ISIS burns Jordanian Pilot alive

[Fern]

So we don't like Iran. I don't like it's leadership either. It would have been great if nitwit Bush hadn't made sure the moderates got completely undermined by his stupidity, but here we are.
-snip-

Could you explain the above claim a bit?

I really don't know what you're speaking of.

TIA

Fern

 

[Fern]

Can anyone explain to me the Israel / Jordan relationship? I know they've had conflict in the past, but today are both allies of the US and seem to be peaceful towards one another. If ISIS did attack Jordan and was close to Israel, what might happen? I imagine if Israel got involved, that may cause some problems. Either way I think the US would do a lot to help keep Jordan stable, but what do you guys think?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel–Jordan_peace_treaty

I believe Jordan is unique among the Arab states over there in that they have recognized Israel etc.

There is some consternation among the Jordanian population as many are Palestine.

Fern

 

[bshole]

Well from hated enemy, Assad becomes our friend again....

So we should support Assad now.... right?

Syria urged Jordan to work with it to fight ISIS and al-Qaeda's Syria wing, condemning what it described as the "heinous" killing of a Jordanian pilot by militants, Syria's state news agency SANA said on Wednesday.

The Syrian foreign ministry called on Jordan, which is part of a U.S.-led aerial campaign against ISIS, "to cooperate in the fight against terrorism represented by the organization Daesh and Nusra Front ... and other terrorist organizations associated with them in Syria and the region."

http://en.ammonnews.net/article.aspx?articleno=27896

 

[Fern]

Well from hated enemy, Assad becomes our friend again....

So we should support Assad now.... right?
-snip-

Says who? Assad?

I don't see anything in your linked article that suggests we should, or are, going to support Assad.

What I do see is Syria trying to take advantage of the situation (DIAF pilot) to muster some help from its immediate neighbor.

Since Jordan appears to want vengeance I suspect he's going to get it (Jordan bombing ISIS), even if only inadvertently.

Fern

 

[sphenodont]

Good luck tolerating and respecting those who wish to behead, crucify, and burn you to death. I think Ill choose another path......

Indeed. Look out, Nebraskans!

 

[bshole]

Says who? Assad?

I don't see anything in your linked article that suggests we should, or are, going to support Assad.

What I do see is Syria trying to take advantage of the situation (DIAF pilot) to muster some help from its immediate neighbor.

Since Jordan appears to want vengeance I suspect he's going to get it (Jordan bombing ISIS), even if only inadvertently.

Fern

So you are thowing your support behind a band of local goat herders?! LMFAO!! Just keep bombing any group that gets any kind of power and popularity with the locals. What could go wrong.

Hell we NEVER have to stop dropping bombs. Christ the military industrial complex must be cumming in their pants. This literally will never end. Americans are so fucking retarded that they will never stop supporting this monumental stupidity.

 

[MrPickins]

Remember that this pilot did drop bombs on ISIS..... bombs that may have killed women and children. He was not some random innocent civillian. He was an active participant in the war. Remember that in WWII during the storming of Normandy, Americans burned Germans of their bunkers and let them die.

You realize there is a difference in how enemy soldiers are treated on the battlefield and when they are prisoners of war, right?

Get back with me when you have evidence of allied forces burning German POWs alive.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Could you explain the above claim a bit?

I really don't know what you're speaking of.

TIA

Fern

What Bush apparently didn't understand was the politics and power system of Iran (or just about anywhere else). Iran was one of the few places in the region where there was considerable support for the US after 9/11. At that time moderates were a growing influence and making headway in government. So the supportive Iranians were told by Bush that they were evil. Part of an Axis of Evil in fact. In one ill advised speech he insulted an entire nation although the people causing trouble were losing ground to pro-west influences. Bush should have understood that Iran has a long memory as being descended from Persia and the people are very nationalistic. The next series of elections saw not only the moderates evicted but ineligible to run. That was because they "betrayed" Iranians to the neocolonialist Bush and the US. Now I doubt that Bush intended to insult everyone but what he meant was not how the Iranians took it, and anyone who knew anything should have seen that coming. So we wound up with Ahmadinejad and the very people we didn't want to see in power being the only ones allowed to hold office.

Not smart.

 

[Fern]

Originally Posted by Fern
Says who? Assad?

I don't see anything in your linked article that suggests we should, or are, going to support Assad.

What I do see is Syria trying to take advantage of the situation (DIAF pilot) to muster some help from its immediate neighbor.

Since Jordan appears to want vengeance I suspect he's going to get it (Jordan bombing ISIS), even if only inadvertently.

Fern

So you are thowing your support behind a band of local goat herders?! LMFAO!! Just keep bombing any group that gets any kind of power and popularity with the locals. What could go wrong.

Hell we NEVER have to stop dropping bombs. Christ the military industrial complex must be cumming in their pants. This literally will never end. Americans are so fucking retarded that they will never stop supporting this monumental stupidity.

WTH are you talking about?

Nothing, nothing you've posted above has anything to do with the post of mine you quoted.

Fern

 

[bshole]

WTH are you talking about?

Nothing, nothing you've posted above has anything to do with the post of mine you quoted.

Fern

Hey I am in full outrage mode, just go with it.....

 

[Fern]

What Bush apparently didn't understand was the politics and power system of Iran (or just about anywhere else). Iran was one of the few places in the region where there was considerable support for the US after 9/11. At that time moderates were a growing influence and making headway in government. So the supportive Iranians were told by Bush that they were evil. Part of an Axis of Evil in fact. In one ill advised speech he insulted an entire nation although the people causing trouble were losing ground to pro-west influences. Bush should have understood that Iran has a long memory as being descended from Persia and the people are very nationalistic. The next series of elections saw not only the moderates evicted but ineligible to run. That was because they "betrayed" Iranians to the neocolonialist Bush and the US. Now I doubt that Bush intended to insult everyone but what he meant was not how the Iranians took it, and anyone who knew anything should have seen that coming. So we wound up with Ahmadinejad and the very people we didn't want to see in power being the only ones allowed to hold office.

Not smart.

For so many years we were told that Imadinnerjacket has nothing to do with anything since Iran is run is by the Mullahs.

Now the Mullahs aren't in control and it's the elected officials afterall?

P&N is hard to keep up with.

Fern

 

[Ns1]

Hey I am in full outrage mode, just go with it.....

lol :thumbsup:

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

For so many years we were told that Imadinnerjacket has nothing to do with anything since Iran is run is by the Mullahs.

Now the Mullahs aren't in control and it's the elected officials afterall?

P&N is hard to keep up with.

Fern

That would be the same misunderstanding Bush made. Iran's government is run by Mullahs, however they allowed more moderate and secular people to run the day to day affairs of government. The conservatives were losing ground to the moderates and it was the former's lucky day when Bush locked them into power. Now Mullahs do determine who can run for election and moderates do not exist. Clerics do have ultimate say, however that did not mean they had to run everything. They still delegate, but to people who never were for normalization of relations. Turns out neither were we.

 

[blastingcap]

That would be the same misunderstanding Bush made. Iran's government is run by Mullahs, however they allowed more moderate and secular people to run the day to day affairs of government. The conservatives were losing ground to the moderates and it was the former's lucky day when Bush locked them into power. Now Mullahs do determine who can run for election and moderates do not exist. Clerics do have ultimate say, however that did not mean they had to run everything. They still delegate, but to people who never were for normalization of relations. Turns out neither were we.

The elected officials have no hard power. Like when Rouhani talked a little bit too much about corruption, the clerics told him to shut up and he did. If he really steps out of line they will do anything up to and including fabricating crimes to lock him away and replace him with someone who toes the line.

Similarly, media is very tightly regulated. Step out of line too much and you go to jail or worse.

Look at the Green Revolution and how the clerics tolerated it... by persecuting those involved.

The clerics especially Khamenei have ultimate hard power and control the security forces; Khamenei even has his own personal bodyguard and financial empire (some earned, a lot stolen, as I referenced above).

This is in addition to the patronage system that clerics and hardliners enjoy. There is grumbling especially among the young that one is too often hired and promoted based on perceived piety rather than ability, especially to higher government jobs.

Given how the Green Revolution failed, I am very doubtful that Iran will shake off the theocratic dictatorship, censorship, etc. anytime soon. I'm not even sure if they are really moderating all that quickly. Many of the people who hate it there leave for other countries, if they can, and conservative religious people make more children than the moderates. (A lot of times you meet some Iranians in the West and sure they seem fine, but that's a self-selecting sample. Iranians who are actually in Iran are on average more conservative. It's the liberal Iranians that are more likely to leave.)

If Iran does manage to replace the theocratic dictatorship with an actual Parliament or something, that could help a lot, especially if Iran stops sponsoring bad actors like Hezbollah and Hamas. If Assad is still in power by that time, he will lose his main financial benefactor and his regime would likely collapse.

 

[Nebor]

Well from hated enemy, Assad becomes our friend again....

So we should support Assad now.... right?



http://en.ammonnews.net/article.aspx?articleno=27896

We should have been supporting Assad from the beginning. He's been telling us that the "rebels" were terrorists affiliated with Al Qaeda and other well known groups since the beginning of the civil war. We very nearly went to war to overthrow him early on, but popular support opposed it. Western educated & supported dictators are proven as the most stable government possible in the middle east, see Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Israel, etc. Without them you get an unending civil war and high oil prices.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The elected officials have no hard power. Like when Rouhani talked a little bit too much about corruption, the clerics told him to shut up and he did. If he really steps out of line they will do anything up to and including fabricating crimes to lock him away and replace him with someone who toes the line.

Similarly, media is very tightly regulated. Step out of line too much and you go to jail or worse.

Look at the Green Revolution and how the clerics tolerated it... by persecuting those involved.

The clerics especially Khamenei have ultimate hard power and control the security forces; Khamenei even has his own personal bodyguard and financial empire (some earned, a lot stolen, as I referenced above).

This is in addition to the patronage system that clerics and hardliners enjoy. There is grumbling especially among the young that one is hired and promoted based on perceived piety, especially to higher government jobs.

Given how the Green Revolution failed, I am very doubtful that Iran will shake off the theocratic dictatorship, censorship, etc. anytime soon. I'm not even sure if they are really moderating all that quickly. Many of the people who hate it there leave for other countries, if they can, and conservative religious people make more children than the moderates.

There are actually at least three groups. The first, the clerics, are just that and as you say they retain ultimate power. That does not mean that everything which happens under their sun is run by them if for no other reason than it's tedious. The "underlings" if you will are more moderate or conservative, but not in a religious sense so much for secular functions. It's more like our Conservatives and Liberals, but religion is all pervasive. It's just less so. Of course there are no liberals in Iran, and if there are moderates I don't know who they are. I think the best way is to consider everyone religious and shift US conservativism and moderates more right. Again, having ultimate say so does not make the clerics omniscient nor omnipresent.

You do have a valid point about how much control the clerics can exert. It took years of back door diplomacy with the west to get where we were, and the failure of the prior administration to think showed why changes were slow. To show collaboration with the West (not just the US) meant potentially serious consequences. People were getting used to more liberty though, and while I don't know if a Western style government will ever exist in Iran, but I don't care as long as their people are happy and it's a peaceful nation.

 

[Ns1]

some good news

Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh later stressed to CNN that the airstrikes marked the beginning of his nation's retaliation over the pilot's death, but not the start of its fight against terrorism. He vowed to destroy ISIS.

"We are upping the ante. We're going after them wherever they are, with everything that we have. But it's not the beginning, and it's certainly not the end," Judeh said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/05/world/isis-jordan/index.html

 

[blastingcap]

You know, the funny part is how the allegedly less-hardline Rouhani is even MORE disliked than his predecessor, and how the rest of the Middle East has caught on to Iran's sectarian meddling as Iran's regional popularity in the last several years has slid down: http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/06/18/irans-global-image-largely-negative/

Iran often alleges that OTHERS are being sectarian to deflect attention away from how Iran is the one being sectarian all too often, like Iran backing sectarian leaders like Maliki and Assad and meddling in Lebanon via Hezbollah, and possible indirect involvement in the assassination of Lebanese leader Hariri since Hezbollah was likely responsible and Hezbollah is Iran's lapdog. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Rafic_Hariri (Obama also backed Maliki but he would have backed a cow if it would have allowed him to exit Iraq sooner... and of course it was too soon. Bush was a catastrophe in foreign policy but Obama is pretty bad too.) That probably has something to do with Iran's unpopularity among Sunnis and rightfully so.

Similarly, Iran loves railing against US intervention in the Middle East (which we should have left long ago), drawing attention away from how Iran itself is one of the worst meddlers in the Middle East.

 

[bradly1101]

So you don't think that they are the scum of the earth or you think that we have the moral low ground to a bunch of thugs that burn people alive and carry out mass executions based on religious following or mass kidnappings and child rape?

I try to look at all sides without taking any. Our enemies find plenty wrong with us too. Can we bomb away behavior or an idea? That's what they'd do to us if they could.

I'd say we have to negotiate, but if that means sending in Kerry...

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

You know, the funny part is how the allegedly less-hardline Rouhani is even MORE disliked than his predecessor, and how the rest of the Middle East has caught on to Iran's sectarian meddling as Iran's regional popularity in the last several years has slid down: http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/06/18/irans-global-image-largely-negative/

Iran often alleges that OTHERS are being sectarian to deflect attention away from how Iran is the one being sectarian all too often, like Iran backing sectarian leaders like Maliki and Assad and meddling in Lebanon via Hezbollah, and possible indirect involvement in the assassination of Lebanese leader Hariri since Hezbollah was likely responsible and Hezbollah is Iran's lapdog. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Rafic_Hariri (Obama also backed Maliki but he would have backed a cow if it would have allowed him to exit Iraq sooner... and of course it was too soon. Bush was a catastrophe in foreign policy but Obama is pretty bad too.) That probably has something to do with Iran's unpopularity among Sunnis and rightfully so.

Similarly, Iran loves railing against US intervention in the Middle East (which we should have done long ago), drawing attention away from how Iran itself is one of the worst meddlers in the Middle East.

Everyone has their fingers in the ME pie, including themselves. If I could go back and change how we handled one thing in the 70's it would be to push energy research full force. The very best thing that could have happened would be to make the region irrelevant. Oil is a valuable raw material and no matter how low a bbl of oil goes it will come back up and we'll still be dependent on others. I'd rather that not be the case.

 

[blastingcap]

everyone has their fingers in the me pie, including themselves. If i could go back and change how we handled one thing in the 70's it would be to push energy research full force. The very best thing that could have happened would be to make the region irrelevant. Oil is a valuable raw material and no matter how low a bbl of oil goes it will come back up and we'll still be dependent on others. I'd rather that not be the case.

+999999999999999

 

[MongGrel]

Holy shit--can we elect this guy as our president? I'm not too bothered by that whole "king" thing...

Jordanian fighter jets strike hard at ISIS, pay tribute to murdered pilot

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/0...-king-against-isis-after-video-pilot-killing/

McCain seems to be pretty clueless in his old age as a side point, but that's just my opinion.

I think the strategy was to just support things till something like this happened to galvanize the ME and let the region police itself.

Turkey didn't bite a short while back, just drove to the border and ate popcorn.

This was pretty bad ass, I didn't read that one as I saw it earlier, but having the US ELINT and refueling in there was pretty cool.

Probably sent in Prowlers or something similar, not sure what the Air Force uses for electronic warfare these days, I didn't see the US ones mentioned specifically.

I think someone pissed off the wrong guys.

 

[OutHouse]

[/IMG]

 

[Ns1]

Holy shit--can we elect this guy as our president? I'm not too bothered by that whole "king" thing...

color me impressed

Then, in an unprecedented act of personal vengeance, the King, a trained pilot, was said to be planning to personally lead a combat mission to bomb ISIS positions in Syria.

 

[OutHouse]

Jordan's King Abdullah leading airstrikes himself.

http://toprightnews.com/?p=8221

thats one bad ass leader.