Obama urged Congress to authorize military action against ISIS.

What a surprise.

My question is, since they aren't a direct threat to the U.S., is it really any of our business?

More much needed money wasted, and more lives placed in jeopardy for what?

The money has already been being spent. This is nothing new.

You once said that the govt. confiscates money. It doesn't bother you that it's spent this way?

Is it really any of our business?

Defending and supporting allies is always worthy of consideration. You don't need to step in every time, but it certainly is reasonable.

To see that it's so, compare ISIS with Boko Haram. Boko Haram is ravaging civilians in the poorest regions of Nigeria. There are no oilfields nor any other resources that attract significant foreign investment. Not one Western state is raising a finger for anything stronger than "tut tut".

In this case, it looks more like a matter of providing bodyguard service for multinational oil companies, which should be looked upon with great suspicion.

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TBH9f1Pk60

Shoot, I dropped a sentence. My second paragraph was supposed to start with "But this isn't about supporting allies; it's about providing multinational oil companies with an armed bodyguard, with no expense to them."

I would not say no expense to them. I mean, corruption, it is expensive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc-0obLiQkA

I never said it didn't bother me. I simply said it is not news or new.

Theyre a direct threat to all of us.

Bin Laden wasn't a direct threat to the U.S. on Sept. 10th.

Try asking that to the parents of the American citizens they beheaded.

Yep "they" are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4B2YGtsIYB4

Bin laden Himself wasn't on the 13th either.

14 years of training wasted and they are still training and now the fronts moved. Could have solved the poor around the world with the money spent instead of caring about self interest (oil) and revenge.

Nope. That's been tried too.

In reality what we are going to bomb is not ISIS but Syria. Assad will be taken out by our useful idiots the ISIS. Then we will go in and wipe out our useful idiots in the ISIS and take control of Syria, thus completing yet another move on the grand chessboard. Your move!

How? Terrorist attacks here in the US?
If so, wouldn't we be better off with more boots on OUR ground, investigating threats?
Or use the money to be spent there, to increase our intelligence efforts here.

They're certainly not going to invade.

Is it about helping our allies? That's not what the talking points are. Besides we've been helping our "allies" for what seems like forever and they never seem to get to the point where they can help themselves.

Here's a list of our allies as of 2014 -

Strongest Allies:
-Israel
-Great Britain
-Australia
-Canada

Strong Allies:
-South Korea
-Poland
-Turkey
-Japan
-Mexico
-Taiwan
-Palestine
-Thailand
-Spain
-Portugal
-New Zealand
-Hungary
-Czech Rep
-The 3 Baltic States (Lit, Lat & Estn)
-Romania
-Slovakia
-Slovenia

Neutral:
-India
-Iraq
-Italy
-Argentina
-Brazil
-Cuba
-Russia
-China
-Greece
-Finland
-Sweden
-Netherlands
-Denmark
-Switzerland
-Norway
-Iceland
-Laos
-Vietnam
-Cambodia

Rising Allies:
-Philippines
-France

Slipping Allies:
-Germany

So all, those countries in closer proximity can't deal with a rag tag bunch.

On the list of neutrals we have Iraq.

How many lives and dollars spent there, and they're not even our allies?
First it was weapons of mass destruction, then it was liberating the poor Iraqis.

Well we liberated them, trained them, and as soon as we "left" what happened?
The country was treated like loot by various "organizations".
Worse the mighty army we trained outnumbered ISIS like 10-1, and they ran like cowards.
Now we're back, but we aren't putting "boots on the ground". We're just there to "advise".

Billions in foreign aid to countries whose citizens burn our flag and chant for our death.
Countries who btw can't provide basic services despite existing for hundreds of years longer than we have.

Is it about oil? Well we never seem to get any, or be in control of it's production.
Besides were supposedly able to produce what we need, so why sacrifice so much for what appears to be no gain.

Is it about "fighting them there so we don't fight them here?"
Well, when left alone they seem to turn on each other. Left completely alone they would probably knock each other off, so again, why are we involved?

My point is this our tax money should be for the good of this country. I understand our need for a strong military and we've got it. In spades.

A strong case can be made for the argument that we involve ourselves in the affairs of other countries to almost no benefit.
Since WWII every war has, in my opinion, been none of our dammn business. We're never thanked and we're often cursed.

Since then we've been in a slow decline. More taxes. More weapons. More war. More debt, so much so now that our great grandchildren won't see it paid off.

I'm not going all tommynazimuslimbrotherhood conspiracy theory, but there is something seriously wrong and has been for a long time. What we do makes no logical sense, and I was just wondering if anyone felt the same way, or had info that can make it clearer.

If it wasn't such a serious matter you'd think it was a joke.

The free world knows that Isis must be nipped in the bud. Jordan knows it, U.A.E. knows it, the Saudis know it. Even the Ayatollah knows it. We all know it.

Ok if they're such a monumental threat, why not just smash them?

Please don't tell me that the combined might of the few world, we couldn't get this done by the weekend.

The first two minutes were a brilliant reminder of what we were dealing with in the years 2000-2008. Extraordinary that anyone was proud to call this person our leader. The rest of the video was long on speculation, short on evidence.

all hold hands in prayer....surely the supreme forces of infinate good are on our side..........

We're going to.