.

Dear Bazz,

.

You wrote :

« Banjo, everything you say might be right but the genome problem is a fixed fact as numerous genetists have reported »

Yes, I have no problem with that, Bazz. As a matter of fact, I made a comment on that very subject on another thread. Here is the link :

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8933#291681

However, in my view, it is hazardous to suggest that there is a link of cause and effect between genetic disorders in offspring due to close biological relationships of parents and “behavior patterns [in Arabs] that make it very difficult for them to compromise” as you indicated in your post of Wednesday, 16 October 2019 12:31:49 AM.

I am not aware of any empirical evidence that there is such a link. If, however, you have knowledge of such evidence, I should be grateful if you would share it with me.

.

Banjo,
Behavior problems are common. It is generally triggered by frustration
at not being able to do something others can do easily or not
being allowed to do something that could injure them.
Just as we all get cranky about something, we generally understand why.
We have all seen a child throw a tantrum in a shop.
Think of the mother that has to handle that several times a day and
usually over the same thing every day.
Then translate that to a six footer who has controlled the tantrum but
will lash out if provoked or become abusive.
Most of course are very quite and easy going. They can have very rigid
habits and get very upset if a change of routine is requested.
However the level of handicap is normally less dramatic than I have described.
Now we have a whole population operating at a lower level of IQ.
A smaller number of people in this population have the skills to run a
country than in other countries.
Now insert into this population a religion that was designed by
someone who for the above reasons may be intolerant and is known to
massacre large towns and villages.
You have a picture of the Middle East and Pakistan.
Many will say I am wrong but the connection is clear if you know what
you are looking for.
Take the over reaction to the Mohammad Cartoons. Typical tantrum

.

Dear individual,

.

You wrote :

« “intolerance inevitably leads to conflict and war, never ending war - never ending religious war” … That's why the West should not interfere there but pounce on it when borders are crossed to the outside world ! »

That makes good sense as a general rule, individual, but the problem under discussion here is the fact that ISIS had established a caliphate in Syria that was conducting a war of terrorism against the rest of the world.

Obviously, each country that came under attack tried to defend itself as best it could but, in most cases, prevention proved to be inefficient. The best they could do was to eliminate the terrorists after or, at best, in some rare cases, during the attack.

Unfortunately, the massacres proved impossible to predict and prevent and were largely successful.

Most of the terrorists were home-grown – citizens of the countries under attack – who had been converted to radical Islam as jihadists and, as such, extremely difficult to identify and neutralize.

That is why the US took the lead of a special task force to eliminate ISIS in Iraq and Syria known as the International Global Coalition (IGC) composed of 23 countries (including Australia) providing military support and 72 countries providing non-military support.

Unfortunately, incursions into Iraq and Syria were inevitable. The rest of the world had no choice. There was no other way it could defend itself from ISIS and stop the massacres of innocent men, women and children going about their daily lives.

.

.

Dear Bazz,

.

I don’t wish to offend you in any way, but I do think you are projecting a systematic sentiment of vengeance onto what you consider to be a whole population of simple-minded people for no objective reason.

Such a pessimistic viewpoint seems to me to be highly exaggerated and totally unwarranted. I think we’d do well to remember the old adage that "one swallow does not a summer make".

I’m sorry to have to be so affirmative.

.

Hey Banjo Patterson,

"Unfortunately, incursions into Iraq and Syria were inevitable. The rest of the world had no choice. There was no other way it could defend itself from ISIS and stop the massacres of innocent men, women and children going about their daily lives."

Unfortunately, the facts don't really fit the narrative.

The US wasn't doing squat against Islamic State.
They were there for years and it was only when Russia came to Assad's aid and started bombing oil convoys headed through north-eastern Syria into Turkey that the situation started to change.
US regime change operations created the refugee crisis.

The US was openly against the removal of Assad, arming and funding the rebels;
- On the same side as Islamic State, they only supported the Kurds as 'Plan B' when Russia intervened.

The Kurds didn't 'go in' to fight Islamic State, they were already there, though its also been stated that only 60% of those fighting for the Kurds are Kurds.

Sometimes it really annoys me that people on the forum rely so much on the mainstream media, but skip entirely doing a bit of digging to get the facts so they can have a more informed opinion.

I don't understand it, but I suppose I'm the same way with other topics like climate change as an example.

What gets me is that in the space of about an hour, you guys can be more informed than you'll ever be from journalists writing articles, and certainly more informed than them themselves.

They don't do investigative journalism, they just copy and rewrite the official narrative.
I'm giving you all the inside story, but you're all content with the crap you're already spoon fed.
And though I can lead you to water I can't force you to drink it.

Spend an hour going through my links in the comments here.
The videos are short.
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=20551&page=0#362393

I guarantee that you all will become wiser to the ways of the world than you ever previously thought possible.

.

Dear Armchair Critic,

.

You wrote :

1. « The US wasn't doing squat against Islamic State. They were there for years … The Kurds didn't 'go in' to fight Islamic State, they were already there … »

You are quite right about the Kurds, Armchair Critic, but not so about the US. There are over 2 million Kurds in Syria, nearly 10% of the Syrian population, and by far the largest minority in the country. Kurdish settlement in Syria goes back to before the Crusades of the 11th century.

There are also about 15 million Kurds in Turkey, 8 million in Iran and 5 million in Iraq.

But, as regards the US, they had a military presence in Syria since early 2016 to train and advise Kurdish and Arab rebel forces fighting ISIS in northern and eastern Syria. It is not true to say that “the US wasn't doing squat against Islamic State” at that time. That is precisely why they were there and what they were doing.

2. « … people on the forum rely so much on the mainstream media, but skip entirely doing a bit of digging to get the facts so they can have a more informed opinion … Spend an hour going through my links in the comments here »

I did, Armchair Critic, but none of the 14 videos had anything to do with our discussions. There was anything in them that contradicted what I have just written about the presence of the Kurds and the Americans in Syria.

3. Finally, in commenting on my statement that “incursions into Iraq and Syria were inevitable. The rest of the world had no choice”, you remarked that “the facts don't really fit the narrative”.

Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain why, since, as I’m sure you will recall, I was referring to the incursion of the US led International Global Coalition (IGC) composed of 23 countries (including Australia) providing military support and 72 countries providing non-military support.

The Kurds, of course, are not members of the IGC.

.