Re: ISIL, ISIS, Murderers, or whatever you want to call them
Posted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 10:55 amtens0r wrote:Hate people that try to talk about politics but don't know shit.
Well that's gonna be me. I may be wrong or I may be expressing hopes rather than honest opinions in this reply. I've been particularly isolated from political discussion since I arrived in Switzerland almost three months ago.
A lot of topics have been brought up in this thread.
IS:
Like every other terrorist organization, they rely on their target to get upset and pay attention. For IS, this means having the West discuss their behaviour, having our media report from their actions, and in particular having the West reacting (although not necessarily by military action). The more we fuel their fire, the more supporters they can recruit. The more we talk about them, the higher status they get as a terrorist organization and the more strength they get. IS have done a pretty damn good job getting the most exposure for the money (advertising, basically).
I would have preferred if it had taken a completely other direction, a direction where IS would have been ignored publicly (although any covert actions could be taken).
The other option would be to actively crush them in the blink of an eye, but that again is risky in many aspects.
Obama:
I'm not going to comment on how he's doing. I do remember thinking multiple times throughout the last decade that a two-chamber system is ineffective when the two sides refuse to work together. Then again, I come from a multi-party single-chamber democracy (well, monarchy) so I might have difficulties relating.
NK:
Someone brought up that NK is a threat. I may be poorly informed, but I think they are not. Threatening the US is probably only going to satisfy his own political system and keep him in power. Due to MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction), no country with nuclear weapons would engage in direct war with another country who has nuclear weapons as well. They would wipe each other out. This, however, doesn't relate to any NK-USA conflict in the future. Any action North Korea may take would be NKAD while US would go (by comparison) unharmed.
Superpowers:
Is America a superpower? I'd say yes. Is Russia, China one? I'd say two times no. But it's a question of definition, as has already been pointed out.
I do think, though, that neither Russia, the US, or China would ever truly intervene in each others "regions". Ukraine may be a good example of this, as was also pointed out earlier.
Other than that, I know I've been absent from the boards for a long time now. The truth is that I'm really caught up with this internship that I'm doing. It's good to ses that jkasiege.com is still active.
