Assault on U.S Embassy in Libya Leaves Ambassador and 3 American Staff dead.

[Almalexia]

It'd probably settle down and quit trying to drag us into it's wars. They're so fussy about Iran right now over alleged nuclear what have you that they give American leaders a deadline wanting us to get involved before they engage in preemptive strikes despite the fact that Iran hasn't invaded or attacked anyone in over a hundred years?

I agree, the terrorism is still an issue, but who's issue is it really? I mean you're more likely to be killed by a cop than by a terrorist.

Well, there's a lot wrong with your statement there. Iran was in a war with Iraq in the 80s for around a decade, most notably. They have done numerous terrorist and espionage actions across the world. And the essential keystone in their foreign relations system is the destruction of Israel. Basically, if Israel stands alone, radical Islamics will take the chance to attempt to overwhelm them, and destroy Israel. An immense war of survival will ensue, and there would inevitably be genocide in such a desperate struggle. Clerics, ultraconservatives, and fundamentalists have been drumming into the population the need for the destruction of Israel for generations. Hell, my girlfriend's Islamic father from Cambodia wants Israel destroyed, for God's sake. Things won't just settle down.

And ahh, considering on 9/11 they specifically hit civilian concentrations, it is our problem. And fundamentally as a government, they are pledged to "provide for the common defense". If they just ignore the threat of terrorism and let it happen, they have wholesale failed as a state.

 

[Splintert]

Plus, if we just completely back out and say Iran nukes Israel...... we look like assholes who abandon our allies, the fallout from the blast causes a lot of environmental damage to most of Europe due to the Mediterranean sea, and the Middle East becomes an almost single ideological superstate capable of truly threatening the NATO alliance.

All hypothetical speculation, but the second you turn your eyes off possible enemies is the same second they strike.

 

[Almalexia]

Basically, with such ideologically charged opponents as radical Islamics, the maxim "Give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile" applies. Any falter in international determination in the region, and they'll take that for weakness and exploit it. Take Iraq, after we pulled out, for an example.

 

[Moose!]

Take Iraq, after we pulled out, for an example.

Can you elaborate on this?

 

[Almalexia]

Well, after the troop surge, I can say some semblance of order and stability was brought to the country. After we pulled out, well... Don't you read the news? Hundreds, thousands of people are being killed by the week by bombings from extremists, and the Al-Qaeda branch in Iraq is making a major comeback. Sectarian violence is worse than its been in half a decade. We pulled out, and now they take it as a sign of weakness for the West and its government in Iraq, and now the extremists are returning in force.

 

[TARDIS]

It was a Shiitehole then and a Shiitehole now.

Spoiler

 

[armdude]

Man I agree with you guys completely, but what do you think their reason is for all this violence? When we get involved militarily how else are they supposed to combat it? It's war no matter what you wana call it.  In no way am I trying to justify the violence by any means. But look at how for years we gave millions to Mubarak just because he was pro-US despite how much the people hated him.
We even funded, trained and put into power Hussein! To add to that you know the CIA created and trained Al Qaeda and gave Osama 3 Billion Us dollars during the cold war to fight the ruskies?
I mean what do people expect when our government does things like this?

All I'm getting at is as long as we have our hands over there pushing buttons this sort of stuff's always gonna be in the news sadly and I thoroughly disagree with people in the media or politicians wanting to use this violence as a reason to send more troops or aid and money to these countries. It's never worth it.

 

[Moose!]

Hundreds, thousands of people are being killed by the week by bombings from extremists

Since the withdrawal, low estimates (i.e. the Iraqi government) cite around 1424 civilian deaths since December, 2011. Higher estimates suggest that there's been around 3337 civilian deaths as of this August. That's certainly lower than the numbers you're estimating.

Sectarian violence is worse than its been in half a decade.

Are you kidding me? 

Civilian deaths were at their second highest half a decade ago. The IBC suggests that 25,206 civilians were killed in 2007. In 2008, they estimate 9562 deaths.

2009 - 4836, 8.4 deaths per day

2010 - 4053, 7.3 deaths per day

2011 - 4102 deaths, 6.6 deaths per day

And now our highest estimates since the withdrawal place the death toll at 3337 (although the IBC has counted 2634 as of August, with an average deaths per day of 7.5). This does not seem like a drastic change. It certainly doesn't compare to the situation five years ago.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/

Also, the number of deaths per day only includes suicide or vehicle bombs. The average number of gun deaths per day has hovered around 4 - 5  for the past four years, and is currently at 4.4.

 

[Almalexia]

Man I agree with you guys completely, but what do you think their reason is for all this violence? When we get involved militarily how else are they supposed to combat it? It's war no matter what you wana call it.  In no way am I trying to justify the violence by any means. But look at how for years we gave millions to Mubarak just because he was pro-US despite how much the people hated him.
We even funded, trained and put into power Hussein! To add to that you know the CIA created and trained Al Qaeda and gave Osama 3 Billion Us dollars during the cold war to fight the ruskies?
I mean what do people expect when our government does things like this?

All I'm getting at is as long as we have our hands over there pushing buttons this sort of stuff's always gonna be in the news sadly and I thoroughly disagree with people in the media or politicians wanting to use this violence as a reason to send more troops or aid and money to these countries. It's never worth it.

We funded Mubarak because he was secular (to an extent, at least). We can see why. The revolution has been hijacked on all fronts by fundamentalist Islamic parties, who's interests on the moral front involve reduction of human rights for women, and on the geopolitical front the opposition and eventual destruction of Israel, our ally, and our interests abroad (a term used derisively in many cases, but US foreign interests are a fundamental part of capitalism. We have them in every country). Additionally, we fund Pakistan (though I loath this state of affairs) because if we didn't, the current government would collapse and fundamentalist extremist Islamic sects would take power, and they would have their hate filled hands on a cache of nuclear weapons.

The moral of this, is we fund these distasteful governments, and we intervene and set up new ones, because if we don't, the region will collapse into the hands of the radicals. Its begun in the Arab Spring countries, which happened without our hand, and fitting perfectly into the classic revolution model, the formerly moderate phase is over, and the radicals are taking charge. We saw this with the French Revolution, who's model has been replicated again and again.

Thus, we are forced to support the lesser evils. Whether you see it as lesser evils for the people, or lesser evils for us is up to you, but that is the reality.

*EDIT*

@ Mr. Moose

Perhaps you have not noticed the recent spike in bombings within the last month or so. 92 were killed just on September 9th. Look at ongoing events, my friend. Statistics are wonderful and all, but there have been an immense amount of killings just recently.

 

[Moose!]

@ Mr. Moose

Perhaps you have not noticed the recent spike in bombings within the last month or so. 92 were killed just on September 9th.

Whats your point? I'm interested with the overall level of violence this year, and so far the change has not been as dramatic as you've depicted. These attacks have been occurring, and will continue to occur. I am interested in whether or not the overall number and severity are going to increase dramatically, and figures suggest that this is not yet the case.

 

[Almalexia]

Because your statistics only include up to 2011, and even then things only heated up by this summer, if memory serves. 

 

[Moose!]

Did you not read my post? 

Hundreds, thousands of people are being killed by the week by bombings from extremists

Since the withdrawal, low estimates (i.e. the Iraqi government) cite around 1424 civilian deaths since December, 2011. Higher estimates suggest that there's been around 3337 civilian deaths as of this August. That's certainly lower than the numbers you're estimating.

Sectarian violence is worse than its been in half a decade.

Are you kidding me? 

Civilian deaths were at their second highest half a decade ago. The IBC suggests that 25,206 civilians were killed in 2007. In 2008, they estimate 9562 deaths.

2009 - 4836, 8.4 deaths per day

2010 - 4053, 7.3 deaths per day

2011 - 4102 deaths, 6.6 deaths per day

And now our highest estimates since the withdrawal place the death toll at 3337 (although the IBC has counted 2634 as of August, with an average deaths per day of 7.5). This does not seem like a drastic change. It certainly doesn't compare to the situation five years ago.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/

Also, the number of deaths per day only includes suicide or vehicle bombs. The average number of gun deaths per day has hovered around 4 - 5  for the past four years, and is currently at 4.4.

 

[Almalexia]

Ah, missed that. Forgive me, it's late and I'm tired. Regardless, I'll renege on a few claims, but it does seem that the extremists seem to be growing in strength as the government is locked in political struggles.

 

[armdude]

Man I agree with you guys completely, but what do you think their reason is for all this violence? When we get involved militarily how else are they supposed to combat it? It's war no matter what you wana call it.  In no way am I trying to justify the violence by any means. But look at how for years we gave millions to Mubarak just because he was pro-US despite how much the people hated him.
We even funded, trained and put into power Hussein! To add to that you know the CIA created and trained Al Qaeda and gave Osama 3 Billion Us dollars during the cold war to fight the ruskies?
I mean what do people expect when our government does things like this?

All I'm getting at is as long as we have our hands over there pushing buttons this sort of stuff's always gonna be in the news sadly and I thoroughly disagree with people in the media or politicians wanting to use this violence as a reason to send more troops or aid and money to these countries. It's never worth it.

We funded Mubarak because he was secular (to an extent, at least). We can see why. The revolution has been hijacked on all fronts by fundamentalist Islamic parties, who's interests on the moral front involve reduction of human rights for women, and on the geopolitical front the opposition and eventual destruction of Israel, our ally, and our interests abroad (a term used derisively in many cases, but US foreign interests are a fundamental part of capitalism. We have them in every country). Additionally, we fund Pakistan (though I loath this state of affairs) because if we didn't, the current government would collapse and fundamentalist extremist Islamic sects would take power, and they would have their hate filled hands on a cache of nuclear weapons.

The moral of this, is we fund these distasteful governments, and we intervene and set up new ones, because if we don't, the region will collapse into the hands of the radicals. Its begun in the Arab Spring countries, which happened without our hand, and fitting perfectly into the classic revolution model, the formerly moderate phase is over, and the radicals are taking charge. We saw this with the French Revolution, who's model has been replicated again and again.

Thus, we are forced to support the lesser evils. Whether you see it as lesser evils for the people, or lesser evils for us is up to you, but that is the reality.

*EDIT*

@ Mr. Moose

Perhaps you have not noticed the recent spike in bombings within the last month or so. 92 were killed just on September 9th. Look at ongoing events, my friend. Statistics are wonderful and all, but there have been an immense amount of killings just recently.

And why do you assume it's our responsibility? We're an ocean apart! It only affects us because we're still over there!

If It's in our jurisdiction to aid Israel, Egypt Libya, Pakistan etc, what is it that we so desperately need that we are getting out of it? Oil? Cause I'm sure as hell its not good conscious knowing we're helping these people. We're just bankrupting ourselves.

 

[Moose!]

It does seem that the extremists seem to be growing in strength as the government is locked in political struggles.

How are you measuring this growth?

 

[Almalexia]

I believe it is a human responsibility to prevent wholesale genocide, and we are the best equipped to prevent that. Plus, I mean, the fundamentalists already hate us, and if they get their hands on Pakistan's nuclear weapons, its not just Israel that is in danger, but also India. Who also has nuclear weapons. Thus we help prevent nuclear war in that area.

It does seem that the extremists seem to be growing in strength as the government is locked in political struggles.

How are you measuring this growth?

Their spread through other countries, particularly Syria, but also reportedly Libya.

 

[Suspicous Pilgrim]

No nuclear bomb should ever be detonated again. I'm perfectly fine with anything that doesn't equal it's horror to stop it.

 

[Almalexia]

Personally I believe we should disarm Pakistan at the first chance we get.

 

[Kobrag]

Man I agree with you guys completely, but what do you think their reason is for all this violence? When we get involved militarily how else are they supposed to combat it? It's war no matter what you wana call it.  In no way am I trying to justify the violence by any means. But look at how for years we gave millions to Mubarak just because he was pro-US despite how much the people hated him.
We even funded, trained and put into power Hussein! To add to that you know the CIA created and trained Al Qaeda and gave Osama 3 Billion Us dollars during the cold war to fight the ruskies?
I mean what do people expect when our government does things like this?

All I'm getting at is as long as we have our hands over there pushing buttons this sort of stuff's always gonna be in the news sadly and I thoroughly disagree with people in the media or politicians wanting to use this violence as a reason to send more troops or aid and money to these countries. It's never worth it.

We funded Mubarak because he was secular (to an extent, at least). We can see why. The revolution has been hijacked on all fronts by fundamentalist Islamic parties, who's interests on the moral front involve reduction of human rights for women, and on the geopolitical front the opposition and eventual destruction of Israel, our ally, and our interests abroad (a term used derisively in many cases, but US foreign interests are a fundamental part of capitalism. We have them in every country). Additionally, we fund Pakistan (though I loath this state of affairs) because if we didn't, the current government would collapse and fundamentalist extremist Islamic sects would take power, and they would have their hate filled hands on a cache of nuclear weapons.

The moral of this, is we fund these distasteful governments, and we intervene and set up new ones, because if we don't, the region will collapse into the hands of the radicals. Its begun in the Arab Spring countries, which happened without our hand, and fitting perfectly into the classic revolution model, the formerly moderate phase is over, and the radicals are taking charge. We saw this with the French Revolution, who's model has been replicated again and again.

Thus, we are forced to support the lesser evils. Whether you see it as lesser evils for the people, or lesser evils for us is up to you, but that is the reality.

*EDIT*

@ Mr. Moose

Perhaps you have not noticed the recent spike in bombings within the last month or so. 92 were killed just on September 9th. Look at ongoing events, my friend. Statistics are wonderful and all, but there have been an immense amount of killings just recently.

Funnily enough, funding locally unpopular political heads so  they stay in power longer allows religious extremism to spread as the population becomes angrier. And once the head is gone, they go after the one that filled his pocket book.

It's better to allow the enevitable to happen, because thehatred will falter in time anyway. Because people usually lose faith in encumbant politicians and leaders when they start making unpopular laws or abuse power.

 

[Suspicous Pilgrim]

Yeah, but in my opinion Pakistan's government is a lot more stable than Iran's. Ahmadinejad is a lunatic.