It's a major issue, so... what is the worst that happens with NO intervention in the M.E.?

[Bonobo]

Some here feel it is "unserious" to do anything other than directly intervene with our military to defeat ISIS, to achieve regime change...

So let's look at this the other way around. Let me be the Devil's Advocate and ask:

"What is the result of non-intervention in the M.E.?"

or

"How is intervention in the M.E. going to improve the lives of Americans?"

I am quite sure that Hillary supporters must have SOME good reason for supporting, before hand, the hundreds of billions of dollars (or more) that she is virtually certain to spend on military intervention in the M.E. So please let me hear your rationalizations (other than 'Well, I trust her!')

[valerief]

1. War profiteers will lose out on lotsa money. nt

[Renew Deal]

2. What is unserious is to promote a sectarian war fought by "muslim nations in the region."

That will get very ugly. It won't be Turkey fighting ISIS. It will be Turkey and Saudi Arabia fighting ISIS in one place and helping them in another. Iran will be controlling Iraq and government controlled Syria to fight ISIS and the Saudi's. And lets hope no one else gets involved.

That's what makes Sanders proposal unserious.

[JaneyVee]

3. ISIS taking over Europe will destroy the US economy.

[JonLeibowitz]

4. So will ISIS taking over North and South America.

Both are equally likely to occur.

Nice argument. Not.

[JaneyVee]

6. We have far better geographical advantages.

[JonLeibowitz]

9. LOL! If you think Europe is at any danger of being taken over by ISIS you are sorely mistaken.

I actually thought you were joking, it is such a ridiculous idea.

[HoneychildMooseMoss]

11. I heard a similar argument back in the 1960s

It was called the "Domino Theory". If we didn't intervene in Vietnam/Indochina, one country after another would fall to the Commies, even Japan and Australia.

[JonLeibowitz]

14. How did that work out for us?

[HoneychildMooseMoss]

16. Well, the dominoes that did fall were Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia

Admittedly, things got pretty bad in those countries, especially Cambodia, especially in the period 1975-79. And while all of those countries are still Communist to one extent or another, the US has normal relations with all of them.

[JaneyVee]

17. Europe doesn't need to be "taken over"...

They will destroy their economy through terror and fear, which would have catastrophic ripple effects for our economy, not to mention national security.

[JonLeibowitz]

21. Uh huh. You keep spreading fear. It befits your candidate's pleas to abandon the constitution

because of "security" concerns.

[JaneyVee]

22. Are you really this disconnected?

Paris was just attacked. You think if they could get their hands on nukes they wouldn't use it?

[JonLeibowitz]

23. No doubt. However, they have not gotten their hands on nukes last I checked.

Nice try though.

I am very much connected, thank you very much.

[JaneyVee]

24. Yeah, I guess we'll just wait until after.

Sounds like a winning plan.

[JonLeibowitz]

27. Well your candidate's winning plan is to abandon the constitution.

[MFrohike]

30. ?

Call me crazy, but I'm pretty sure that Europe's elites are doing a fine job of destroying their economies right now. I don't see any role for ISIS in that. Draghi and co. have it handled.

[Bonobo]

7. ISIS taking over Europe? Who is unserious now?

I would expect to hear such things from Donald Trump.

[neverforget]

20. Lol! The Nazis did it, but they had an army and air force.

ISIS has none of that.

[EndElectoral]

5. We're already intervening with ISIL, however the issue of Asad and regime change is where I stop.

ISIL has attacked us, and France, a major ally.

Asad is a despot, like Saddam Hussein, but we cannot go to war with every despot or we'd be invading North Korea at present or half a dozen nations in Africa. People often don't understand the phrase "The world's policemen." At the crux of this is the question, what constitutes the rationale for American military involvement abroad, and to what extent. That's a good question and was addressed in a minimal way in the debate.

[99th_Monkey]

13. But, but .. we ARE the Cops of the World

[JaneyVee]

19. No we are not the cops of the world.

There are plenty of global crises we are not taking part in.

[99th_Monkey]

33. Did I forget my sarcasm smilie?

I just couldn't resist posting the Phil Ochs song, as it illustrates how this cops of the world thing
has been with us for so long, and is so transparently a function of corporate-driven US imperialism,
rather than a function of the US 'spreading democracy' or any of that BS.

Oh, and just because there are 'conflicts' around the globe the US is NOT involved in, doesn't take
away from that whatsoever. As with actual 'cops' in a city, there is crime going on all over the city,
and the cops are only capable of dealing with a fraction of it on any given day.

[notadmblnd]

8. The US loses the control of the flow of the oil

The military industrial complex's profits plummet

Thousands of lives will continue to be lost (but the way I see it, what difference is it if the US bombs them to death or if they kill each other. Dead is dead isn't it?)

Other countries will have to fight their own battles.

Russia and China could gain more power in the region.

Dictators that the US want to get rid of stay in place

If I can think of anything else, I'll be back.

[Chitown Kev]

10. Saudi Arabia and Iran

coming to blows would be the worse thing that could happen.

And would present Israel with an interesting set of conundrums.

[msongs]

12. ask bernie, he votes for military appropriations type bills too nt

[99th_Monkey]

15. Bernie's votes make a hell of a lot more sense than Hillary's 'We're the Cops of the World' shtick

the US can't "fix" every other nation's problems with endless war & military interventions.

[Motown_Johnny]

26. Once the decision is made to sail into a hurricane....

...he battens down the hatches.


That does not mean he thought it was a good idea to sail into a hurricane.

[jfern]

18. We need to arm some allies to fight our current enemies so that

our current allies can become our new enemies.

[Motown_Johnny]

25. When you are a hammer, you think everything is a nail.

Direct military intervention is supported by people who lack the ability to comprehend anything else. We have already seen that it does more harm than good. How many times must the same mistake be made before it dawns on people that it is a mistake?

This is a multi-generational problem that isn't going to be solved by one more war or one President's actions (although it can be made worse that way). It is a hot version of the cold war and needs to be "won" through long term diplomatic and economic policies in conjunction with limited military support for allies in the region.

This isn't a nail. A hammer won't work. In a way, we need extremist's support to be so small we can drown it in a bathtub. That isn't going to happen overnight.

[loyalsister]

32. Martin O'Malley said the same thing....

Do the hawks even understand that they are passing down war. Presently young, and future generations are going to risk or sacrifice their bodies AND pay the bill.

"May I offer a different generation's perspective on this?" the 52-year-old said to a mix of jeers and some boos from the audience after Sanders, 74, and Clinton, 68, sparred over the merits of regime change.

The former Maryland governor, in a distant third in polls, went on to note America's mixed record with regime change, highlighting Iran as a key example.

"During the Cold War, we got into a bad habit of always looking to see who was wearing the jersey of the communists and who was wearing the U.S. jersey," he said.. "We need to leave the Cold War behind us and we need to put together new alliances."
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/263849-omalley-digs-at-age-of-sanders-clinton

[Agnosticsherbet]

28. ISIS became a state because Syria became a failed state.

So the worst that could happen is that Jordan and countries become destabilized and spread war and death across the whole region. This would drive millions more refugees into Europe, whose economies will not last long under the pressure.

I think we, the Europe, Russians, Iranians, Turks, Saudi's, Jordanians, Iraqi's, and Syrians should work together to set up stable governments. Stable governments in those countries will make ISIS just another group of criminal thugs.

I do not support a military invasion with US troops. I do support working with our allies and others in the region to bring stability back to Iraq and Syria

[pansypoo53219]

29. a NEEDED islamic reformation?

[MFrohike]

31. I'll venture a guess

Russia continues to create a coastal enclave for the Alawites and their allies. The Sunni militias continue to flounder because they're terrible fighters. ISIS continues to beat up on those militias because they're not quite as bad as the militias. Hezbollah continues to hold its corner of Syria and give ISIS and the militias nightmares. Rojava continues to slowly expand, unless Turkey or its allies decide that a successful band of Kurds and other minorities is beyond the pale.

In short, not a long would change.