Important to ponder this. Think about it and research it and consider additional points. Might be interesting to compare to their opposition other than "progressives". Frame this within the context of their possible/probable goals.
...and what did all of that accomplish? Recruitment of support is basic. Unless we do that, all of the bombing will never be able to accomplish a worthwhile objective. But while we should be focusing on recruitment, we do everything we can to repel. I saw somebody say that we create chaos so that we can more easily take whatever resource we want. Either we are incompetent or purposely creating chaos.
Cool. I saw at a university ag site that the processing and packaging actually costs more and is more polluting than the transporting. Some vegetables keep a long time in a cool dark corner of the basement or a hole in the ground. Winter squash and dried beans are options. It's all lots of fun too. Here's an interesting instructional video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTGilR95T44&t=1s
Women with children and older women. If anybody visits a subsidized housing project in this country, they would find older people with no food for a couple or few days before their next Social Security check arrives.
Didn't Madeleine Albright say that she though it was just fine that hundreds of thousands of children died in Iraq from her and Clinton's food and medicine embargo.
Amazingly, I, at least, cannot find much information about what ISIS does to build an organization in the areas that they have captured. Other than coercion and fear, how do they build their “caliphate”? Do they recruit key network leaders? Do they supply essentials of water and food?
From the small pieces of information I have found, I get the sense that they are similar to warlords taking an area by force and then doing the minimum to maintain life in those areas. They make alliances with other “strong men” and I assume make trade-offs of whatever either side has to offer.
All of this is a top-down organization of networks and intimidation. So, how does bombing fit into that context? I think of it as a kaleidoscope. If a bomb opens one small spot, the rest of the pieces quickly fall into the vacant spot. Or, another way to look at it could very well be to think of inner city gangs in any of our cities. If the leaders of one gang get arrested, that only serves the interests of their rival gangs to fill the vacuum. ---Similar network rivalries no doubt are part of ISIS.
They have decades of experience playing the "game of nations". I haven't studied this very intensely, but maybe the US had a chance to reduce this mess when Putin did his diplomatic rescue during the chemical weapon events.
The countries that supply the most weapons and spend the most on bombing do the least to help the refugees. The US leads the pack with that.
Among all of the issues here that mystify me is why we are so weak with this. Just from a power building standpoint, rescuing the refugees and people in general builds tremendous loyalty. The European refugees and the Filipinos have been thankful to an extreme to the US for helping during and after WWII.
But, in recent history, we have created refugees that are running from ISIS and do very little to help them. The consequences of doing this will no doubt cause much trouble. I have to ask who gains with all of this?
Important to ponder this. Think about it and research it and consider additional points. Might be interesting to compare to their opposition other than "progressives". Frame this within the context of their possible/probable goals.
Yesterday, I saw some poll showing that voters have an even lower opinion about Democrats. That's the only way he was able to win.
...and what did all of that accomplish? Recruitment of support is basic. Unless we do that, all of the bombing will never be able to accomplish a worthwhile objective. But while we should be focusing on recruitment, we do everything we can to repel. I saw somebody say that we create chaos so that we can more easily take whatever resource we want. Either we are incompetent or purposely creating chaos.
Cool. I saw at a university ag site that the processing and packaging actually costs more and is more polluting than the transporting. Some vegetables keep a long time in a cool dark corner of the basement or a hole in the ground. Winter squash and dried beans are options. It's all lots of fun too. Here's an interesting instructional video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTGilR95T44&t=1s
Kinda amazing that assimilation is a critical issue, but the French repel people when they need to be recruiting.
Yep. C. Vann Woodward predicted all of this. It's in the epilogue. http://www.amazon.com/Burden-Southern-History-Vann-Woodward/dp/0807133809
Between now and 2100 and before we reach a full 6 feet, how much flooding will happen and when? Think about what 2 feet will do.
Women with children and older women. If anybody visits a subsidized housing project in this country, they would find older people with no food for a couple or few days before their next Social Security check arrives.
Didn't Madeleine Albright say that she though it was just fine that hundreds of thousands of children died in Iraq from her and Clinton's food and medicine embargo.
Amazingly, I, at least, cannot find much information about what ISIS does to build an organization in the areas that they have captured. Other than coercion and fear, how do they build their “caliphate”? Do they recruit key network leaders? Do they supply essentials of water and food?
From the small pieces of information I have found, I get the sense that they are similar to warlords taking an area by force and then doing the minimum to maintain life in those areas. They make alliances with other “strong men” and I assume make trade-offs of whatever either side has to offer.
All of this is a top-down organization of networks and intimidation. So, how does bombing fit into that context? I think of it as a kaleidoscope. If a bomb opens one small spot, the rest of the pieces quickly fall into the vacant spot. Or, another way to look at it could very well be to think of inner city gangs in any of our cities. If the leaders of one gang get arrested, that only serves the interests of their rival gangs to fill the vacuum. ---Similar network rivalries no doubt are part of ISIS.
That's not all. This is a typical day: http://blog.theheadlines.org/thehead/?cat=1
They have decades of experience playing the "game of nations". I haven't studied this very intensely, but maybe the US had a chance to reduce this mess when Putin did his diplomatic rescue during the chemical weapon events.
"clashes"? How about Israel attacks protestors?
The countries that supply the most weapons and spend the most on bombing do the least to help the refugees. The US leads the pack with that.
Among all of the issues here that mystify me is why we are so weak with this. Just from a power building standpoint, rescuing the refugees and people in general builds tremendous loyalty. The European refugees and the Filipinos have been thankful to an extreme to the US for helping during and after WWII.
But, in recent history, we have created refugees that are running from ISIS and do very little to help them. The consequences of doing this will no doubt cause much trouble. I have to ask who gains with all of this?