or control according to a specific doctrine.  Either way the despot is cruel and has little or no regard to human life.

    I doubt any of the ISIS people actually want to fight or actually like to fight.  This would preclude them from being thugs.  They only fight because they are hell-driven by exposure and indoctrination into a fundamental religious organization which compels them to do so in order to impose an absolute, strict and cruel rule upon the people.  And THAT makes them despots.

    Most other thugs I know are very nice people.  I am a nice person.  But I would give up a night of hard core sex for a good fight.  But only for purpose.  We thugs don't pick fights.  Many of us are cage fighters nowadays because we can fight for profit and entertainment to others. But we do not start confrontations. But we can easily end them.

    Get it right folks.  We thugs have been mis-categorized for years -- ever since Easyriders.  We are not that mean.

    The hip-hop community has picked up on the term, a var of its original meaning.  In the hip-hop world a thug is a person who tries to deal with the difficulties in life that plague himself or his community, usually racism and poverty and other inner-city political oppression.  The hip-hop thug is a social fighter for the solution to his woes but usually does nothing for himself, only for others (just like biker thugs only in a different setting).

    I am a biker, and a thug.  And I'm damn proud of it.

    O-ne-i-nis-to - Oh-no-mis-ta [Lakota]

    Wolfman

    Howlin' at the World from the Left Side of the Planet

    by WolfmanSpike on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 03:58:02 PM PDT

  •  Yeah, why listen to experts? (4+ / 0-)

    What does the president's Sec of Defense know? Or his Director of Central Intelligence? After all you're a writer.

    And just because ISIS is better financed, more brutal, and controls more territory than Al Qaeda what's the worry?

  •  Is someone freaking out? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    johnnygunn

    Your commentary appears callous and cavalier.

  •  You overstate the point.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    the fan man

    ISIS is not a currently a threat to US national interests or national  security, in the way that Hitler's Germany was. In that you are undoubtedly right (and of course, about further false analogies to Hitler made with Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, etc. etc. etc).

    However, to US individuals here and abroad, yes.  When I say that, mind you I can go as far as including the 9/11 under that umbrella--those ttacks were not something that measurably diminished US power. It killed a bunch of civilians, yes, but diminished US power not a whit. For a WWII analogue, the 9/11 attacks were Bin Laden's V-2 rocket. Worrisome, cheap drone technology may become available one day to 'stateless warriors', for lack of a better term. And of course if any of these get nuclear weapons (even 'dirty bombs') that changes things once more for the worse.

    I think you would have strengthened your point had you mentioned ISIS's numerous enemies--Assad, Iran, Shia Iraq, the Kurds, Hezbollah, and virtiually every Syrian rebel group, including Al-Qaeda. US intelligence infers that Iraq alone has at least 200,000 reliable troops, while the total number of ISIS "fighters" (however you define the term) ranges from c. 10,000 to 50,000. Part of the reason for the current bombing campaign is to degrade ISIS's armed forces by destroying the US-made weaponry captured from the Iraqis, to once again 'level the playing field' between ISIS and its opponents. Properly aided, they should be capable of at least containing ISIS, if not destroying it.

  •  ISIL = BIG OIL MONARCHS GAVE THEM $3+ BILLION (0+ / 0-)

    So they have the GOOD STUFF!

    The real enemy is QATAR + SAUDIS!

  •  Assad read your piece and gave them an airbase. (0+ / 0-)

    One problem with the US crying wolf over every "terror cell" from Buffalo to Newburgh is that we can get overly comfortable with the idea that everything presented as a threat is simply hype.
    ISIL is not an existential threat to the US, it is a wild card in a region we have already destabilized. Whether many or any abroad will heed its call to mayhem remains to be seen. In the meantime, fighting an enemy ready to starve hundreds of thousands into submission or death for "faith" does scare me.

    They will self destruct, our job is not to allow them to take too many others with them as they go down.

    Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther

    by the fan man on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:13:18 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for this important diary. (0+ / 0-)
    We demonstrated that we were a nation willing to do anything to preserve freedom. Even take away freedom.
    As Benjamin Franklin wrote, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

    In the weeks and months after 9/11, I saw the following quote posted by at least two sources:  Osama Bin Laden, upon being informed that he and his warriors were being called Al Qaeda: "That's what they're calling us?  Oh. OK."  (I make no claim as to the veracity of those posts.)

    There is no information -- NONE -- that is not the product of some person or agency, who or which very likely has some kind of agenda.  I'd like to see more responsible people spend more energy verifying the source and intent of the data they absorb, and perhaps less reacting to it in a reactionary way.

    Let's calm down about ISIS, or ISIL, or whatever their name du jour is.

    Does anyone remember that the common and accepted political term for "conservative" used to be "reactionary"?

    Sometimes I think we are over-informed.

    How children dance to the unlived lives of their parents. Rilke

    by ceebee7 on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 07:56:25 PM PDT

  •  The big threat to our country is the (0+ / 0-)

    republican/teabag/libertarian party.

    "The tides go out, the tides come in...Nobody knows why." Glenn Beck, 2014.

    by old mark on Sun Aug 24, 2014 at 10:36:55 PM PDT

  •  Yeah, yeah, yeah. All That. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dorsano

    Still, any group that kills reporters deserves a date with the Marines. Sometimes people are bad and you have to do something about it.

    But if we wanted to be serious about this, we'd get off oil. Want to really hurt the bad guys (all of them)? Put a few hundred billion dollars into renewables and stop giving subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.

    I'm not opposed to bombing. You just have to know where to bomb.

  •  ISIS has managed to unite most the entire world (0+ / 0-)

    short of an invasion from outer space by aliens I didn't think that possible.

  •  Couldn't Disagree More (0+ / 0-)

    The IS poses a real threat to the region and to the West. If it weren't for U.S. intervention its soldiers would have rolled through most if not all of Kurdistan. Part of its strategy is to create a refugee crisis. Those refugees flee across the border and become someone else's problem to feed, clothe, and house. In the region we have no idea how much of the population of Jordan, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, and Turkey support what IS has accomplished and would take up arms against their own governments. IS' followers in the West can't seize control or topple governments but they could make our lives hell through repeated terrorist attacks.

    We need to wipe out IS in both Iraq and Syria. I view them the same as I do nazis. They will always have followers, but keep them from posing a threat. In this case it means taking the fight to them. I'd like to see congress get off its ass and declare war; give the president the power and the backing to defeat them like we did the Germans and Japanese, unconditional surrender.

  •  ISIS threat (0+ / 0-)

    When ISIS takes over Pakistan and its nuclear arsenal, don't mind if we both say "I told you so"

    Stop them now or stop them never.

  •  They are a serious threat (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lungfish

    Sure I get that some people want to exaggerate the threat to start another war in Iraq.  But that doesn't mean you should downplay the threat to nothing.  This group has gained considerable ground.  They have money and have captured alot of military equipment.  They have ambitions beyond what they already done.  The treat is to the stability of an already highly unstable region.  I believe it's time to act.  Not put troops in but coordinate with troops on the ground from other nations to at least reduce them to where they are a minor threat.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Riane Eisler

    by noofsh on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 04:52:43 AM PDT

  •  Agree except - (0+ / 0-)

    except for 2 things

    1) there's no doubt they could do something, and you don't want to be that someone who is in their line of fire - I never thought 9/11 could happen, then it did

    2) the ability for a few lone nuts to do massive damage increases every year. One day, it will be possible for one nut to detonate a nuke in NYC.  Maybe it will be 50 years from now, or 5, or 105, or never. But it's possible - and more and more possible all the time.  There is no solution to that except robot overlords.

    the most comprehensive college hockey resource collegehockeynews.com

    by AdamW on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 10:04:27 AM PDT

  •  Honestly, that sums it up. (0+ / 0-)
    just because Hagel and McCain and half the United States Senate feels that KBR and Lockheed-Martin are overdue for a really good pay day.
    Thank you for writing this and for everyone else who calls out the salivating war profiteers in plain English.

    "No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money." -- JC, Matthew 6:24

    by Chi on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 10:49:40 AM PDT

  •  Excellent diary. Spot on! (0+ / 0-)
  •  ISIL worse than Soviets, Nazis, Japan? WTF (0+ / 0-)

    an existential threat?  Come on.

    80 % of Success is Just Showing Up!

    by Churchill on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 12:59:26 PM PDT

  •  Origin of ISIS (0+ / 0-)

    This may help put things in perspective.

    http://nsnbc.me/...

    Let's just say efforts to inspire support for WWIII continue to fail.  Iran... Syria...Ukraine...now IRAQ again...

    I think this old pony has lost it touch...it's one trick just doesn't seem to work anymore...

Meteor Blades, claude, Alumbrados, JWC, buffalo soldier, vicki, Bill in Portland Maine, Chi, Phoenix Woman, Liberal Thinking, native, mimi, janinsanfran, TJ, CleverNickName, waytac, eeff, Duncan Idaho, Cambridgemac, expatjourno, hubcap, davelf2, muledriver, Bronxist, aitchdee, k9disc, emmasnacker, Dallasdoc, johanus, flatford39, liberte, mosesfreeman, Emmy, rambler american, environmentalist, Ohkwai, jarneys dad, greatferm, JanetT in MD, schumann, Laurence Lewis, estutes, where4art, Pluto, bunsk, peacestpete, Ekaterin, psyched, noladq, begone, Nowhere Man, esquimaux, Hirodog, Orinoco, Medium Head Boy, smokeymonkey, AoT, global citizen, gpoutney, Rosaura, JVolvo, Spock36, ER Doc, onionjim, CA Nana, kurt, Ian Reifowitz, markthshark, BeerNotWar, Aaa T Tudeattack, One Pissed Off Liberal, out of left field, devis1, bfbenn, newpioneer, NoMoJoe, jayden, mcgee85, Got a Grip, leonard145b, ImpeachKingBushII, Steve CXS, Da Rock, zorp, on the cusp, Mike Williams, 6412093, Thomas Twinnings, Mr Stagger Lee, brooklynbadboy, filby, monkeybrainpolitics, Calamity Jean, TomFromNJ, Dancing Frog, RandomNonviolence, chalatenango, BYw, Tross, briefer, rhutcheson, CIndyCasella, Zappatero, postalblue, Turn Left, WhizKid331, MufsMom, J M F, arendt, ceebee7, divineorder, CanyonWren, maryabein, indres, mkor7, Fixed Point Theorem, aunt blabby, dRefractor, petral, kevinpdx, winkk, IreGyre, Leftcandid, Mokurai, roadbear, The Jester, serendipityisabitch, politik, marsanges, Polly Syllabic, renzo capetti, shyewoods, tb mare, Egalitare, rfall, Nada Lemming, Oh Mary Oh, annieli, sturunner, kerflooey, allenjo, kayak58, Tommye, slowbutsure, stone clearing, implicate order, fwcetus, KCthinking, FarWestGirl, thomask, political mutt, sofa turf, enhydra lutris, organicus, red rabbit, Liberal Mole, Andrew F Cockburn, old mark, blue aardvark, weinerschnauzer, nncardoso, StratCat, Auriandra, Azazello, Laurel in CA, Sister Inspired Revolver of Freedom, DeadHead, teachered, IndieGuy, Jakkalbessie, Eric Nelson, oldcrow, Joieau, TRsCousin, Debflyer, dandy lion, Mr Robert, Philbutrin, Rixar13, FrY10cK, Dmusicguy, MrQA, cablecargal, Foothills of Oblivion, mike49, David Michigan, AmericanAnt, VeloDramatic, Tim DeLaney, aresea, GerryOregon, Yo Bubba, Badgermom, Icicle68, tampaedski, CATSASS, Patango, OceanDiver, Brian1066, skepticalcitizen, dreamweaver1, Irish Liberal, danjb, Mystic Michael, LtPowers, Tronsix2, Dodgerdog1, eagleray, Eccentric1, SinglePayer1, Propter Hoc, hbk, CJB2012, RepresentUsPlease, Doctor Jazz, gearymc, plg, OuijaForestCat, nicestjerk, LewS, mfcascanet, Schneewolfe, leftneckgirl, LeftCoastCommonSense

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site