1
TheGhostOfTomPaine 1 point ago +1 / -0

There were a lot of attacks that ISIS claimed within both of those time frames. What’s your point? I’m not arguing the politics of the response to ISIS. I’m arguing that it serves literally nobody to try and spin their actions to reflect on partisan issues. Saying that “they’re back” says to me that you’re more concerned with the politics of it, rather than the humanity of it. Why? Because according to our own military (the people who would actually know) they never went anywhere.

1
TheGhostOfTomPaine 1 point ago +3 / -2

This seems like pure speculation. What makes you think this is the case? What evidence is there to indicate that this is all a show? From where I’m standing, it seems that Washington is moving on the way it always does. Every ounce of my experience says that things like Trump hiring lawyers for his impeachment defense, McConnell and Schumer bickering over procedure and the way the new Senate will operate and Pompeo looking forward to the next election indicate that it’s back to business as usual.

-1
TheGhostOfTomPaine -1 points ago +1 / -2

According to West Point and The Pentagon, ISIS changed as an organization, but they never went anywhere. So, it’s patently false to claim that they’re “back”. We need to be honest with ourselves when dealing with a group like ISIS. If we aren’t, we give them openings.

https://ctc.usma.edu/the-islamic-states-strategic-trajectory-in-africa-key-takeaways-from-its-attack-claims/

1
TheGhostOfTomPaine 1 point ago +2 / -1

Ok? I understand the concept, but I’ve seen nothing to suggest that ANYONE has been arrested. Just claiming things without any evidence to back it up seems really detrimental. Wouldn’t it make more sense to speculate rather than make unsubstantiated claims?