Quote from: zolace on September 04, 2014, 01:20:00 PM

Quote from: umair127 on September 04, 2014, 12:57:10 PM

Quote from: sana8410 on September 03, 2014, 01:18:38 PM

Quote from: zolace on September 03, 2014, 01:10:57 PM

Quote from: sana8410 on September 03, 2014, 11:13:11 AM

Another US journalist (Steven Sotlof) killed by the IS. Appears to have been murdered by the same individual.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middle...156273317.html

Of all the things I've heard said about GWB, timid responses were not among them. I doubt anyone considered him overly cautious. He certainly believed in American military adventurism.

However, the basis of Obama's foreign policy seems to be that if it doesn't directly affect American interests, or American citizens, he really doesn't want to interfere too much. These people are essentially forcing him to address people getting murdered specifically because they are American. They are making it his business.

I'm not moved by it. If someone comes to the US, kills a journalist on our soil, films it, posts it, then leaves, we have a problem. But in this case, I can't help but see this as an occupational hazard. This is to say, I don't think it is reasonable to expect US foreign policy to be built around the idea that anyone with an American passport can traipse around the globe and dig into the most awful places, reporting on the most awful people and events, and whoever messes with said passport-holder, that's who we go to war with.

And you are atypical. This sort of thing has an impact on the president, even though I generally agree with the policy of moving away from military adventurism when at all rational. I may not like it, but it's also reality. The US isn't ready yet to take a less aggressive world view.

I can't see how military adventurism or aggressive world views tie into the current situation.

The air attacks against IS, that these murders are purportedly a response to, are neither adventurism nor the result of an aggressive world view. In fact our response in that region so far is markedly less aggressive than the last time we played air strikes/ground assault and assholes over there, so I really don't get what you mean.

That wasn't what I was saying. I was saying that Obama has a tendency to stay away from adventurism, which I support philosophically. What ISIS is doing is putting pressure on Obama to engage in Syria, which is probably a bad idea. I say that not because I in any way want to see any ISIS members survive...I hope they all get their asses killed...but rather it's a guarantee of long term military action that will almost inevitably end up with American troops in a shooting war in the midst of a civil war with Islamic terrorists...Iraq pt 2 if you will. It's very hard to stop mission cree, which Obama is seeing right now.