Canada vs ISIL: War vs fight? (split fm Politics in 2016)

[jollyjacktar]

Did we mobilize the nation's resources?  Did Parliament issue a formal declaration of war?  Did we deploy the army, or did we send less than 10% of the Army at any one time and then send them off for mid-deployment vacations?


And terror is a tactic.  Declaring a war on terror is like declaring a war on left flanking.

Maybe not, but we sold the tiff a shit load of weapons.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

So you don't consider ISIL/ISIS a state?

Based on the Montevideo Conference, perhaps they are.....

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

 

[chanman]

No, I don't acknowledge their claims, nor does the Obama administration.

Would you consider Taiwan a state? Officially recognized or not, ISIL acts like a state. It maintains or at least tries very hard to maintain a monopoly on the use of force inside its borders. It HAS borders. It maintains armed forces, administers territory, operates a judiciary (however brutal), collects taxes, has bureaucratic machinery...

Just because they don't count as a state now, doesn't mean they won't be in future. The old colonial constructs of Syria and Iraq are gone. Barring outright extermination of multiple sides, there remains a large chunk of land inhabited by people with a common identity who aren't probably aren't welcome in and will violently contest incorporation in any of the neighbouring states/rump states/quasi-states

 

[The Bread Guy]

What if Harper had asserted we are not in a war, we are in a fight.

For the record, at least one Harper Parliamentary Secretary got away with saying the fight in Afghanistan wasn't a war ...

This is not a war. We are providing a secure environment in a country in which there was a complete loss of security. Let us get it very clear so the NDP can understand what a secure environment is and what a war is.

    A war is between two nations; a war is between two parties. There are not two parties there. This is a different kind of war. We are facing a terrorist organization that does not respect any rules of engagement. As a matter of fact, it has the most hideous way of running a government on record. It will provide no rights to its own citizens. That is why the citizens of Afghanistan want us to bring peace and security. Peace and security can only be provided by NATO forces.

P.S. - Good discussion on the war vs. fight angle, so the thread is now stand alone.

 

[jmt18325]

Would you consider Taiwan a state?

I think Taiwan has pretty wide international recognition, which, under international law, is generally required for true statehood.

 

[Jarnhamar]

No, I don't acknowledge their claims, nor does the Obama administration.

PPCLI Guy beat me to it.  Whether you or Obama thinks they're not their own nation there is some pretty good indicators they are.  I'm not really sold on the Obama administration being a gague with this sort of stuff considering the fiasco in Guantanamo bay. You know, how they tortured prisoners and justified it by saying they weren't prisoners of war. Well that started before Obama but really it's the same organization.


Really this boils down to playing with words, like how the Liberals would pull CF18s out of the middle easy in weeks rather than months of being elected (I think I may have even seen "days") and when they were called on it their defense was they didn't technically give a date. Word games.

Merriam-Webster defines war as

: a state or period of fighting between countries or groups
: a situation in which people or groups compete with or fight against each other
: an organized effort by a government or other large organization to stop or defeat something that is viewed as dangerous or bad

Pretty broad.

 

[jmt18325]

That's why I quoted a legal dictionary.

 

[Cloud Cover]

ISIS is a far more organized entity than many states are. They have laws, taxes, budgets, social welfare, education, health care, executive leadership, a murderous judicial system, but they lack legitimacy because they established all of that by terror and conquer and in some cases by the modern equivalent of Anschluss. You name it, it's there, just like Hitler but not quite Hitler. And, they are Global.

I cannot think of too many countries except for Canada that is musing about having discussions with them. No G-7, G-8, G-20 country acts like our cowardly leader does. Trudeau wants a UN SEC Council seat? Come on.... 

We were at war with Germany after the appeasement ended.  Mr. Trudeau and Dion are in appeasement mode, but unlike Chamberlain, these two are much more naive than that.   

 

[PuckChaser]

That's why I quoted a legal dictionary.

So we're legally not at war, but common sense and common language would indicate we are.

If the legal definition is conflict between 2 states, then it needs to be updated. We may likely never see a "war" again, but a whole lot of armed conflicts or whatever nom-de-jour we want to use.

 

[jmt18325]

So we're legally not at war, but common sense and common language would indicate we are.

Sure, but there are certain rules and responsibilities that come with war.  The government is nervous to commit to such an onerous term, if I had to guess.

 

[PuckChaser]

I think we would have saved ourselves a lot of legal headache with detainees if they were treated as POWs, because we said it was a war. No complaints about being held without charge, they would be held under hostilities cease, so forever.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

ISIS whole claim is to start a State, with all the trapping and advertised to people to bring their families, etc. They are similar to a early Israel but without any international support at the government level. It is the state bit that clearly separates ISIS from AQ.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

ISIS is a far more organized entity than many states are. They have lawsreligious rule, taxes, budgets, social welfare, education, health care, executive leadership, a murderous judicialreligious "courts" system, but they lack legitimacy because they established all of that by terror and conquer and in some cases by the modern equivalent of Anschluss. You name it, it's there, just like Hitler but not quite Hitler. And, they are Global.

I cannot think of too many countries except for Canada that is musing about having discussions with them. No G-7, G-8, G-20 country acts like our cowardly leader does. Trudeau wants a UN SEC Council seat? Come on.... 

We were at war with Germany after the appeasement ended.  Mr. Trudeau and Dion are in appeasement mode, but unlike Chamberlain, these two are much more naive than that. 

TFTFY.

ISIS whole claim is to start a State, with all the trapping and advertised to people to bring their families, etc. They are similar to a early Israel but without any international support at the government level. It is the state bit that clearly separates ISIS from AQ.

Quite so. Their aim, contrary to what is said above by W601, is not global but the establishment where they are of an actual Caliphate (or at least their idea of a caliphate) in this world. But like any other "country", they can only succeed when other nations start to recognize them and deal with them as if they were a country or when they fully control what they claim as borders (not yet the case in view of Iraq and Syria's fighting) and live in complete autarky.

 

[Journeyman]

Trudeau wants a UN SEC Council seat? Come on.... 

Proper thing.  It's an absolutely useless money-pit and sinecure for the world's most self-righteous bureaucrats; it needs  a cheerleader of Canada's status to proclaim how worthy League of Nations 2.0 is.    :

I now return you to the battle  fight  wrangling of the lexicographers.



The problem is, if we didn't have a UN we'd have to invent something like it.  Maybe like the Matrix, it just needs to be razed periodically and we start fresh.

 

[jollyjacktar]

TFTFY.

Quite so. Their aim, contrary to what is said above by W601, is not global but the establishment where they are of an actual Caliphate (or at least their idea of a caliphate) in this world. But like any other "country", they can only succeed when other nations start to recognize them and deal with them as if they were a country or when they fully control what they claim as borders (not yet the case in view of Iraq and Syria's fighting) and live in complete autarky.

That being said,  however,  I believe their end game desire is world domination, with all humanity submitting to Islam.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Proper thing.  It's an absolutely useless money-pit and sinecure for the world's most self-righteous bureaucrats; it needs  a cheerleader of Canada's status to proclaim how worthy League of Nations 2.0 is.    :

I now return you to the battle  fight  wrangling of the lexicographers.



The problem is, if we didn't have a UN we'd have to invent something like it.  Maybe like the Matrix, it just needs to be razed periodically and we start fresh.

Exactly so.  Good hair needs photo opportunities and screaming worshippers.  Trudeau mania 2.0 too.

 

[a_majoor]

For those with access to the Intranet, David Kilcullen gave a presentation where he essentially makes the point ISIS is and should be treated like a radical state (his two examples are Russia prior to 1923 and Iran just after the 1979 Revolution), meaning we can and should use the instruments of State power to defeat them; in other words "war" no matter if we choose to declare it or not.

http://intranet.mil.ca/en/news/articles.page?doc=david-kilcullen-counterinsurgency-and-counterterrorism-in-today-s-operational-context/ilxa79ek&WT.mc_id=ADMPA2016W12eng-feat3

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

That being said,  however,  I believe their end game desire is world domination, with all humanity submitting to Islam.

You may be right Jollyjacktar, but not necessarily in the way you think.

My understanding (and please all feel free to correct me if wrong) of the Islamic cult (and I use cult on purpose here) that is ISIL is that they are like the Islamic equivalent of the Christian Rapture cults. ISIL's view is that they currently are (geographically) exactly where they should be as they are the "last one hundred" true Muslim engaged in the final fight that will bring about the rule of Islam through Armageddon/the end of the world. I may have the details wrong, but their point is fundamentally "we are making our final stand here, and when we are all dead in this fight, God will eradicate all infidels from the planet and we will rise again in his splendour as the true muslims we are and live eternally".

Basically: They are not planning to invade the whole world, only to provoke infidels everywhere so we actually do attend their "final battle" to wipe them out.

I guess it's an elaborate and hyper inflationary take on the old "suicide-by-police" gig.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

That being said,  however,  I believe their end game desire is world domination, with all humanity submitting to Islam.

that is the end game of every Islamic fundamentalist, as I said before:

Whabbist=  Happy to boil the frog slowly using oil money and demographics so it does not notice till to late.
AQ= Lets kill them in fiendishly devised plots to bring glory to the Islamic world and eventually domination somehow
ISIS= Lets kill them in new and interesting ways because I am bored talking about garbage and sewage

 

[Staff Weenie]

I'm just pondering the apparent foolishness of officially noting that we are not 'at war' with them, but ISIS certainly believe that they are in essence at war with us....well, actually, they are against everything and everyone outside of their little world.

It must be terribly draining to find enough energy to hate everyone with such vigour.