Escalation in the war aganist ISIS.

[fred1451]

I agree with those that say you need to take the financial backers out, economically if possible, militarily if necessary, and if their country raises a stink, agree with them that a casus belie has been committed, but do they really want to go there?

That being said, and with the understanding I am not advocating this. Getting rid of ISIS is not going to solve the problem, something else with the same goals will pop up in a couple of years.

This area has been in conflict since biblical times, at least, there must be something in the water, so simply killing off any given group is not going to accomplish much.

The best chance of stopping this from happening again someone needs to start at the northeast coast of the Mediterranean Sea and draw a line to the bottom of the Sinai Peninsula and start moving east, killing every living thing higher than a bacteria until they hit the Hindu Kush, then kill everyone that tries to resettle the area.

Will this stop political violence on a world wide basis, no, it will not even keep people from resettling the land, but we will not have to worry about these particular jokers ever again.

 

[fred1451]

*shrugs*

Not everybody sees Muslims as human beings, like you and I do. To those who consider them "Untermenschen", massacring lots of Muslims to destroy a terrorist organisation is killing two flies with one stone.

I'm sure there were a lot of innocent Germans in Dresden, didn't slow the RAF down any.

 

[Lost Freeway]

I'm sure there were a lot of innocent Germans in Dresden, didn't slow the RAF down any.

But the RAF's objective in Dresden was more complex than "kill as many Germans as possible".

 

[DracoLazarus]

Except that all nuclear powers adopted no-first-use policy and rejected use agaisnt non nuclear country. (something that comes in any "WI Brits nuke Argentina during Falklands war?")

this is slightly inexact. French CW Doctrine included tacnuking any enemy army crossing the Rhine, even on West German or Belgian lands.

 

[Falecius]

this is slightly inexact. French CW Doctrine included tacnuking any enemy army crossing the Rhine, even on West German or Belgian lands.

However, Da'ish isn't exactly running big tank formations in the general vicinity of the Ruhr valley now.

 

[fred1451]

But the RAF's objective in Dresden was more complex than "kill as many Germans as possible".

Yeah, it was "Lets see if we can cause a firestorm to more efficiently kill as many Germans as possible."

If you are going to fight a war, fight a war. When you start worrying about collateral damage then you are just telling the bad guys where it's safe to hide.

 

[Mike D]

Yeah, it was lets see if we can cause a firestorm.

If we are going to fight a war, fight a war. You start worrying about collateral damage then you are just telling the bad guys were it's safe to hide.

That was the only way to attack industrial targets in a city in the mid 1940s.

It's not the only way to attack targets in a built up area in 2015 and there's absolutely no excuse for doing it outside of retaliation for a CBRN attack.

 

[fred1451]

That was the only way to attack industrial targets in a city in the mid 1940s.

It's not the only way to attack targets in a built up area in 2015 and there's absolutely no excuse for doing it outside of retaliation for a CBRN attack.

An army travels on it's stomach, as long as you allow ISIS to have safe Logistical bases they remain an organized threat, their logistics are what needed to be targeted and destroyed. If that can be done surgically I'm all for it, if not, use other methods, what ever they may be. If you are fighting a war, then your goal should be to have your opponent at the end point at the sky and say, "From where the sun stands in the sky, I will war no more forever." We've forgotten that.

 

[Mike D]

An army travels on it's stomach, as long as you allow ISIS to have safe Logistical bases they remain an organized threat, their logistics are what needed to be targeted and destroyed. If that can be done surgically I'm all for it, if not, use other methods, what ever they may be. If you are fighting a war, then your goal should be to have your opponent at the end point at the sky and say, "From where the sun stands in the sky, I will war no more forever." We've forgotten that.

And all of the innocents living in Raqqa? We should be making ourselves worse than IS?

 

[MUC]

France should nuke Raqqah now.
ISIS and their sympathists do not understand this "soft" western policy of surgical strikes against terrorists using drones and getting upset about Putin using cluster bombs.
In the eyes of these radicals this kind of policy is a sign of weakness.

Nuke Raqqah now and declare that we will nuke any other place they try to hide in. The gloves are off.

 

[Yanez de Gomera]

France should nuke Raqqah now.
ISIS and their sympathists do not understand this "soft" western policy of surgical strikes against terrorists using drones and getting upset about Putin using cluster bombs.
In the eyes of these radicals this kind of policy is a sign of weakness.

Nuke Raqqah now and declare that we will nuke any other place they try to hide in. The gloves are off.

Come on, that would be a wild overreaction!
For one, most of the people living in Raqqa ar innocents, and big parts of the ISIS forces will not be there and so wouldn't be destroyed by the attack. Then I don't think such kind of deterrence helps much with people who are so clearly prepared to die for their cause, they are fanatics, not a rational state actor.
Thirdly, and most importantly, this would open the nuclear Pandora box, lowering the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons, spell the doom of the non-proliferation treaties and in short bring humanity closer to self-annhilation.

 

[fred1451]

And all of the innocents living in Raqqa? We should be making ourselves worse than IS?

Do you want to win the war or not? If you give the terrorists safe haven, a place you will not annihilate because of innocents then that is where they will move in and hide. If on the other hand, you make it clear that anywhere terrorists hide is fair game, then the people in those places might just solve the problem for everyone.

Your way guarantees the perpetuation of this conflict, my way will end it, even if it is after we have made a desert and called it peace.

It is not good, it is not pretty, it will stain our souls, but at his point ISIS has basically given us three choices, we can A) Submit to them. B) We can fight, and if we are going to fight we should approach it at the same level that ISIS does, actually we should be more ferocious, or C) Die.

ISIS has made this a war of survival, it should be treated as such.

 

[Lost Freeway]

So you're saying that committing genocide on a scale that would make Madnessverse America green with envy is the only way to secure peace? That ISIS is correct that enemies can only be dealt with by totally annihilating their people?

You're not the most disgusting member this board has had, but you're pretty close. I've already reported your initial post. Once the mods stir and see this insanity, your ass is going on a one-way flight to Coventry. Have a nice day.

 

[Mike D]

ISIS has made this a war of survival, it should be treated as such.

Actually they haven't. ISIS don't have anything like the ability to threaten the survival of France, the UK, the US or any other western nation.

It's interesting how many posters are so quick to suggest genocide as a war winning strategy though. I mean, it's not like there's one billion plus Muslims in the world who are going to turn against us if we do that, is it?

Mind you, I suppose we could just nuke all of them too

 

[CalBear]

We should send an ASMP nuclear cruise missile on Raqqa, the ISIS "Capital". Decapitation strike (quite an appropriate word, btw)

Raqqa no longer belong to Iraq or Syria, it belongs to ISIS. So just nuke the whole thing to clean the bastards.

At least the ISIS chief S.O.B (Djiahad John) has been wiped out by an American missile. Thank you Uncle Sam !

Good God!

Only the fact that you have a clean record over seven plus years kept of the 14:20 to Coventry.

Kicked for a week for advocating mass killings.

 

[Caiaphas]

Having read these posts this conversation sickens me, most of these comments are disgusting and vile

Over a 100 people died give their families time to mourn before your sick minds start planning genocide

 

[CalBear]

I agree with those that say you need to take the financial backers out, economically if possible, militarily if necessary, and if their country raises a stink, agree with them that a casus belie has been committed, but do they really want to go there?

That being said, and with the understanding I am not advocating this. Getting rid of ISIS is not going to solve the problem, something else with the same goals will pop up in a couple of years.

This area has been in conflict since biblical times, at least, there must be something in the water, so simply killing off any given group is not going to accomplish much.

The best chance of stopping this from happening again someone needs to start at the northeast coast of the Mediterranean Sea and draw a line to the bottom of the Sinai Peninsula and start moving east, killing every living thing higher than a bacteria until they hit the Hindu Kush, then kill everyone that tries to resettle the area.

Will this stop political violence on a world wide basis, no, it will not even keep people from resettling the land, but we will not have to worry about these particular jokers ever again.

WTF?

Not advocating it... but?

I was originally going to go with a kick, I understand emotions are running extremely high and all that until I read your second comment.

We divorce you.

To Coventry with you.

 

[CalBear]

If you really want to stick it to the IS, you have to go Old School.

1. Take as many ground troops (infantry) as you can.

2. Surround a piece of land and start slowly moving inward.

3. Kill everybody that resist, kill those that try to break out.

4. After you meet in the middle, kill those that you can identify.
(facial recognition etc. they liked to show off on social media).

5. Repeat as long as there is still an IS.

6. No Press allowed.

Duckie

Old school? For who. the Mongols?

Jesus Christ, if you are this upset (and again, I get it, this is an appalling situation) you shouldn't be posting. Revenge fantasies are not acceptable here.

You are getting away with only a kick solely because you made clear that this would not be a general genocide but "only" mass killing of combatants.

You are kicked for a week. You have used every little bit of slack with this post. I strongly suggest that you think before posting in the future.

 

[CalBear]

For obvious reasons I am locking this disaster.

 

[CalBear]

France should nuke Raqqah now.
ISIS and their sympathists do not understand this "soft" western policy of surgical strikes against terrorists using drones and getting upset about Putin using cluster bombs.
In the eyes of these radicals this kind of policy is a sign of weakness.

Nuke Raqqah now and declare that we will nuke any other place they try to hide in. The gloves are off.

What the hell is going on here?

Okay. Mass murder is NOT an acceptable thing to advocate here. Using a nuclear weapon crammed with innocent civilians, many of whom are effectively prisoners, is mass killing

Kicked for a week.