Ben Carson: War Against ISIS Should Have No ‘Rules’

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by steve knight, Feb 16, 2015.

  1. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #1
    so kill children and woman old old people? no biggie rape those same people no biggie. this will really endure us to the world. really this is a presidential wannabe?

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/ben-carson-war-against-isis-should-have-no-rules/
    According to pediatric neurosurgeon and potential 2016 presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson, one of the main impediments to U.S. military success against ISIS in the Middle East is the fear of prosecution when those conducting the operations return home. In Carson’s view, we need to eliminate all “rules” in the fight against ISIS if we ever want to win.

    “Our military needs to know that they’re not going be prosecuted when they come back, because somebody has said, ‘You did something that was politically incorrect
     
  2. xmichaelp macrumors 68000

    xmichaelp

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    #2
    If the belief that some conservatives have that Obama only got elected because he was black is true then they should nominate Carson. Surely he would get all the black and liberal votes and it would be an automatic win. :eek:

    Really though this guy is a nut. Nothing to see here.
     
  3. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #3
    someone should clue him in, we are not in it to win it, we have not been since they learned just how much money they can make.
     
  4. Meister Suspended

    Meister

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    #4
    It's hopeless. They all ignore the fact these wars are wanted.
     
  5. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #5
    Ha, Obama started 2 more and it means nothing.
     
  6. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #6
    I hope someone asks him what he means, exactly. Does he really want U.S. troops to violate {the rules of war; the Geneva Conventions; etc}? And, if he actually does want troops to violate the rules of war, exactly how that would help U.S. interests?
     
  7. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #7
    By this knucklehead's logic, we might as well just nuke the hell out of Syria and Iraq and be done with it.
     
  8. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #8
    He's just pandering to people who don't care about civilian deaths in other countries as long as they do not have to see them. The rest of it is just rhetoric. That the guy is probably a smart person just makes his responses even more insidious.
     
  9. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #9
    The problem with that is he's playing right into the hands of ISIS with all of his rhetoric. They want nothing more for the US to have some knee-jerk reaction and end up killing tons of muslims in the process, ultimately creating more tensions between the US and the Middle-east.
     
  10. steve knight thread starter macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #10
    exactly and we are looking bad enough already just with the drone attacks. well another prime presidential candidate with foot in mouth desease.
     
  11. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #11
    yes, because SLOWLY killing 1000's of civilians and occupying their territories for years on end is so much better, I bet ISIS/ISIL just LOVES us and our ways:rolleyes:

    the only "War" that was semi decently executed was Bush SR's :eek: wam bam thank you mam, in & out in about a month. go in, kick butt & LEAVE.
     
  12. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #12
    Yeah I have no idea how this will end, but I suspect it will just end with more enemies. How long before the Kurds hate the US too? After all the US and UK were at least partly friendly to Saddam in the 1980s.

    Are you at all familiar with the history of that war? It was just supporting one bad regime over another, in that case Kuwait over Iraq.
     
  13. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #13
    Both you and Ben Carson are nothing but checkers players in a world were everyone is playing chess.

    Comparing the Desert Storm operation, which was isolated to the town of Kuwait against an actual military, to a war spanning many different towns across two different countries against civilian terrorists is completely absurd.
     
  14. kds1 Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #14
    I fail to see the problem with drone attacks. You could send in a real plane, or you could send in a drone. If the drone is more advantageous, do it. People need to get a grip.

    ----------

    I have news for you, Kuwait is a country, not a "town". Geez. And people wonder why Americans come off as ignorant about the rest of the world, and can't locate cities and countries on a map.
     
  15. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #15
    how many years of "chess" again? :rolleyes:
     
  16. 556fmjoe macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2014
    #16
    There should always be rules in war. ISIS is what you get when there are none.
     
  17. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #17
    I didn't realize that, thank you for the correction.
     
  18. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #18
    Sorry, but ISIS is what you get when Obama made it a point to pull all American troops out.
     
  19. Natzoo macrumors 65816

    Natzoo

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2014
    Location:
    Not sure where i am
    #19
    I agree to this but how long is the US supposed to support other countries. I agree with you, wouldnt it be nice to see Russia deploying troops in Iraq. That would definitely make US remove the sanctions that were thrust upon them
     
  20. kds1 Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #20
    ISIS is what we got by going into Iraq in the first place.

    ----------

    Russia had two covert operatives operating within ISIS.
    They were caught and beheaded, of course.
     
  21. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #21
    Around that time there were several incidents of US troops killing innocent Iraqis, leading to negative sentiment toward the US. This didn't leave much in the way of good options, and aside from that, there was the initial lie that we wouldn't be there for years or decades. Basically enough people in the US didn't want US troops to remain there, and the Iraqis were in agreement. I can't say I blame them. I don't think Saddam would still be in power today or at least not for much longer, but we seem to make it a little worse each time we meddle there.
     
  22. kds1 Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #22
    Well you know, fake WMD's and a very cynical plan to try and create some sort of U.S. foothold in the Middle East for oil under the guise of "liberation" did wonders didn't it? And I feel bad for Colin Powell, he was duped and made a fool of in front of the United Nations. A vey embarrasing time for the United States. And then there were "Freedom Fries"....Thanks G Dubs! Or maybe I should really be thanking the men behind the curtain: Cheney, Rove, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld. They were the puppet masters to GWB's blockhead.
     
  23. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #23
    Things were copacetic until Obama pulled out the troops. Said another way, ISUS would not be part of our vocabulary had Obama left troops in place.
     
  24. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #24
    Possibly. On the other hand, the real breeding ground for ISIS was Syria, so unless we were ready to invade and hunt down Assad, we were going to face ISIS/ISIL and we might have found ourselves in direct asymmetric conflict with them rather than the Iraqis. And, the Iraqis may have been more willing to support ISIS because they wanted the US out.

    If we really want to make that kind of argument, keep in mind that the vacuum created by the end of the Hussein and Gaddafi regimes has as much to do with ISIS as the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.
     
  25. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #25
    Would you have preferred perpetual occupation?
     

Share This Page