Iran: Collapse of ISIS is a Defeat For USA

[xcvbn]

there have been PLENTY of moderate arab governments in the region. Problem is, the US keeps toppling them. Iran pre-revolution, Iraq, Syria on the chopping block. Problem is, the US doesnt want moderate government in the middle east so much as it wants an ally. Like Saudi Arabia, we'll put up with a totalitarian islamist regime so long as money is being handed over.

But who gets this money? Surely it's not taxpayers.

Would be great if the IRS and FBI even tried following the Saudi>US money trail.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

The defeat of IS is a defeat for the US, and on several levels.

1. Assad remaining in power is a defeat for the US
2. No Qatar pipeline
3. Possibly of an Iran-Syrian pipeline - making Iran stronger economically.
4. Not a blow against Russia's economic and military power.
5. Iraq's Shia majority more likely to be influenced by Iran than the US.
6. The fact that Iran helped defeat IS makes them look less and less like the demon the US has framing them as for the last 50 years.
7. That influence endangers the US plan for a military presence in the region.

If you disagree, then what would the US "win" by defeating IS?

 

[second sight]

Iran is micheal brown

 

[xcvbn]

Can't find the infamous John McCain "only 5-7% of rebels are extremists" quote, but here's some war drum beating in favor of the "moderate Syrian rebels"



Let's also not forget about the several million USD/month spent on the CIA training "moderate rebels"

 

[Islam Imamate]

there have been PLENTY of moderate arab governments in the region. Problem is, the US keeps toppling them. Iran pre-revolution, Iraq, Syria on the chopping block. Problem is, the US doesnt want moderate government in the middle east so much as it wants an ally. Like Saudi Arabia, we'll put up with a totalitarian islamist regime so long as money is being handed over.

Those governments were not moderate. Secular, yes, but moderate? Not really. One you could consider moderate that the US toppled was Mossadegh in Iran in 53 when they reinstated the Shah over his democratically elected coalition government via a coup.

 

[Bloodworth]

Can't find the infamous John McCain "only 5-7% of rebels are extremists" quote, but here's some war drum beating in favor of the "moderate Syrian rebels"



Let's also not forget about the several million USD/month spent on the CIA training "moderate rebels"

I remember McCain saying he knows about everything going on in Syria and Iraq.
There would be no attacks or fighting without his knowledge
What a skechty anti American

 

[Rod1]

If you disagree, then what would the US "win" by defeating IS?

It may win its geopolitical independence from being Israel and SA bitches to an actual world power.

 

[Bloody Pulp]

That’s some Trudeau level reasoning.

 

[Bacco]

Obama and France caused shit in Syria

 

[Rod1]

That’s some Trudeau level reasoning.

How come? Iran is stronger than ever, despite the best efforts of the US and its "allies".

 

[Grenz]

What is the Middle Eastern moderate going to fight for? The chance to lose a democratic election to an Islamist party which will assume totalitarian power immediately after? Good luck getting people to fight in favour of that.

 

[Grenz]

Wow we went over the countless times and only makes you look more stupid.

I never said Isis was formed under Obama, i said Isis rose to power under hussein Obama.
Became world wide under Obama.

Get it....

And why were they able to do this. Because Obama pulled out with zero exit plan.
Now don't play dumb and say the plans were already in place before Obama.
He was the one who executed the horrible plan resulting in the rise of isis, why because he pulled troops and left Iraq to be the wild wild west, anything goes.

Something he is praised for in Iraq.

What does ending foreign involvement look like to you? Once the troops were pulled out (to stop bleeding money, to prevent more US deaths and to stop creating more ostracized and deeply hurting veterans, let's keep that in mind), what was supposed to have been left behind? Whatever it was supposed to be, it couldn't have existed without US troops as protection. This was an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation, that's not something you're ever going to smoothly transition into some form of a functioning democracy.

It was either pull out now, or basically set up a permanent occupation, like in Afghanistan.

 

[Bloodworth]

What does ending foreign involvement look like to you? Once the troops were pulled out (to stop bleeding money, to prevent more US deaths and to stop creating more ostracized and deeply hurting veterans, let's keep that in mind), what was supposed to have been left behind? Whatever it was supposed to be, it couldn't have existed without US troops as protection. This was an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation, that's not something you're ever going to smoothly transition into some form of a functioning democracy.

It was either pull out now, or basically set up a permanent occupation, like in Afghanistan.

Well look at the results from just leaving without an exit strategy.

Not good.

American deaths were not out of control.

Set up a military state and take over oil production. Let Muslims in Jordan and Egypt help set up a government

 

[Grenz]

Well look at the results from just leaving without an exit strategy.

Not good.

American deaths were not out of control.

Set up a military state and take over oil production. Let Muslims in Jordan and Egypt help set up a government

Well that's pretty much the strategy of the Bush administration, keeping that up would have meant permanent occupation, and nobody - or at least the majority of the US people - wanted that after 8 years of Bush. The financial crisis didn't help either. Politically, it wasn't really an option, especially since everyone knew the pretense for the invasion was bogus in the first place.

 

[Roaming East]

Those governments were not moderate. Secular, yes, but moderate? Not really. One you could consider moderate that the US toppled was Mossadegh in Iran in 53 when they reinstated the Shah over his democratically elected coalition government via a coup.

compared to what was installed afterwards, every single one of those dictatorships was moderate.

 

[Islam Imamate]

compared to what was installed afterwards, every single one of those dictatorships was moderate.

I don't think so. They may have been secular but they all had pretty repressive security apparatuses that they extensively used to repress dissent. I don't consider that moderate at all.