Like most of humanity, I have been stunned by the sheer savagery and cruelty of the Islamic State. Yet, thousands have flocked to the ISIS forces from the West. For me, it has been a particularly shocking phenomenon. The images that repel us, attract them. Religion is clearly a release for these people. A release from the obligations of decency and humanity. Images show Islamic State fighters laughing and enjoying the torture and murder of captives. Muslim clerics with ISIS assure them that they can treat non-Muslims as lower than animals and commit rape as an Islamically pure act. It has been an incredibly depressing time for those of us who believe that humans can aspire to true greatest of spirit and caring. This Christmas, however, my daughter showed me the YouTube clip below of a man named Matt Harding who goes around the world getting people to dance with him. After watching him, my faith in humanity was restored.
What is so striking about the Islamic State and other extreme Muslim groups is that they most hate joyous expressions from dancing to singing. They throw acid on little girls trying to become educated and destroy the houses of worship of other groups.
Nothing could be a greater antithesis to the hate of these extremists than Matt Harding and people like him:
What is even more reassuring is that he is not alone. Around the world, people are spontaneously singing and dancing. These are a few clips shared by our readers this year. Watching them restores some of the faith in the future that these extremists really cannot extinguish the joy in the world.
David, you put forth facts as if Anarchist denies them. WE have moved on beyond what ISL does, to what the proximate AND distal causes are behind what it does.
Eric’s facts and evidence as the same “facts and evidence” put forth to justify the Iraq war, that have been widely, and I mean widely discounted by everyone but the agents of the war and their apologists.
Yellow cake….Sadaam and Al Qaeda…WMDs (where is the note that the only WMD found in Iraq were the remnants of the program WE helped Iraq build to better war against Iran… which we kept secret and had our soldiers dismantle in secret without the required proper gear and precautions, which left a great many of them suffering from horrific diseases that the government still refuses to acknowledge… http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=0
Additionally, the fact that a legal case was made for the Iraq war does not justify it. Eric can provide as many legal briefs as he wants but it does not change this simple fact: every step taken to build a case against Sadaam and justify the invasion was based on false evidence that was cooked up to justify the war.
John Yoo made the case for the legality of torture, and now he is being ostracized for it
The horsemen of the war (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al) face criminal cases if they ever travel out of this country…
Colin Powell, who made the case for the invasion before the UN, regrets it to this day…
Our legislative body leaders who voted for the invasion now say they did it based on the info the Bush administration gave them, and now regret it.
Finally, to say that ISL existed before the Iraq war is to be dishonest at best. It sprung out of the vacuum caused by Sadaam’s disappearance. SO the best thing the propagandist can do is to spread its reach and its timeline, and claim that ISl is simply one of the heads of the beast, not the beast itself…and how better to do it but by using such terms such as Qutbist as the umbrella under which ISL operates?
We didn’t choose to be the world police, but someone has to be, who better than the U.S.
Anarchist 2.0 said …
However, your mindless subservience is noted.
With that kind of pejorative remark, why would expect anyone to engage you in a sensible discussion?
I don’t agree with much, if anything, you’ve said on this thread, but I’d be willing to discuss it. I’ll skip that because I don’t intend to have someone I don’t know, who knows nothing about me, my experiences and where I’ve been to be receptive what-so-ever. My impression, perhaps falsely construed, is that you do not really seek discussion, only a forum to say your bit and otherwise drive-by.
It’s time to send in the Marines to do some dancing on their heads, the Neville Chamberlin approach won’t work
“Religion or imperialism, sometimes it’s just hard to pick the lesser of the evils.”
I empathize with your dilemma Zack. It’s called ignorance, but if you give it time; study more, listen, open your mind and eventually you’ll form opinions based on sound, objective reasoning.
Anarchist,
Eric seems to present actual facts and evidence for his assertions. You seem to be the one who simply puts forward propaganda. Isis does indeed have prisoners and tortures them, beheads them, etc. Isis also invades Iraq, not to give the people there relief from a murdering dictator and establish the right to vote to the people, but to establish a caliphate.
What I find strange is your avatar. Perhaps you can explain why you choose to have for your avatar the image of an American lawyer turned evangelist who was not at all an anarchist nor pacifist. Why would you use the image of someone considered by many to be America’s greatest Christian evangelist?
Another depressing issue…. The retirement of the A-10 Thunder Bolt. ISIS worst nightmare.
Ooops. I had the name wrong. It is:
Because They Hate: A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America Paperback – January 8, 2008 by Brigitte Gabriel (Author)
A woman author has a book out which gets good reviews from those of us who have traveled the world. The name: Why They Hate. The root of the Islamic terrorist problem is the core of Islamic thought and teaching. All else is evil and go kill the other guy. I will find the book here at my marina clubhouse and provide the full title and author. Do not make the mistake of placing Islam in with the other religions of the world. It is more akin to a Nazi ideology than a world religion.
po@minutbol: “for we have had these debates before and we recognize the trails.”
The trail I mark out is the law and policy, fact basis of the mission.
Anarchist 2.0:
Well yeah, as eventually every 1L hears from a practitioner channeling John Stuart Mill, what is just ( your “right and wrong”) in your personal belief and what is legal are not necessarily in agreement.
Like I said to lester macgurdy, what is clear is the President’s decision for Operation Iraqi Freedom was right on the law and justified on the policy. From there, you can opine the law and policy are wrong. But in this case, I suggest that you review the primary sources and consider your opinion.
Anarchist 2.0:
“That the threat from Iraq was completely imaginary” is not what Saddam’s history, including the ISG findings, shows us.
In any case, the evaluation of Saddam’s threat and mandate to make Iraq compliant with its ceasefire obligations was a collective determination codified in the Gulf War ceasefire:
From UNSCR 1441 (2002):
At the same time, Saddam’s threat wasn’t evaluated only on Iraq’s disarmament violations, and Operation Iraqi Freedom didn’t only enforce Iraq’s disarmament obligations.
For example, alongside UNSCR 687, UNSCR 688 (1991) was the other foundational resolution of the Gulf War ceasefire:
With apologies to Crystal, Olly, and Anarchist, I posted the link to the event announcement for the Columbia professors’ panel on ISIS, not the page with the link to the video of the panel.
Correct link:
http://www.siwps.org/watch-video-of-siwps-panel-discussion-isis-in-iraq-syria-and-the-us/
And just in case, the youtube link itself:
Anarchist 2.0, Olly,
For a solid nuts-and-bolts explanation of the origins, character, and goals of ISIS, I recommend the video of the Columbia University professors’ ‘subject matter expert’ panel I recommended to Crystal Starheart at December 27, 2014 at 9:43 pm.
Here it is again:
http://www.siwps.org/event/isis-in-iraq-syria-and-the-us/
The origin story of ISIS – and AQI for that matter – did not start in Camp Bucca.
“Yes Anarchist, world history began during your generation.”
The history of ISIS did, though you’d like to pretend that they are some eternal, nebulous force of evil that awoke from slumber the first time a European set foot on African soil.
Hey Eric, remember that there’s a wide margin between “right and wrong” and the law. Actually, it’s obvious that you do remember that, given your attempts to justify atrocity with questionable legal arguments are a tacit admission that presenting an argument based upon necessity would be the only possible way you could appear more amoral and delusional on the subject.
If war was justified because a sociopath with a law degree could make a case for it (even a case as flimsy as the one you’ve outlined here), we’d never have anything but war. The bottom line is that the threat from Iraq was completely imaginary, as history has shown. As an ostensibly free and democratic society, we should learn from our mistakes, rather than argue them to the death.
However, your mindless subservience is noted.
Yes Anarchist, world history began during your generation.
Oops. Fix:
The successful implementation of the Protocols, continued oil smuggling efforts, and the manipulation of UN OFF [
OifOil for Food] contracts emboldened Saddam to pursue his military reconstitution efforts starting in 1997 and peaking in 2001. These efforts covered conventional arms, dual-use goods acquisition, and some WMD-related programs.“My personal opinion is anyone that believes the Islamic State exists because of ONE American administration’s foreign policy, or TWO for that matter, isn’t firmly fixed in reality.”
Well, your personal opinion is wrong-
“But where did it start?
CBS News traced ISIS back to a U.S. military prison.
Camp Bucca was known as the largest, and one of the toughest, American prisons in Iraq”
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-origins-of-isis-finding-the-birthplace-of-jihad/
“They exist because they NEVER didn’t exist”
You’re confusing militant Islamic resistance to Western Imperialism in general with ISIS specifically, and in doing so, you’re attempting to negate the responsibility of American foreign policy and the Barbarism of the US military in occupied territory for the creation of this group.
Anarchist 2.0: “the only thing that would be meaningless is debating some propagandist about whether the invasion of Iraq under the pretense of removing weapons of mass destruction was reasonable given there were no weapons of mass destruction.”
“There were no weapons of mass destruction” is incorrect.
At the same time, US demonstration of Iraqi possession of WMD was not part of the standard of compliance for Iraq. There was no burden of proof on the US, as the chief enforcer of the UN mandates, to prove Iraq possessed WMD.
Under the standard of compliance set by UNSCR 687, enforced by 3 US Presidents under US law, Iraq was obligated to prove it was compliant and disarmed by following the steps outlined in UNSCR 687.
The 2 key findings pursuant to UNSCR 687 for OIF are the UNMOVIC Cluster Document and the Iraq Survey Group’s Duelfer Report.
Keep in mind the ISG Duelfer Report is not relevant to the decision for OIF since the ISG investigation was conducted after regime change. Therefore, ISG did not determine whether Saddam was compliant with UNSCR 687 at the decision point for OIF. ISG only provided post-war insights, with the proviso that the ISG stated much evidence was lost in the war and aftermath, many Saddam regime officials wouldn’t cooperate, and suspect areas were “sanitized”.
Still, what ISG did find in Iraq corroborated Saddam was in violation of UNSCR 687.
The UNMOVIC Cluster Document was the key finding at the decision point for OIF that confirmed Iraq “remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687” (UNSCR 1441).
UNSCR 687, the 173-page Cluster Document, and 3-volume Duelfer Report are on-line. I recommend first reading UNSCR 687 to learn the basic standard of compliance for Iraq’s WMD. Then read the UNMOVIC and ISG reports in the context of UNSCR 687.
Here’s a State Department cheat-sheet summary of the 173-page Cluster Document:
http://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2003/18513.htm
Here is a sample (note: not summary) taken from the Duelfer Report:
Contra your assertion that “there were no weapons of mass destruction”, in fact, the ISG Duelfer Report is rife with Saddam’s violations of UNSCR 687.
Iraq was required to “comply fully” (UNSCR 1441), and just 1 violation would pass your bar of “no weapons of mass destruction”.
In my opinion, we can rest our case at the 1st excerpt in the sample regarding the IIS “large covert procurement program” and “undeclared covert laboratories”.
The IIS was, of course, Saddam’s regime arm notorious for working with terrorists and carrying out Saddam’s in-house black ops. In fact, Saddam’s chemical and biological weapons programs started in the IIS.
Notably, Western intelligence agencies failed to indicate the IIS “undeclared covert laboratories” in the pre-war intelligence estimates. Neither did UNMOVIC uncover any indication of them. The last safety net was the UNSCR 687 mandated standard of compliance itself, enforced by 3 US presidents under US law. Had the President been less strict about enforcing the mandated standard of compliance, it’s conceivable that UNMOVIC might have certified Saddam while the very proscribed Iraqi capability that was the highest priority to disarm after 9/11 passed through unchecked.
“The British and French government, as the protectors of the Arab state, shall agree that they will not themselves acquire and will not consent to a third power acquiring territorial possessions in the Arabian peninsula, nor consent to a third power installing a naval base either on the east coast, or on the islands, of the red sea. This, however, shall not prevent such adjustment of the Aden frontier as may be necessary in consequence of recent Turkish aggression.
The negotiations with the Arabs as to the boundaries of the Arab states shall be continued through the same channel as heretofore on behalf of the two powers.” excerpt from “The Sykes-Picot Agreement : 1916”
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/sykes.asp