Act of War

[bendog]

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.

Iraq certainly created more terrorists, but then it was not connected to 9-11 or any legitimate use of force. Some would say "but we did it for the children," but of course we did not, and had we actually bothered to try an make that case in the UN and world opinion, things might have turned out a bit differently. Afghan has less so increased terrorists. Our drone war collateral damage has justifiably angered people, but really the Taliban never had a lot of support amongst any muslims, even in Afghan.

HW tried to make that point in the new book. Force and diplomacy are counterparts. If you are seen to use force for illegitimate ends, people will hate you. If you are seen to be trying to respectfully make the world better, and acting for some legitimate US interest, it's not so bad.

Of course there are sociopaths and psychopaths out there, and it seems that takes an even bigger religious aspect with muslims than .... even the Israelis. And it's not unheard of at all with Christians.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. Brutal force is now required, not by our choice but by what has been forced on us.

well 129 dead people is not that significant, but the threat of WMD's is so I agree with you but it should all be done from the air just they way we did it in Japan in WW2.

 

[eagle1462010]

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.

You under estimate France, and overestimate ISIS...............They went in and saved Chad, and deserve the credit for doing so..........

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

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.

You under estimate France, and overestimate ISIS...............They went in and saved Chad, and deserve the credit for doing so..........

No, he's right, the French are lover liberals not fighters. To get their fighter jets to African they needed our tankers to refuel them in the air! How's that for an ability to project power!!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

And it's not unheard of at all with Christians.

of course the world is full of Christians who would cut one million heads off of living non Christians!

See why we are positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance?

 

[eagle1462010]

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.

You under estimate France, and overestimate ISIS...............They went in and saved Chad, and deserve the credit for doing so..........

No, he's right, the French are lover liberals not fighters. To get their fighter jets to African they needed our tankers to refuel them in the air! How's that for an ability to project power!!!

Once they got there they fought...............and yes we are refueling their planes in flight.....................why shouldn't we.....................
I give credit where credit is due..................At least they are showing up for the fight.

 

[eagle1462010]

French Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They have 14 of these.........

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

..................At least they are showing up for the fight.

yes the French are now showing up and so are a number of nations but so what. It all led to Paris. Only now are we getting around to bombing the trucks ISIS uses to carry oil? Why? Because the west has not been serious and still is not it seems,

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

French Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They have 14 of these.........

thats a US tanker and a US fighter- right??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

the French are helpless wimps!!

US military sending air tankers to refuel French jets over Mali | US ...
www.theguardian.com/world/2013/.../us-military-tankers-french-mali
‎
Jan 27, 2013 ... US military sending air tankers to refuel French jets over Mali ... The UnitedStates has agreed to fly tankers to refuel French jet fighters and ... also discussed plans for the United States to transport troops from African nations, ..

 

[eagle1462010]

French Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They have 14 of these.........

thats a US tanker and a US fighter- right??

Yep...............the picture is the same as the 14 they have.............which is why I posted the other link showing it............

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

French Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They have 14 of these.........

thats a US tanker and a US fighter- right??

Yep...............the picture is the same as the 14 they have.............which is why I posted the other link showing it............

Unfortunately, the sum total of all current French fleets would only meet 25% of the airlift requirements set out in France’s 2008 defense white paper, and falls well short of aerial refueling requirements. Which explains why they need the USA to get their airforce anywhere. Its French, and its pathetic!!

 

[Rustic]

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.

Socialism isn't working out so well.

.

Hey f*ck for brains...

This has nothing to do with socialism... Look at the reason why France has a large muslim population you ignorant ape but hey don't let any opportunity go without having a go.

Socialism = epic fail

 

[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.

You under estimate France, and overestimate ISIS...............They went in and saved Chad, and deserve the credit for doing so..........

Bombing more countries will only make France less safe. And it'll move closer to becoming a miserbable Police State. The same is true of the U.S. and Great Britain.

They'll pay a heftly bloody price for all the meddling. I would suggest those nations rethink their Endless War policy. Otherwise, suffer the inevitable consequences.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

They'll pay a heftly bloody price for all the meddling.

true, ISIS must pay a heavy price for imagining that their Caliphate must meddle all over the world and rule all over the world !!

 

[paulitician]

They'll pay a heftly bloody price for all the meddling.

true, ISIS must pay a heavy price for imagining that their Caliphate must meddle all over the world and rule all over the world !!

ISIS wouldn't have been possible without U.S./Saudi/British meddling in Syria. They had no right getting involved with its Civil War. It wasn't their fight. Declaring 'Regime Change' is unwise, and illegal.

There are more terrorists in the Middle East now, than ever before. And the U.S. is largely responsible for that. Al Qaeda and ISIS have benefited greatly from constant U.S. meddling over there. And one day, the chickens have to come home to roost. It will happen.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

ISIS wouldn't have been possible without U.S./Saudi/British meddling in Syria..

thats true stupid liberal but that does not mean they will disappear if we stop meddling now!!

 

[paulitician]

ISIS wouldn't have been possible without U.S./Saudi/British meddling in Syria..

thats true stupid liberal but that does not mean they will disappear if we stop meddling now!!

Well, at least you admit it's true. It's a start guess. No meddling in Syria and Iraq, there wouldn't be an ISIS. You're gettin there. Now you just have to stop supporting your Government's Endless War policy.

 

[Timmy]

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.

The west is spoiled . War is so easy cause it happens far away and doesn't effect the majority . "Act do war". We'll duuuuuh . France has been bombing Isis , is that not war ? France was already at war with Isis!

 

[Flopper]

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.

Al Qaeda made lot's of demands but not ISIS. What demands has ISIS made of the west other than ransoms? The only thing they want from non-believes is their life.

ISIS targets, Muslims, Jews, Christians, and anyone who's not a true believer. They seek to form their Islamic state in Syria and Iraq and expand it within 5 years to include the entire Middle East. You would think this would bring every nation in the region together but deep seated animosities keep that from happening. Unfortunately, the United States is probably the only nation that could pull the various Muslim countries together to engage ISIS.