Act of War

[ChrisL]

French President Calls Attacks an 'Act of War'


The French president calls attacks in Paris an 'Act of War'.

That is what it is. Nato needs to mobilize immediately and neutralize this threat with all due hostility. We aren't at terrorism, we are at war. The ENEMY has made it clear.

Nato should convene, tell the member states we need a quarter million troops and all will participate and land troops in Iraq and Syria FOR STARTERS. And it should make clear to the rest of the world get the fuck out of the way.

The real world is harsh and sometimes deadly force is required and right now is one of those times. And be clear, Nato will have forces in that region for decades to come.

The Nato charter states 'any attack on one member nation is an attack on all'. The time for half measures and yammering is now over, for good. Brutal force is now required, not by our choice but by what has been forced on us.

Just that ? War , more war and destruction ?
Did war make middle east more stable?
What I find appaling is the lack of intelligence in all this ISIS matter.
Assad and the russian blame the US for creating ISIS. The US blames Assad. WTF is going on?
How did the terrorists arrive to France and coordinated their attacks? How did they get the weapons and ammunition?
And don't get me wong : I hate terrorists and religious fanatics. But, is war the right answer?
What failed in the intelligence agencies? How is this related to the massive immigration waves europe is receiving.
Wasn't war what spawned ISIS?

There is no good solution here. And yes war is what spawned Isis.

We have to eliminate this crop of barbarians, stabilize the region as much as possible with continued presence, divide Iraq into three smaller nations, one Shiite, one Sunni, and one Kurd.

Everyone seems to be looking for some magic answer, there isn't one. This is a colossal goatfuck from every angle, but we HAVE to destroy this particular group of insane people first.

Get used to it, there will be more attacks like the Paris attack all over the Western countries. The US included. I've wondered why since 9/11 they haven't done this before. It takes nearly no training and little money to pick out soft targets with a lot of people and take an AK or AR with a bunch of clips and wreak havoc in ten minutes. Anywhere.

This 'caliphate' has to be destroyed first and safe ground denied to these fanatical groups. Ugly, costly, but required.

And what makes you think this would be any more successful than the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan? Have those wars done anything to stop terrorism?

 

[Two Thumbs]

Don't forget to take your sons and daughters to the recruiting station with you.

wouldn't want to look like a hypocrite now would we

to whom are you responding?

to the op and every leftist pussy that wants war

now

I wouldn't want to send my son or anyone else's to that hell hole cesspool of crap.

hell no! me neither

My son is 15 and is talking about joining up, I'm pushing for the Navy or CG, fuck face to face killing.

leave those assholes over there, don't go in and don't let them out

 

[ChrisL]

Don't forget to take your sons and daughters to the recruiting station with you.

wouldn't want to look like a hypocrite now would we

to whom are you responding?

to the op and every leftist pussy that wants war

now

I wouldn't want to send my son or anyone else's to that hell hole cesspool of crap.

hell no! me neither

My son is 15 and is talking about joining up, I'm pushing for the Navy or CG, fuck face to face killing.

leave those assholes over there, don't go in and don't let them out

Yeah, at that age, they are very aggressive and hormonal. That's why they want to take our children at 17 years old! Because, as the saying goes, they are young, dumb and full of cum! I feel bad for the French people, but this is not a reason for us to involve ourselves in yet ANOTHER war, which isn't going to shit to stop terrorism. These wars are useless because, for one thing, you cannot discern the enemy from the civilians, and because of our modern days "rules of engagement", we can't go balls to the wall on these people.

 

[ChrisL]

You know, when we fight these kinds of enemies, they have all the advantages. They don't follow any "rules." We have to abide by the rules given to us by the Geneva Convention and other such agreements.

If anyone is familiar with the writings of Sun Tsu, you know that you cannot win a war that way, with one hand tied behind your back. You have to fight fire with fire or you are going to lose or remain stagnant in your war efforts.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Get used to it, there will be more attacks like the Paris attack all over the Western countries. The US included. I've wondered why since 9/11 they haven't done this before. It takes nearly no training and little money to pick out soft targets with a lot of people and take an AK or AR with a bunch of clips and wreak havoc in ten minutes. Anywhere.

If there is another such attack on the US of this size, I would then find questionable the NSA's strategy of pulling every piece of information from emails , social media and phones.
ISIS must go down, but then , the role of reconstruction can not be understated in any way.
There was no reconstruction in Afghanistan after the rusians left, nor was there much in Iraq after Saddams demise.
I do feel it is becoming the sort of battle like the one Hercules sustained against the hydra.

Top 10 Longest Wars

List of longest wars.

The West, and the world really, has to get used to the fact this conflict with these faux-religious zealots are going to last a long time. Its already lasted 14 years and if you were to go back farther you could say it started in 1993 and even farther back to 1979 with the fundamentalist revolution in Iran.

The current fight with the, and lets call them what they are, insane groups of religious whacks, who claim to be religious anyway, is going to last many many years. And we are going to have to fight it until its over. They aren't really worried about how long it will take, they are trying to recreate the world as it was in 600 AD.

They can't win, obviously, but they think they can and what sustains them is killing people. It makes them feel powerful.

What would be the alternative to fighting and defeating them? There is none, they aren't going to stop. Every time they export and carry out one of these massacres against the West and we do nothing, and really bombing is nearly doing nothing, they are emboldened and think the West weak. If you are slaughtering an enemy and they do not physically come to fight and kill you then you are winning. That is how THEY see it.

We have to go back there with a large army and obliterate them, erase this 'caliphate' from the map which really is the most important thing to do, all the ignorant lowlifes that might see these groups and want to follow will have far less incentive if they look at a map and the group they want to follow can't be found on it.

 

[paulitician]

Boy, the French are on a pretty big losing streak as far as Wars go. So I wouldn't be too optimistic on this one. If it were just the French VS. ISIS/Al Qaeda, i might have to go with ISIS/Al Qaeda winning it. That would be the smart money.

They just kicked their asses in Chad...............and are fighting them now...........

Chad?? Really? Without the U.S., France would be in some serious trouble. In a one on one matchup, France VS. Al Qaeda/ISIS, i'd have to go with Al Qaeda/ISIS. But regardless, bombing another defenseless country won't make them safer. In fact, it's only gonna breed more anger. Just creating more people who will seek revenge someday.

The U.S., France, and Great Britain have done an awful lot of damage around the world. They're constantly meddling and murdering. The chickens have to come home to roost at some point. It is inevitable.

 

[paulitician]

Boy, the French are on a pretty big losing streak as far as Wars go. So I wouldn't be too optimistic on this one. If it were just the French VS. ISIS/Al Qaeda, i might have to go with ISIS/Al Qaeda winning it. That would be the smart money.

If you have any interest in understanding what ISIS really wants, you should take a look at this article. It's not light reading but it's worth the effort.

ISIS does not want to establish a nation, they want to establish a territory that they can operate out of. They have no interest in peace or treaties, or cease fires. Notice that they make no demands on the West. They seek reputation. They only want one thing, to kill all those that are not true believers. They seek to die in service of God unlike most Christians, Jews or Muslims who seek to live to serve God. ISIS is an apocalyptic cult. This is quite different than Al Qaeda.

What ISIS Really Wants

Some of their demands seem pretty reasonable. The West especially the U.S., should leave those lands it doesn't belong in. I mean, why the hell are we fighting a war in Syria anyway? It isn't our fight. We shouldn't have meddled. In fact if we hadn't, there would be no ISIS. We need to end the endless War policy. It's time to come home and secure our border.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Get used to it, there will be more attacks like the Paris attack all over the Western countries. The US included. I've wondered why since 9/11 they haven't done this before. It takes nearly no training and little money to pick out soft targets with a lot of people and take an AK or AR with a bunch of clips and wreak havoc in ten minutes. Anywhere.

If there is another such attack on the US of this size, I would then find questionable the NSA's strategy of pulling every piece of information from emails , social media and phones.
ISIS must go down, but then , the role of reconstruction can not be understated in any way.
There was no reconstruction in Afghanistan after the rusians left, nor was there much in Iraq after Saddams demise.
I do feel it is becoming the sort of battle like the one Hercules sustained against the hydra.

Top 10 Longest Wars

List of longest wars.

The West, and the world really, has to get used to the fact this conflict with these faux-religious zealots are going to last a long time. Its already lasted 14 years and if you were to go back farther you could say it started in 1993 and even farther back to 1979 with the fundamentalist revolution in Iran.

The current fight with the, and lets call them what they are, insane groups of religious whacks, who claim to be religious anyway, is going to last many many years. And we are going to have to fight it until its over. They aren't really worried about how long it will take, they are trying to recreate the world as it was in 600 AD.

They can't win, obviously, but they think they can and what sustains them is killing people. It makes them feel powerful.

What would be the alternative to fighting and defeating them? There is none, they aren't going to stop. Every time they export and carry out one of these massacres against the West and we do nothing, and really bombing is nearly doing nothing, they are emboldened and think the West weak. If you are slaughtering an enemy and they do not physically come to fight and kill you then you are winning. That is how THEY see it.

We have to go back there with a large army and obliterate them, erase this 'caliphate' from the map which really is the most important thing to do, all the ignorant lowlifes that might see these groups and want to follow will have far less incentive if they look at a map and the group they want to follow can't be found on it.

Of course , ISIS is a threat, as all their mentally dearranged members and they must be taken out somehow.

That said, before launching a full blown attack there needs to be a strategy:

Obama has said Putin is attacking not only ISIS but the rebel army in Siria . Really ? How can anyone diferentiate between one and another ? There are fotographs of McCain with the rebels and at least one of ISIS members. He is now being very vocal about how the ISIS situation is Obama's fault, but at least in that case, it is clear one top member of the rebels switched sides ( a more sinister hypothesis would be that McCaain is covertly supporting ISIS ) . My point here is there is complete lack of intelligence regarding ISIS.

Also ISIS has control of the oil in the region, but that oil is useless without a buyer, the same goes for all the weapons they adquire. The money and goods flow has to be stopped.

Going into war might seem the obvious option , but going into war unprepared might create a bigger disaster.
Evenmore, it has to be made clear exactly how these terrorists adquired their weapons, ammunition and explosives without being detected. This is particularly important given the number of refugees going into Europe . This risk has to be addressed first.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting .
- Sun tzu.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Get used to it, there will be more attacks like the Paris attack all over the Western countries. The US included. I've wondered why since 9/11 they haven't done this before. It takes nearly no training and little money to pick out soft targets with a lot of people and take an AK or AR with a bunch of clips and wreak havoc in ten minutes. Anywhere.

If there is another such attack on the US of this size, I would then find questionable the NSA's strategy of pulling every piece of information from emails , social media and phones.
ISIS must go down, but then , the role of reconstruction can not be understated in any way.
There was no reconstruction in Afghanistan after the rusians left, nor was there much in Iraq after Saddams demise.
I do feel it is becoming the sort of battle like the one Hercules sustained against the hydra.

Top 10 Longest Wars

List of longest wars.

The West, and the world really, has to get used to the fact this conflict with these faux-religious zealots are going to last a long time. Its already lasted 14 years and if you were to go back farther you could say it started in 1993 and even farther back to 1979 with the fundamentalist revolution in Iran.

The current fight with the, and lets call them what they are, insane groups of religious whacks, who claim to be religious anyway, is going to last many many years. And we are going to have to fight it until its over. They aren't really worried about how long it will take, they are trying to recreate the world as it was in 600 AD.

They can't win, obviously, but they think they can and what sustains them is killing people. It makes them feel powerful.

What would be the alternative to fighting and defeating them? There is none, they aren't going to stop. Every time they export and carry out one of these massacres against the West and we do nothing, and really bombing is nearly doing nothing, they are emboldened and think the West weak. If you are slaughtering an enemy and they do not physically come to fight and kill you then you are winning. That is how THEY see it.

We have to go back there with a large army and obliterate them, erase this 'caliphate' from the map which really is the most important thing to do, all the ignorant lowlifes that might see these groups and want to follow will have far less incentive if they look at a map and the group they want to follow can't be found on it.

Of course , ISIS is a threat, as all their mentally dearranged members and they must be taken out somehow.

That said, before launching a full blown attack there needs to be a strategy:

Obama has said Putin is attacking not only ISIS but the rebel army in Siria . Really ? How can anyone diferentiate between one and another ? There are fotographs of McCain with the rebels and at least one of ISIS members. He is now being very vocal about how the ISIS situation is Obama's fault, but at least in that case, it is clear one top member of the rebels switched sides ( a more sinister hypothesis would be that McCaain is covertly supporting ISIS ) . My point here is there is complete lack of intelligence regarding ISIS.

Also ISIS has control of the oil in the region, but that oil is useless without a buyer, the same goes for all the weapons they adquire. The money and goods flow has to be stopped.

Going into war might seem the obvious option , but going into war unprepared might create a bigger disaster.
Evenmore, it has to be made clear exactly how these terrorista adquired their weapons, ammunition and explosives without being detected. This is particularly important given the number of refugees going into Europe . This risk has to be addressed first.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting .
- Sun tzu.

The world has to recognize a moment when talking and 'strategizing' is over. That moment has arrived. These people are not going to stop, they are not only threatening all the rest of the world with mass murder, they are committing those mass murders. Russia confirmed the Russian airliner was brought down with a bomb.

This is a group of the insane who believe literally that they are in the process of bringing on the apocalypse which will result in a world-wide caliphate. They are not sane. They will not stop. They kill everyone, Muslims, non-Muslims, Russians, French, Italians, Spanish, English, Americans. Everyone.

I understand completely the aversion to a ground war, and all war for that matter, but reality is what it is. Killing these people is the only thing that is going to work.

Either we are going to send an army there to annihilate them, or these mass murders are going to continue unabated. Even after an invasion an sweep has destroyed these people and their phoney 'caliphate', some attacks will continue. But they will progressively get smaller and weaker. But it will likely take decades for this disease to fade away.

Lastly, this is maybe 20-30,000 people. A modern army would destroy them in a week or two with minimal casualties.

I just watch this and wonder why are the Western democracies always so timid in the face of hostility like this. It seems there is always a threshold that the enemy has to cross over before we take action. 3,000 dead in New York, yes let's invade. 130 dead here, 192 dead there, uhhmmm let's talk tough and drop bombs, never actually ending the threat.

And I'm done here, that's enough.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Get used to it, there will be more attacks like the Paris attack all over the Western countries. The US included. I've wondered why since 9/11 they haven't done this before. It takes nearly no training and little money to pick out soft targets with a lot of people and take an AK or AR with a bunch of clips and wreak havoc in ten minutes. Anywhere.

If there is another such attack on the US of this size, I would then find questionable the NSA's strategy of pulling every piece of information from emails , social media and phones.
ISIS must go down, but then , the role of reconstruction can not be understated in any way.
There was no reconstruction in Afghanistan after the rusians left, nor was there much in Iraq after Saddams demise.
I do feel it is becoming the sort of battle like the one Hercules sustained against the hydra.

Top 10 Longest Wars

List of longest wars.

The West, and the world really, has to get used to the fact this conflict with these faux-religious zealots are going to last a long time. Its already lasted 14 years and if you were to go back farther you could say it started in 1993 and even farther back to 1979 with the fundamentalist revolution in Iran.

The current fight with the, and lets call them what they are, insane groups of religious whacks, who claim to be religious anyway, is going to last many many years. And we are going to have to fight it until its over. They aren't really worried about how long it will take, they are trying to recreate the world as it was in 600 AD.

They can't win, obviously, but they think they can and what sustains them is killing people. It makes them feel powerful.

What would be the alternative to fighting and defeating them? There is none, they aren't going to stop. Every time they export and carry out one of these massacres against the West and we do nothing, and really bombing is nearly doing nothing, they are emboldened and think the West weak. If you are slaughtering an enemy and they do not physically come to fight and kill you then you are winning. That is how THEY see it.

We have to go back there with a large army and obliterate them, erase this 'caliphate' from the map which really is the most important thing to do, all the ignorant lowlifes that might see these groups and want to follow will have far less incentive if they look at a map and the group they want to follow can't be found on it.

Of course , ISIS is a threat, as all their mentally dearranged members and they must be taken out somehow.

That said, before launching a full blown attack there needs to be a strategy:

Obama has said Putin is attacking not only ISIS but the rebel army in Siria . Really ? How can anyone diferentiate between one and another ? There are fotographs of McCain with the rebels and at least one of ISIS members. He is now being very vocal about how the ISIS situation is Obama's fault, but at least in that case, it is clear one top member of the rebels switched sides ( a more sinister hypothesis would be that McCaain is covertly supporting ISIS ) . My point here is there is complete lack of intelligence regarding ISIS.

Also ISIS has control of the oil in the region, but that oil is useless without a buyer, the same goes for all the weapons they adquire. The money and goods flow has to be stopped.

Going into war might seem the obvious option , but going into war unprepared might create a bigger disaster.
Evenmore, it has to be made clear exactly how these terrorista adquired their weapons, ammunition and explosives without being detected. This is particularly important given the number of refugees going into Europe . This risk has to be addressed first.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting .
- Sun tzu.

The world has to recognize a moment when talking and 'strategizing' is over. That moment has arrived. These people are not going to stop, they are not only threatening all the rest of the world with mass murder, they are committing those mass murders. Russia confirmed the Russian airliner was brought down with a bomb.

This is a group of the insane who believe literally that they are in the process of bringing on the apocalypse which will result in a world-wide caliphate. They are not sane. They will not stop. They kill everyone, Muslims, non-Muslims, Russians, French, Italians, Spanish, English, Americans. Everyone.

I understand completely the aversion to a ground war, and all war for that matter, but reality is what it is. Killing these people is the only thing that is going to work.

Either we are going to send an army there to annihilate them, or these mass murders are going to continue unabated. Even after an invasion an sweep has destroyed these people and their phoney 'caliphate', some attacks will continue. But they will progressively get smaller and weaker. But it will likely take decades for this disease to fade away.

Lastly, this is maybe 20-30,000 people. A modern army would destroy them in a week or two with minimal casualties.

I just watch this and wonder why are the Western democracies always so timid in the face of hostility like this. It seems there is always a threshold that the enemy has to cross over before we take action. 3,000 dead in New York, yes let's invade. 130 dead here, 192 dead there, uhhmmm let's talk tough and drop bombs, never actually ending the threat.

And I'm done here, that's enough.

For a moment , let's assume I support your stance on going to war . That still leaves a lot of open issues :
- What was McCain doing with the rebels, and with an Isis members?
Should he personally apologize with france for his foolhardy accidental support for ISIS based on faulty intelligence?
- How many of the so called rebels supported by the US and the CIA ?
Should rebels continue to be supported ? If so , how will resources be traced so they don't end on the ISIS side.
What is the flow of goods and money from and to ISIS, which companies and countries are involved ?
What filters and checks have to be passed with refugees to minimize the risk of getting a member from ISIS.

The iraq death toll reached 500,000 persons ( about 5,000 of them were american soldiers). A killing far worse than any perpatrated by Saddam , Al qaeda and Isis combined.
How do you weight this as a cost of war? How do you balance which lives were more important ( do iraqui lives count as zero because they are not-american?) ,and that is assuming Iraq had anything to do with 9/11?

 

[CultureCitizen]

Get used to it, there will be more attacks like the Paris attack all over the Western countries. The US included. I've wondered why since 9/11 they haven't done this before. It takes nearly no training and little money to pick out soft targets with a lot of people and take an AK or AR with a bunch of clips and wreak havoc in ten minutes. Anywhere.

If there is another such attack on the US of this size, I would then find questionable the NSA's strategy of pulling every piece of information from emails , social media and phones.
ISIS must go down, but then , the role of reconstruction can not be understated in any way.
There was no reconstruction in Afghanistan after the rusians left, nor was there much in Iraq after Saddams demise.
I do feel it is becoming the sort of battle like the one Hercules sustained against the hydra.

Top 10 Longest Wars

List of longest wars.

The West, and the world really, has to get used to the fact this conflict with these faux-religious zealots are going to last a long time. Its already lasted 14 years and if you were to go back farther you could say it started in 1993 and even farther back to 1979 with the fundamentalist revolution in Iran.

The current fight with the, and lets call them what they are, insane groups of religious whacks, who claim to be religious anyway, is going to last many many years. And we are going to have to fight it until its over. They aren't really worried about how long it will take, they are trying to recreate the world as it was in 600 AD.

They can't win, obviously, but they think they can and what sustains them is killing people. It makes them feel powerful.

What would be the alternative to fighting and defeating them? There is none, they aren't going to stop. Every time they export and carry out one of these massacres against the West and we do nothing, and really bombing is nearly doing nothing, they are emboldened and think the West weak. If you are slaughtering an enemy and they do not physically come to fight and kill you then you are winning. That is how THEY see it.

We have to go back there with a large army and obliterate them, erase this 'caliphate' from the map which really is the most important thing to do, all the ignorant lowlifes that might see these groups and want to follow will have far less incentive if they look at a map and the group they want to follow can't be found on it.

Of course , ISIS is a threat, as all their mentally dearranged members and they must be taken out somehow.

That said, before launching a full blown attack there needs to be a strategy:

Obama has said Putin is attacking not only ISIS but the rebel army in Siria . Really ? How can anyone diferentiate between one and another ? There are fotographs of McCain with the rebels and at least one of ISIS members. He is now being very vocal about how the ISIS situation is Obama's fault, but at least in that case, it is clear one top member of the rebels switched sides ( a more sinister hypothesis would be that McCaain is covertly supporting ISIS ) . My point here is there is complete lack of intelligence regarding ISIS.

Also ISIS has control of the oil in the region, but that oil is useless without a buyer, the same goes for all the weapons they adquire. The money and goods flow has to be stopped.

Going into war might seem the obvious option , but going into war unprepared might create a bigger disaster.
Evenmore, it has to be made clear exactly how these terrorista adquired their weapons, ammunition and explosives without being detected. This is particularly important given the number of refugees going into Europe . This risk has to be addressed first.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting .
- Sun tzu.

The world has to recognize a moment when talking and 'strategizing' is over. That moment has arrived. These people are not going to stop, they are not only threatening all the rest of the world with mass murder, they are committing those mass murders. Russia confirmed the Russian airliner was brought down with a bomb.

This is a group of the insane who believe literally that they are in the process of bringing on the apocalypse which will result in a world-wide caliphate. They are not sane. They will not stop. They kill everyone, Muslims, non-Muslims, Russians, French, Italians, Spanish, English, Americans. Everyone.

I understand completely the aversion to a ground war, and all war for that matter, but reality is what it is. Killing these people is the only thing that is going to work.

Either we are going to send an army there to annihilate them, or these mass murders are going to continue unabated. Even after an invasion an sweep has destroyed these people and their phoney 'caliphate', some attacks will continue. But they will progressively get smaller and weaker. But it will likely take decades for this disease to fade away.

Lastly, this is maybe 20-30,000 people. A modern army would destroy them in a week or two with minimal casualties.

I just watch this and wonder why are the Western democracies always so timid in the face of hostility like this. It seems there is always a threshold that the enemy has to cross over before we take action. 3,000 dead in New York, yes let's invade. 130 dead here, 192 dead there, uhhmmm let's talk tough and drop bombs, never actually ending the threat.

And I'm done here, that's enough.

For a moment , let's assume I support your stance on going to war . That still leaves a lot of open issues :
- What was McCain doing with the rebels, and with an Isis members?
Should he personally apologize with france for his foolhardy accidental support for ISIS based on faulty intelligence?
- How many of the so called rebels supported by the US and the CIA ?
Should rebels continue to be supported ? If so , how will resources be traced so they don't end on the ISIS side.
What is the flow of goods and money from and to ISIS, which companies and countries are involved ?
What filters and checks have to be passed with refugees to minimize the risk of getting a member from ISIS.

The iraq death toll reached 500,000 persons ( about 5,000 of them were american soldiers). A killing far worse than any perpatrated by Saddam , Al qaeda and Isis combined.
How do you weight this as a cost of war? How do you balance which lives were more important ( do iraqui lives count as zero because they are not-american?) ,and that is assuming Iraq had anything to do with 9/11?

Addendum ,
Those claims I did about McCain need some reference , so I am adding a link and pic.

John McCain Accidentally Admits He Met With ISIS Members - Counter Current News

 

[ChrisL]

Get used to it, there will be more attacks like the Paris attack all over the Western countries. The US included. I've wondered why since 9/11 they haven't done this before. It takes nearly no training and little money to pick out soft targets with a lot of people and take an AK or AR with a bunch of clips and wreak havoc in ten minutes. Anywhere.

If there is another such attack on the US of this size, I would then find questionable the NSA's strategy of pulling every piece of information from emails , social media and phones.
ISIS must go down, but then , the role of reconstruction can not be understated in any way.
There was no reconstruction in Afghanistan after the rusians left, nor was there much in Iraq after Saddams demise.
I do feel it is becoming the sort of battle like the one Hercules sustained against the hydra.

Top 10 Longest Wars

List of longest wars.

The West, and the world really, has to get used to the fact this conflict with these faux-religious zealots are going to last a long time. Its already lasted 14 years and if you were to go back farther you could say it started in 1993 and even farther back to 1979 with the fundamentalist revolution in Iran.

The current fight with the, and lets call them what they are, insane groups of religious whacks, who claim to be religious anyway, is going to last many many years. And we are going to have to fight it until its over. They aren't really worried about how long it will take, they are trying to recreate the world as it was in 600 AD.

They can't win, obviously, but they think they can and what sustains them is killing people. It makes them feel powerful.

What would be the alternative to fighting and defeating them? There is none, they aren't going to stop. Every time they export and carry out one of these massacres against the West and we do nothing, and really bombing is nearly doing nothing, they are emboldened and think the West weak. If you are slaughtering an enemy and they do not physically come to fight and kill you then you are winning. That is how THEY see it.

We have to go back there with a large army and obliterate them, erase this 'caliphate' from the map which really is the most important thing to do, all the ignorant lowlifes that might see these groups and want to follow will have far less incentive if they look at a map and the group they want to follow can't be found on it.

Of course , ISIS is a threat, as all their mentally dearranged members and they must be taken out somehow.

That said, before launching a full blown attack there needs to be a strategy:

Obama has said Putin is attacking not only ISIS but the rebel army in Siria . Really ? How can anyone diferentiate between one and another ? There are fotographs of McCain with the rebels and at least one of ISIS members. He is now being very vocal about how the ISIS situation is Obama's fault, but at least in that case, it is clear one top member of the rebels switched sides ( a more sinister hypothesis would be that McCaain is covertly supporting ISIS ) . My point here is there is complete lack of intelligence regarding ISIS.

Also ISIS has control of the oil in the region, but that oil is useless without a buyer, the same goes for all the weapons they adquire. The money and goods flow has to be stopped.

Going into war might seem the obvious option , but going into war unprepared might create a bigger disaster.
Evenmore, it has to be made clear exactly how these terrorista adquired their weapons, ammunition and explosives without being detected. This is particularly important given the number of refugees going into Europe . This risk has to be addressed first.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting .
- Sun tzu.

The world has to recognize a moment when talking and 'strategizing' is over. That moment has arrived. These people are not going to stop, they are not only threatening all the rest of the world with mass murder, they are committing those mass murders. Russia confirmed the Russian airliner was brought down with a bomb.

This is a group of the insane who believe literally that they are in the process of bringing on the apocalypse which will result in a world-wide caliphate. They are not sane. They will not stop. They kill everyone, Muslims, non-Muslims, Russians, French, Italians, Spanish, English, Americans. Everyone.

I understand completely the aversion to a ground war, and all war for that matter, but reality is what it is. Killing these people is the only thing that is going to work.

Either we are going to send an army there to annihilate them, or these mass murders are going to continue unabated. Even after an invasion an sweep has destroyed these people and their phoney 'caliphate', some attacks will continue. But they will progressively get smaller and weaker. But it will likely take decades for this disease to fade away.

Lastly, this is maybe 20-30,000 people. A modern army would destroy them in a week or two with minimal casualties.

I just watch this and wonder why are the Western democracies always so timid in the face of hostility like this. It seems there is always a threshold that the enemy has to cross over before we take action. 3,000 dead in New York, yes let's invade. 130 dead here, 192 dead there, uhhmmm let's talk tough and drop bombs, never actually ending the threat.

And I'm done here, that's enough.

For a moment , let's assume I support your stance on going to war . That still leaves a lot of open issues :
- What was McCain doing with the rebels, and with an Isis members?
Should he personally apologize with france for his foolhardy accidental support for ISIS based on faulty intelligence?
- How many of the so called rebels supported by the US and the CIA ?
Should rebels continue to be supported ? If so , how will resources be traced so they don't end on the ISIS side.
What is the flow of goods and money from and to ISIS, which companies and countries are involved ?
What filters and checks have to be passed with refugees to minimize the risk of getting a member from ISIS.

The iraq death toll reached 500,000 persons ( about 5,000 of them were american soldiers). A killing far worse than any perpatrated by Saddam , Al qaeda and Isis combined.
How do you weight this as a cost of war? How do you balance which lives were more important ( do iraqui lives count as zero because they are not-american?) ,and that is assuming Iraq had anything to do with 9/11?

I thought it was a terrible idea to take sides in the Syrian war. It was a mistake to support these "rebels." I wish we would stop doing that and stop picking sides in wars that really don't have anything to do with US. We only end up creating more strife, every time.

 

[ChrisL]

Get used to it, there will be more attacks like the Paris attack all over the Western countries. The US included. I've wondered why since 9/11 they haven't done this before. It takes nearly no training and little money to pick out soft targets with a lot of people and take an AK or AR with a bunch of clips and wreak havoc in ten minutes. Anywhere.

If there is another such attack on the US of this size, I would then find questionable the NSA's strategy of pulling every piece of information from emails , social media and phones.
ISIS must go down, but then , the role of reconstruction can not be understated in any way.
There was no reconstruction in Afghanistan after the rusians left, nor was there much in Iraq after Saddams demise.
I do feel it is becoming the sort of battle like the one Hercules sustained against the hydra.

Top 10 Longest Wars

List of longest wars.

The West, and the world really, has to get used to the fact this conflict with these faux-religious zealots are going to last a long time. Its already lasted 14 years and if you were to go back farther you could say it started in 1993 and even farther back to 1979 with the fundamentalist revolution in Iran.

The current fight with the, and lets call them what they are, insane groups of religious whacks, who claim to be religious anyway, is going to last many many years. And we are going to have to fight it until its over. They aren't really worried about how long it will take, they are trying to recreate the world as it was in 600 AD.

They can't win, obviously, but they think they can and what sustains them is killing people. It makes them feel powerful.

What would be the alternative to fighting and defeating them? There is none, they aren't going to stop. Every time they export and carry out one of these massacres against the West and we do nothing, and really bombing is nearly doing nothing, they are emboldened and think the West weak. If you are slaughtering an enemy and they do not physically come to fight and kill you then you are winning. That is how THEY see it.

We have to go back there with a large army and obliterate them, erase this 'caliphate' from the map which really is the most important thing to do, all the ignorant lowlifes that might see these groups and want to follow will have far less incentive if they look at a map and the group they want to follow can't be found on it.

Of course , ISIS is a threat, as all their mentally dearranged members and they must be taken out somehow.

That said, before launching a full blown attack there needs to be a strategy:

Obama has said Putin is attacking not only ISIS but the rebel army in Siria . Really ? How can anyone diferentiate between one and another ? There are fotographs of McCain with the rebels and at least one of ISIS members. He is now being very vocal about how the ISIS situation is Obama's fault, but at least in that case, it is clear one top member of the rebels switched sides ( a more sinister hypothesis would be that McCaain is covertly supporting ISIS ) . My point here is there is complete lack of intelligence regarding ISIS.

Also ISIS has control of the oil in the region, but that oil is useless without a buyer, the same goes for all the weapons they adquire. The money and goods flow has to be stopped.

Going into war might seem the obvious option , but going into war unprepared might create a bigger disaster.
Evenmore, it has to be made clear exactly how these terrorista adquired their weapons, ammunition and explosives without being detected. This is particularly important given the number of refugees going into Europe . This risk has to be addressed first.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting .
- Sun tzu.

The world has to recognize a moment when talking and 'strategizing' is over. That moment has arrived. These people are not going to stop, they are not only threatening all the rest of the world with mass murder, they are committing those mass murders. Russia confirmed the Russian airliner was brought down with a bomb.

This is a group of the insane who believe literally that they are in the process of bringing on the apocalypse which will result in a world-wide caliphate. They are not sane. They will not stop. They kill everyone, Muslims, non-Muslims, Russians, French, Italians, Spanish, English, Americans. Everyone.

I understand completely the aversion to a ground war, and all war for that matter, but reality is what it is. Killing these people is the only thing that is going to work.

Either we are going to send an army there to annihilate them, or these mass murders are going to continue unabated. Even after an invasion an sweep has destroyed these people and their phoney 'caliphate', some attacks will continue. But they will progressively get smaller and weaker. But it will likely take decades for this disease to fade away.

Lastly, this is maybe 20-30,000 people. A modern army would destroy them in a week or two with minimal casualties.

I just watch this and wonder why are the Western democracies always so timid in the face of hostility like this. It seems there is always a threshold that the enemy has to cross over before we take action. 3,000 dead in New York, yes let's invade. 130 dead here, 192 dead there, uhhmmm let's talk tough and drop bombs, never actually ending the threat.

And I'm done here, that's enough.

This "enemy" doesn't wear a uniform and doesn't follow the "rules of war" which WE are bound to. You keep talking about going to war. Who are you going to fight? How do you recognize them? This has not worked in Iraq or Afghanistan.

"Strategizing" is over? What? This is a TERRIBLE idea, IMO.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Get used to it, there will be more attacks like the Paris attack all over the Western countries. The US included. I've wondered why since 9/11 they haven't done this before. It takes nearly no training and little money to pick out soft targets with a lot of people and take an AK or AR with a bunch of clips and wreak havoc in ten minutes. Anywhere.

If there is another such attack on the US of this size, I would then find questionable the NSA's strategy of pulling every piece of information from emails , social media and phones.
ISIS must go down, but then , the role of reconstruction can not be understated in any way.
There was no reconstruction in Afghanistan after the rusians left, nor was there much in Iraq after Saddams demise.
I do feel it is becoming the sort of battle like the one Hercules sustained against the hydra.

Top 10 Longest Wars

List of longest wars.

The West, and the world really, has to get used to the fact this conflict with these faux-religious zealots are going to last a long time. Its already lasted 14 years and if you were to go back farther you could say it started in 1993 and even farther back to 1979 with the fundamentalist revolution in Iran.

The current fight with the, and lets call them what they are, insane groups of religious whacks, who claim to be religious anyway, is going to last many many years. And we are going to have to fight it until its over. They aren't really worried about how long it will take, they are trying to recreate the world as it was in 600 AD.

They can't win, obviously, but they think they can and what sustains them is killing people. It makes them feel powerful.

What would be the alternative to fighting and defeating them? There is none, they aren't going to stop. Every time they export and carry out one of these massacres against the West and we do nothing, and really bombing is nearly doing nothing, they are emboldened and think the West weak. If you are slaughtering an enemy and they do not physically come to fight and kill you then you are winning. That is how THEY see it.

We have to go back there with a large army and obliterate them, erase this 'caliphate' from the map which really is the most important thing to do, all the ignorant lowlifes that might see these groups and want to follow will have far less incentive if they look at a map and the group they want to follow can't be found on it.

Of course , ISIS is a threat, as all their mentally dearranged members and they must be taken out somehow.

That said, before launching a full blown attack there needs to be a strategy:

Obama has said Putin is attacking not only ISIS but the rebel army in Siria . Really ? How can anyone diferentiate between one and another ? There are fotographs of McCain with the rebels and at least one of ISIS members. He is now being very vocal about how the ISIS situation is Obama's fault, but at least in that case, it is clear one top member of the rebels switched sides ( a more sinister hypothesis would be that McCaain is covertly supporting ISIS ) . My point here is there is complete lack of intelligence regarding ISIS.

Also ISIS has control of the oil in the region, but that oil is useless without a buyer, the same goes for all the weapons they adquire. The money and goods flow has to be stopped.

Going into war might seem the obvious option , but going into war unprepared might create a bigger disaster.
Evenmore, it has to be made clear exactly how these terrorista adquired their weapons, ammunition and explosives without being detected. This is particularly important given the number of refugees going into Europe . This risk has to be addressed first.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting .
- Sun tzu.

The world has to recognize a moment when talking and 'strategizing' is over. That moment has arrived. These people are not going to stop, they are not only threatening all the rest of the world with mass murder, they are committing those mass murders. Russia confirmed the Russian airliner was brought down with a bomb.

This is a group of the insane who believe literally that they are in the process of bringing on the apocalypse which will result in a world-wide caliphate. They are not sane. They will not stop. They kill everyone, Muslims, non-Muslims, Russians, French, Italians, Spanish, English, Americans. Everyone.

I understand completely the aversion to a ground war, and all war for that matter, but reality is what it is. Killing these people is the only thing that is going to work.

Either we are going to send an army there to annihilate them, or these mass murders are going to continue unabated. Even after an invasion an sweep has destroyed these people and their phoney 'caliphate', some attacks will continue. But they will progressively get smaller and weaker. But it will likely take decades for this disease to fade away.

Lastly, this is maybe 20-30,000 people. A modern army would destroy them in a week or two with minimal casualties.

I just watch this and wonder why are the Western democracies always so timid in the face of hostility like this. It seems there is always a threshold that the enemy has to cross over before we take action. 3,000 dead in New York, yes let's invade. 130 dead here, 192 dead there, uhhmmm let's talk tough and drop bombs, never actually ending the threat.

And I'm done here, that's enough.

This "enemy" doesn't wear a uniform and doesn't follow the "rules of war" which WE are bound to. You keep talking about going to war. Who are you going to fight? How do you recognize them? This has not worked in Iraq or Afghanistan.

"Strategizing" is over? What? This is a TERRIBLE idea, IMO.

There is this weird false belief that there are other humans on Earth that we just cannot defeat. Ridiculous to the infinite degree. These nonsensical memes need to die a natural death, they aren't real.

You land troops and destroy the 'caliphate' which is nothing more than angry people with guns who control some highways and various towns and cities. You use special forces to kill cells around the world. All directed by intelligence.

When we were in force in Iraq they had very little room to maneuver and no place to train. It was only the vacuum that was left when we pulled out that provided empty territory to conquer.

The same is the case in Afghanistan. These people cannot stand up to our military in any way. Their only weapon is killing unarmed people that don't shoot back. And they will be able to do that on a small scale forever. Get used to it.

But they can be degraded by 95% using the military and special ops.

You people need to stop yelling 'we can't win so stop trying'. It is a thought that has no basis in reality. Just because something is hard doesn't mean it can't be done.

 

[ChrisL]

If there is another such attack on the US of this size, I would then find questionable the NSA's strategy of pulling every piece of information from emails , social media and phones.
ISIS must go down, but then , the role of reconstruction can not be understated in any way.
There was no reconstruction in Afghanistan after the rusians left, nor was there much in Iraq after Saddams demise.
I do feel it is becoming the sort of battle like the one Hercules sustained against the hydra.

Top 10 Longest Wars

List of longest wars.

The West, and the world really, has to get used to the fact this conflict with these faux-religious zealots are going to last a long time. Its already lasted 14 years and if you were to go back farther you could say it started in 1993 and even farther back to 1979 with the fundamentalist revolution in Iran.

The current fight with the, and lets call them what they are, insane groups of religious whacks, who claim to be religious anyway, is going to last many many years. And we are going to have to fight it until its over. They aren't really worried about how long it will take, they are trying to recreate the world as it was in 600 AD.

They can't win, obviously, but they think they can and what sustains them is killing people. It makes them feel powerful.

What would be the alternative to fighting and defeating them? There is none, they aren't going to stop. Every time they export and carry out one of these massacres against the West and we do nothing, and really bombing is nearly doing nothing, they are emboldened and think the West weak. If you are slaughtering an enemy and they do not physically come to fight and kill you then you are winning. That is how THEY see it.

We have to go back there with a large army and obliterate them, erase this 'caliphate' from the map which really is the most important thing to do, all the ignorant lowlifes that might see these groups and want to follow will have far less incentive if they look at a map and the group they want to follow can't be found on it.

Of course , ISIS is a threat, as all their mentally dearranged members and they must be taken out somehow.

That said, before launching a full blown attack there needs to be a strategy:

Obama has said Putin is attacking not only ISIS but the rebel army in Siria . Really ? How can anyone diferentiate between one and another ? There are fotographs of McCain with the rebels and at least one of ISIS members. He is now being very vocal about how the ISIS situation is Obama's fault, but at least in that case, it is clear one top member of the rebels switched sides ( a more sinister hypothesis would be that McCaain is covertly supporting ISIS ) . My point here is there is complete lack of intelligence regarding ISIS.

Also ISIS has control of the oil in the region, but that oil is useless without a buyer, the same goes for all the weapons they adquire. The money and goods flow has to be stopped.

Going into war might seem the obvious option , but going into war unprepared might create a bigger disaster.
Evenmore, it has to be made clear exactly how these terrorista adquired their weapons, ammunition and explosives without being detected. This is particularly important given the number of refugees going into Europe . This risk has to be addressed first.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting .
- Sun tzu.

The world has to recognize a moment when talking and 'strategizing' is over. That moment has arrived. These people are not going to stop, they are not only threatening all the rest of the world with mass murder, they are committing those mass murders. Russia confirmed the Russian airliner was brought down with a bomb.

This is a group of the insane who believe literally that they are in the process of bringing on the apocalypse which will result in a world-wide caliphate. They are not sane. They will not stop. They kill everyone, Muslims, non-Muslims, Russians, French, Italians, Spanish, English, Americans. Everyone.

I understand completely the aversion to a ground war, and all war for that matter, but reality is what it is. Killing these people is the only thing that is going to work.

Either we are going to send an army there to annihilate them, or these mass murders are going to continue unabated. Even after an invasion an sweep has destroyed these people and their phoney 'caliphate', some attacks will continue. But they will progressively get smaller and weaker. But it will likely take decades for this disease to fade away.

Lastly, this is maybe 20-30,000 people. A modern army would destroy them in a week or two with minimal casualties.

I just watch this and wonder why are the Western democracies always so timid in the face of hostility like this. It seems there is always a threshold that the enemy has to cross over before we take action. 3,000 dead in New York, yes let's invade. 130 dead here, 192 dead there, uhhmmm let's talk tough and drop bombs, never actually ending the threat.

And I'm done here, that's enough.

This "enemy" doesn't wear a uniform and doesn't follow the "rules of war" which WE are bound to. You keep talking about going to war. Who are you going to fight? How do you recognize them? This has not worked in Iraq or Afghanistan.

"Strategizing" is over? What? This is a TERRIBLE idea, IMO.

There is this weird false belief that there are other humans on Earth that we just cannot defeat. Ridiculous to the infinite degree. These nonsensical memes need to die a natural death, they aren't real.

You land troops and destroy the 'caliphate' which is nothing more than angry people with guns who control some highways and various towns and cities. You use special forces to kill cells around the world. All directed by intelligence.

When we were in force in Iraq they had very little room to maneuver and no place to train. It was only the vacuum that was left when we pulled out that provided empty territory to conquer.

The same is the case in Afghanistan. These people cannot stand up to our military in any way. Their only weapon is killing unarmed people that don't shoot back. And they will be able to do that on a small scale forever. Get used to it.

But they can be degraded by 95% using the military and special ops.

You people need to stop yelling 'we can't win so stop trying'. It is a thought that has no basis in reality. Just because something is hard doesn't mean it can't be done.

We have been trying, in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As you can see, war helps to create MORE terrorists. You cannot kill them all when new ones are being created every day. Unless you are suggesting that we kill EVERYONE. A lot of terrorists don't make it obvious that they are terrorists. When they dress and behave like anyone else, you cannot possibly determine one from another. These are not enemies in uniforms that fight "wars" in that sense. The only thing your idea will accomplish is a lot of deaths, including American troops, for basically NOTHING and potentially create even worse situation in the future. Unless they attack the United States, I see no reason to go to "war." Support like we are doing now is fine. I am not willing to send MY child over there, and I have a feeling that you have no children. Perhaps you should go volunteer right now. I'm sure they can send YOU over to some Middle East shithole to do something.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Top 10 Longest Wars

List of longest wars.

The West, and the world really, has to get used to the fact this conflict with these faux-religious zealots are going to last a long time. Its already lasted 14 years and if you were to go back farther you could say it started in 1993 and even farther back to 1979 with the fundamentalist revolution in Iran.

The current fight with the, and lets call them what they are, insane groups of religious whacks, who claim to be religious anyway, is going to last many many years. And we are going to have to fight it until its over. They aren't really worried about how long it will take, they are trying to recreate the world as it was in 600 AD.

They can't win, obviously, but they think they can and what sustains them is killing people. It makes them feel powerful.

What would be the alternative to fighting and defeating them? There is none, they aren't going to stop. Every time they export and carry out one of these massacres against the West and we do nothing, and really bombing is nearly doing nothing, they are emboldened and think the West weak. If you are slaughtering an enemy and they do not physically come to fight and kill you then you are winning. That is how THEY see it.

We have to go back there with a large army and obliterate them, erase this 'caliphate' from the map which really is the most important thing to do, all the ignorant lowlifes that might see these groups and want to follow will have far less incentive if they look at a map and the group they want to follow can't be found on it.

Of course , ISIS is a threat, as all their mentally dearranged members and they must be taken out somehow.

That said, before launching a full blown attack there needs to be a strategy:

Obama has said Putin is attacking not only ISIS but the rebel army in Siria . Really ? How can anyone diferentiate between one and another ? There are fotographs of McCain with the rebels and at least one of ISIS members. He is now being very vocal about how the ISIS situation is Obama's fault, but at least in that case, it is clear one top member of the rebels switched sides ( a more sinister hypothesis would be that McCaain is covertly supporting ISIS ) . My point here is there is complete lack of intelligence regarding ISIS.

Also ISIS has control of the oil in the region, but that oil is useless without a buyer, the same goes for all the weapons they adquire. The money and goods flow has to be stopped.

Going into war might seem the obvious option , but going into war unprepared might create a bigger disaster.
Evenmore, it has to be made clear exactly how these terrorista adquired their weapons, ammunition and explosives without being detected. This is particularly important given the number of refugees going into Europe . This risk has to be addressed first.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting .
- Sun tzu.

The world has to recognize a moment when talking and 'strategizing' is over. That moment has arrived. These people are not going to stop, they are not only threatening all the rest of the world with mass murder, they are committing those mass murders. Russia confirmed the Russian airliner was brought down with a bomb.

This is a group of the insane who believe literally that they are in the process of bringing on the apocalypse which will result in a world-wide caliphate. They are not sane. They will not stop. They kill everyone, Muslims, non-Muslims, Russians, French, Italians, Spanish, English, Americans. Everyone.

I understand completely the aversion to a ground war, and all war for that matter, but reality is what it is. Killing these people is the only thing that is going to work.

Either we are going to send an army there to annihilate them, or these mass murders are going to continue unabated. Even after an invasion an sweep has destroyed these people and their phoney 'caliphate', some attacks will continue. But they will progressively get smaller and weaker. But it will likely take decades for this disease to fade away.

Lastly, this is maybe 20-30,000 people. A modern army would destroy them in a week or two with minimal casualties.

I just watch this and wonder why are the Western democracies always so timid in the face of hostility like this. It seems there is always a threshold that the enemy has to cross over before we take action. 3,000 dead in New York, yes let's invade. 130 dead here, 192 dead there, uhhmmm let's talk tough and drop bombs, never actually ending the threat.

And I'm done here, that's enough.

This "enemy" doesn't wear a uniform and doesn't follow the "rules of war" which WE are bound to. You keep talking about going to war. Who are you going to fight? How do you recognize them? This has not worked in Iraq or Afghanistan.

"Strategizing" is over? What? This is a TERRIBLE idea, IMO.

There is this weird false belief that there are other humans on Earth that we just cannot defeat. Ridiculous to the infinite degree. These nonsensical memes need to die a natural death, they aren't real.

You land troops and destroy the 'caliphate' which is nothing more than angry people with guns who control some highways and various towns and cities. You use special forces to kill cells around the world. All directed by intelligence.

When we were in force in Iraq they had very little room to maneuver and no place to train. It was only the vacuum that was left when we pulled out that provided empty territory to conquer.

The same is the case in Afghanistan. These people cannot stand up to our military in any way. Their only weapon is killing unarmed people that don't shoot back. And they will be able to do that on a small scale forever. Get used to it.

But they can be degraded by 95% using the military and special ops.

You people need to stop yelling 'we can't win so stop trying'. It is a thought that has no basis in reality. Just because something is hard doesn't mean it can't be done.

We have been trying, in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As you can see, war helps to create MORE terrorists. You cannot kill them all when new ones are being created every day. Unless you are suggesting that we kill EVERYONE. A lot of terrorists don't make it obvious that they are terrorists. When they dress and behave like anyone else, you cannot possibly determine one from another. These are not enemies in uniforms that fight "wars" in that sense. The only thing your idea will accomplish is a lot of deaths, including American troops, for basically NOTHING and potentially create even worse situation in the future. Unless they attack the United States, I see no reason to go to "war." Support like we are doing now is fine. I am not willing to send MY child over there, and I have a feeling that you have no children. Perhaps you should go volunteer right now. I'm sure they can send YOU over to some Middle East shithole to do something.

You surrender, say no more. You made your point.

 

[dblack]

Of course , ISIS is a threat, as all their mentally dearranged members and they must be taken out somehow.

That said, before launching a full blown attack there needs to be a strategy:

Obama has said Putin is attacking not only ISIS but the rebel army in Siria . Really ? How can anyone diferentiate between one and another ? There are fotographs of McCain with the rebels and at least one of ISIS members. He is now being very vocal about how the ISIS situation is Obama's fault, but at least in that case, it is clear one top member of the rebels switched sides ( a more sinister hypothesis would be that McCaain is covertly supporting ISIS ) . My point here is there is complete lack of intelligence regarding ISIS.

Also ISIS has control of the oil in the region, but that oil is useless without a buyer, the same goes for all the weapons they adquire. The money and goods flow has to be stopped.

Going into war might seem the obvious option , but going into war unprepared might create a bigger disaster.
Evenmore, it has to be made clear exactly how these terrorista adquired their weapons, ammunition and explosives without being detected. This is particularly important given the number of refugees going into Europe . This risk has to be addressed first.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting .
- Sun tzu.

The world has to recognize a moment when talking and 'strategizing' is over. That moment has arrived. These people are not going to stop, they are not only threatening all the rest of the world with mass murder, they are committing those mass murders. Russia confirmed the Russian airliner was brought down with a bomb.

This is a group of the insane who believe literally that they are in the process of bringing on the apocalypse which will result in a world-wide caliphate. They are not sane. They will not stop. They kill everyone, Muslims, non-Muslims, Russians, French, Italians, Spanish, English, Americans. Everyone.

I understand completely the aversion to a ground war, and all war for that matter, but reality is what it is. Killing these people is the only thing that is going to work.

Either we are going to send an army there to annihilate them, or these mass murders are going to continue unabated. Even after an invasion an sweep has destroyed these people and their phoney 'caliphate', some attacks will continue. But they will progressively get smaller and weaker. But it will likely take decades for this disease to fade away.

Lastly, this is maybe 20-30,000 people. A modern army would destroy them in a week or two with minimal casualties.

I just watch this and wonder why are the Western democracies always so timid in the face of hostility like this. It seems there is always a threshold that the enemy has to cross over before we take action. 3,000 dead in New York, yes let's invade. 130 dead here, 192 dead there, uhhmmm let's talk tough and drop bombs, never actually ending the threat.

And I'm done here, that's enough.

This "enemy" doesn't wear a uniform and doesn't follow the "rules of war" which WE are bound to. You keep talking about going to war. Who are you going to fight? How do you recognize them? This has not worked in Iraq or Afghanistan.

"Strategizing" is over? What? This is a TERRIBLE idea, IMO.

There is this weird false belief that there are other humans on Earth that we just cannot defeat. Ridiculous to the infinite degree. These nonsensical memes need to die a natural death, they aren't real.

You land troops and destroy the 'caliphate' which is nothing more than angry people with guns who control some highways and various towns and cities. You use special forces to kill cells around the world. All directed by intelligence.

When we were in force in Iraq they had very little room to maneuver and no place to train. It was only the vacuum that was left when we pulled out that provided empty territory to conquer.

The same is the case in Afghanistan. These people cannot stand up to our military in any way. Their only weapon is killing unarmed people that don't shoot back. And they will be able to do that on a small scale forever. Get used to it.

But they can be degraded by 95% using the military and special ops.

You people need to stop yelling 'we can't win so stop trying'. It is a thought that has no basis in reality. Just because something is hard doesn't mean it can't be done.

We have been trying, in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As you can see, war helps to create MORE terrorists. You cannot kill them all when new ones are being created every day. Unless you are suggesting that we kill EVERYONE. A lot of terrorists don't make it obvious that they are terrorists. When they dress and behave like anyone else, you cannot possibly determine one from another. These are not enemies in uniforms that fight "wars" in that sense. The only thing your idea will accomplish is a lot of deaths, including American troops, for basically NOTHING and potentially create even worse situation in the future. Unless they attack the United States, I see no reason to go to "war." Support like we are doing now is fine. I am not willing to send MY child over there, and I have a feeling that you have no children. Perhaps you should go volunteer right now. I'm sure they can send YOU over to some Middle East shithole to do something.

You surrender, say no more. You made your point.

War, as a response to terrorism, is surrender.

 

[IsaacNewton]

The world has to recognize a moment when talking and 'strategizing' is over. That moment has arrived. These people are not going to stop, they are not only threatening all the rest of the world with mass murder, they are committing those mass murders. Russia confirmed the Russian airliner was brought down with a bomb.

This is a group of the insane who believe literally that they are in the process of bringing on the apocalypse which will result in a world-wide caliphate. They are not sane. They will not stop. They kill everyone, Muslims, non-Muslims, Russians, French, Italians, Spanish, English, Americans. Everyone.

I understand completely the aversion to a ground war, and all war for that matter, but reality is what it is. Killing these people is the only thing that is going to work.

Either we are going to send an army there to annihilate them, or these mass murders are going to continue unabated. Even after an invasion an sweep has destroyed these people and their phoney 'caliphate', some attacks will continue. But they will progressively get smaller and weaker. But it will likely take decades for this disease to fade away.

Lastly, this is maybe 20-30,000 people. A modern army would destroy them in a week or two with minimal casualties.

I just watch this and wonder why are the Western democracies always so timid in the face of hostility like this. It seems there is always a threshold that the enemy has to cross over before we take action. 3,000 dead in New York, yes let's invade. 130 dead here, 192 dead there, uhhmmm let's talk tough and drop bombs, never actually ending the threat.

And I'm done here, that's enough.

This "enemy" doesn't wear a uniform and doesn't follow the "rules of war" which WE are bound to. You keep talking about going to war. Who are you going to fight? How do you recognize them? This has not worked in Iraq or Afghanistan.

"Strategizing" is over? What? This is a TERRIBLE idea, IMO.

There is this weird false belief that there are other humans on Earth that we just cannot defeat. Ridiculous to the infinite degree. These nonsensical memes need to die a natural death, they aren't real.

You land troops and destroy the 'caliphate' which is nothing more than angry people with guns who control some highways and various towns and cities. You use special forces to kill cells around the world. All directed by intelligence.

When we were in force in Iraq they had very little room to maneuver and no place to train. It was only the vacuum that was left when we pulled out that provided empty territory to conquer.

The same is the case in Afghanistan. These people cannot stand up to our military in any way. Their only weapon is killing unarmed people that don't shoot back. And they will be able to do that on a small scale forever. Get used to it.

But they can be degraded by 95% using the military and special ops.

You people need to stop yelling 'we can't win so stop trying'. It is a thought that has no basis in reality. Just because something is hard doesn't mean it can't be done.

We have been trying, in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As you can see, war helps to create MORE terrorists. You cannot kill them all when new ones are being created every day. Unless you are suggesting that we kill EVERYONE. A lot of terrorists don't make it obvious that they are terrorists. When they dress and behave like anyone else, you cannot possibly determine one from another. These are not enemies in uniforms that fight "wars" in that sense. The only thing your idea will accomplish is a lot of deaths, including American troops, for basically NOTHING and potentially create even worse situation in the future. Unless they attack the United States, I see no reason to go to "war." Support like we are doing now is fine. I am not willing to send MY child over there, and I have a feeling that you have no children. Perhaps you should go volunteer right now. I'm sure they can send YOU over to some Middle East shithole to do something.

You surrender, say no more. You made your point.

War, as a response to terrorism, is surrender.

You are training to be a comedian?

 

[ChrisL]

Of course , ISIS is a threat, as all their mentally dearranged members and they must be taken out somehow.

That said, before launching a full blown attack there needs to be a strategy:

Obama has said Putin is attacking not only ISIS but the rebel army in Siria . Really ? How can anyone diferentiate between one and another ? There are fotographs of McCain with the rebels and at least one of ISIS members. He is now being very vocal about how the ISIS situation is Obama's fault, but at least in that case, it is clear one top member of the rebels switched sides ( a more sinister hypothesis would be that McCaain is covertly supporting ISIS ) . My point here is there is complete lack of intelligence regarding ISIS.

Also ISIS has control of the oil in the region, but that oil is useless without a buyer, the same goes for all the weapons they adquire. The money and goods flow has to be stopped.

Going into war might seem the obvious option , but going into war unprepared might create a bigger disaster.
Evenmore, it has to be made clear exactly how these terrorista adquired their weapons, ammunition and explosives without being detected. This is particularly important given the number of refugees going into Europe . This risk has to be addressed first.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting .
- Sun tzu.

The world has to recognize a moment when talking and 'strategizing' is over. That moment has arrived. These people are not going to stop, they are not only threatening all the rest of the world with mass murder, they are committing those mass murders. Russia confirmed the Russian airliner was brought down with a bomb.

This is a group of the insane who believe literally that they are in the process of bringing on the apocalypse which will result in a world-wide caliphate. They are not sane. They will not stop. They kill everyone, Muslims, non-Muslims, Russians, French, Italians, Spanish, English, Americans. Everyone.

I understand completely the aversion to a ground war, and all war for that matter, but reality is what it is. Killing these people is the only thing that is going to work.

Either we are going to send an army there to annihilate them, or these mass murders are going to continue unabated. Even after an invasion an sweep has destroyed these people and their phoney 'caliphate', some attacks will continue. But they will progressively get smaller and weaker. But it will likely take decades for this disease to fade away.

Lastly, this is maybe 20-30,000 people. A modern army would destroy them in a week or two with minimal casualties.

I just watch this and wonder why are the Western democracies always so timid in the face of hostility like this. It seems there is always a threshold that the enemy has to cross over before we take action. 3,000 dead in New York, yes let's invade. 130 dead here, 192 dead there, uhhmmm let's talk tough and drop bombs, never actually ending the threat.

And I'm done here, that's enough.

This "enemy" doesn't wear a uniform and doesn't follow the "rules of war" which WE are bound to. You keep talking about going to war. Who are you going to fight? How do you recognize them? This has not worked in Iraq or Afghanistan.

"Strategizing" is over? What? This is a TERRIBLE idea, IMO.

There is this weird false belief that there are other humans on Earth that we just cannot defeat. Ridiculous to the infinite degree. These nonsensical memes need to die a natural death, they aren't real.

You land troops and destroy the 'caliphate' which is nothing more than angry people with guns who control some highways and various towns and cities. You use special forces to kill cells around the world. All directed by intelligence.

When we were in force in Iraq they had very little room to maneuver and no place to train. It was only the vacuum that was left when we pulled out that provided empty territory to conquer.

The same is the case in Afghanistan. These people cannot stand up to our military in any way. Their only weapon is killing unarmed people that don't shoot back. And they will be able to do that on a small scale forever. Get used to it.

But they can be degraded by 95% using the military and special ops.

You people need to stop yelling 'we can't win so stop trying'. It is a thought that has no basis in reality. Just because something is hard doesn't mean it can't be done.

We have been trying, in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As you can see, war helps to create MORE terrorists. You cannot kill them all when new ones are being created every day. Unless you are suggesting that we kill EVERYONE. A lot of terrorists don't make it obvious that they are terrorists. When they dress and behave like anyone else, you cannot possibly determine one from another. These are not enemies in uniforms that fight "wars" in that sense. The only thing your idea will accomplish is a lot of deaths, including American troops, for basically NOTHING and potentially create even worse situation in the future. Unless they attack the United States, I see no reason to go to "war." Support like we are doing now is fine. I am not willing to send MY child over there, and I have a feeling that you have no children. Perhaps you should go volunteer right now. I'm sure they can send YOU over to some Middle East shithole to do something.

You surrender, say no more. You made your point.

You didn't address any of the counter points I made towards your idea of war. Do you have any children? Are you willing to "sacrifice" them or yourself to go over there?

 

[ChrisL]

This "enemy" doesn't wear a uniform and doesn't follow the "rules of war" which WE are bound to. You keep talking about going to war. Who are you going to fight? How do you recognize them? This has not worked in Iraq or Afghanistan.

"Strategizing" is over? What? This is a TERRIBLE idea, IMO.

There is this weird false belief that there are other humans on Earth that we just cannot defeat. Ridiculous to the infinite degree. These nonsensical memes need to die a natural death, they aren't real.

You land troops and destroy the 'caliphate' which is nothing more than angry people with guns who control some highways and various towns and cities. You use special forces to kill cells around the world. All directed by intelligence.

When we were in force in Iraq they had very little room to maneuver and no place to train. It was only the vacuum that was left when we pulled out that provided empty territory to conquer.

The same is the case in Afghanistan. These people cannot stand up to our military in any way. Their only weapon is killing unarmed people that don't shoot back. And they will be able to do that on a small scale forever. Get used to it.

But they can be degraded by 95% using the military and special ops.

You people need to stop yelling 'we can't win so stop trying'. It is a thought that has no basis in reality. Just because something is hard doesn't mean it can't be done.

We have been trying, in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As you can see, war helps to create MORE terrorists. You cannot kill them all when new ones are being created every day. Unless you are suggesting that we kill EVERYONE. A lot of terrorists don't make it obvious that they are terrorists. When they dress and behave like anyone else, you cannot possibly determine one from another. These are not enemies in uniforms that fight "wars" in that sense. The only thing your idea will accomplish is a lot of deaths, including American troops, for basically NOTHING and potentially create even worse situation in the future. Unless they attack the United States, I see no reason to go to "war." Support like we are doing now is fine. I am not willing to send MY child over there, and I have a feeling that you have no children. Perhaps you should go volunteer right now. I'm sure they can send YOU over to some Middle East shithole to do something.

You surrender, say no more. You made your point.

War, as a response to terrorism, is surrender.

You are training to be a comedian?

Nothing funny about a US military man or woman being taken by these scums, tortured and lit on fire in a cage. And for what? For some idealistic war hawk who thinks ANOTHER war is the answer? A war against WHOM? The terrorists blend in with citizens. Unless you are willing to drop a nuclear bomb on various portions of the ME, your idea is not going to accomplish diddly squat.