Act of War

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

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

You aren't going either so stop the whining, you are not in a position to pontificate to anyone else.

You seem to be saying only people actually in the military should have the right to voice an opinion on when and where the military should be used?

That is called a military dictatorship.

And to try to say American citizens should have no say about where their military should be used is ludicrous. The military exists to exert OUR will, not theirs.

If we commit the military to a mission, politicians can't tie their hands with ridiculous rules of engagement. Been there done that, it does nothing but get people killed and accomplishes little or nothing. The military is there for one reason, break things and destroy the enemy. Innocent folks will get caught in the cross fire, that's war.

I agree, its time to simply point at a map for our military and say THERE.

Where is THERE?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I say we react in kind: Highly surgical, coordinated attacks by the Navy SEALs after ascertaining positions and movements of ISIS cells through intel. Sure worked on bin Laden.

I say we consult our military experts to see what they think. Of course Hussein would probably go against their advice like he did in Iraq.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Take your immigration stuff to another post, this one is Act of War re the French leader's speech. There are endless threads for wailing on immigration, thanks for participating in USMB and have a nice day.

And if it turns out to be French nationals who self-radicalized? What, civil war?

Time is up, we know who the enemy is. If they only 'influenced' others to take this action that is enough. They must be dealt with. Evil men will do evil until they are stopped.

Inaction by the West only instills confidence and a great recruiting atmosphere for these groups. "Look! The US and its allies are too afraid to come fight us".

At some point Nato has to put an end to this shit and that moment has arrived.

So how do you propose a counter-attack will be mounted? Where? Upon whom? The attackers killed themselves or were killed by the Gendarmerie. The others within this terrorist group in Paris are so heavily embedded into the local outlying neighborhoods, predominantly Muslim areas, as to be invisible.

In Iraq and Syria, where they are. It would be a relatively quick campaign and 'Isis' would be no more. There would only be the scattered remnants of a failed 'caliphate' which also cannot be underestimated.

What psychological impact will it have when the 'caliphate' is destroyed in a week.

All the nutjobs around the world will continue isolated attacks here and there now and then, no matter what we do or don't do. Doesn't matter, you have to kill the queen and the hive will eventually die.

You sound like Bush in 2003 selling the Iraq war. I think he said it would only take a couple of months and a couple of billion dollars.
And you didn't answer my question. How would it be a relatively quick campaign when ISIS members will hide in local village and town households where they will hold their hosts hostage by pointing a gun to their children's heads?

Notice they don't do the big black flag-waving parades anymore. There's a reason for that. They have become invisible.

For more information on this subject, pick up a copy of "Chasing Ghosts" by Paul Rieckhoff, founder of IAVA.org and Iraq war veteran.

You're selling books?

Go away.

 

[Freewill]

At this point I think all of Europe should throw their hat into the ring and we should have their backs.

Coupled with excluding the refugees from coming into the US, since terrorists will come in with them...

But Newton seems to be overlooking the fact that there are more efficient ways to deal with ISIS in Syria and Iraq than sending in large numbers of ground troops...

We should send in B-52s to carpet-bomb training camps and convoys, back our European allies with unlimited air strikes , and actually make a SERIOUS effort to arm the Kurds.

And hang around to rebuild afterwards??? Nope!!! If the rag heads turned a blind eye to ISIS, they pay the price.

That's fine if you could find military experts to agree with you, but most don't. Most know that to win a war, you can't do it from the air. Kill a few of them, annoy them a bit? Yes, you can do that, but not defeat them.

Why do you suppose the Palestinian conflict has been going on for decades? Because Israel won't wipe them off the face of the earth. Shoot a couple here, launch a few missiles there, and in a few months or years, it starts all over again.

So Israel should be focused on a genocide of the Palestinian people?

That's a BIT ironic don't you think?

Nope, just making a point. If you want to win a war, you have to annihilate the enemy hands down--especially when you're talking about a bunch of mentally deranged people.

If Israel's legitimate aim is to annihilate the Palestinians, that makes it a legitimate aim if the Palestinian want to annihilate the Israelis.

It is not so why do you even bring up this BS?

 

[Kondor3]

...And drop the bombs where? You Keyboard Kowboys krack me up.

Any town or area where ISIS has headquarters or operational bases will do nicely, yes?

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Take your immigration stuff to another post, this one is Act of War re the French leader's speech. There are endless threads for wailing on immigration, thanks for participating in USMB and have a nice day.

And if it turns out to be French nationals who self-radicalized? What, civil war?

Time is up, we know who the enemy is. If they only 'influenced' others to take this action that is enough. They must be dealt with. Evil men will do evil until they are stopped.

Inaction by the West only instills confidence and a great recruiting atmosphere for these groups. "Look! The US and its allies are too afraid to come fight us".

At some point Nato has to put an end to this shit and that moment has arrived.

So how do you propose a counter-attack will be mounted? Where? Upon whom? The attackers killed themselves or were killed by the Gendarmerie. The others within this terrorist group in Paris are so heavily embedded into the local outlying neighborhoods, predominantly Muslim areas, as to be invisible.

In Iraq and Syria, where they are. It would be a relatively quick campaign and 'Isis' would be no more. There would only be the scattered remnants of a failed 'caliphate' which also cannot be underestimated.

What psychological impact will it have when the 'caliphate' is destroyed in a week.

All the nutjobs around the world will continue isolated attacks here and there now and then, no matter what we do or don't do. Doesn't matter, you have to kill the queen and the hive will eventually die.

You sound like Bush in 2003 selling the Iraq war. I think he said it would only take a couple of months and a couple of billion dollars.
And you didn't answer my question. How would it be a relatively quick campaign when ISIS members will hide in local village and town households where they will hold their hosts hostage by pointing a gun to their children's heads?

Notice they don't do the big black flag-waving parades anymore. There's a reason for that. They have become invisible.

For more information on this subject, pick up a copy of "Chasing Ghosts" by Paul Rieckhoff, founder of IAVA.org and Iraq war veteran.

You're selling books?

Go away.

Thanks for another stunning example of low-information rightwing flaming ignorance.
It's not my book, but it IS a very important book to thousands of returning and wounded Iraq veterans, oh patriotic one.
Go pound your stupidity elsewhere, I see you can't respond to my salient point of sacrificing innocent people in another war.

 

[Flopper]

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.

I agree with your post. NATO should act. There should be a coalition of nations dedicated to putting ISIS out of business. However, ISIS is not a single headed serpent. ISIS exist in a number of countries now.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

...And drop the bombs where? You Keyboard Kowboys krack me up.

Any town or area where ISIS has headquarters or operational bases will do nicely, yes?

You guys are so fun to play with.... You want to bomb whole cities that have 15,000 civilians and 150 ISIS members? Brilliant.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

 

[Flopper]

And if it turns out to be French nationals who self-radicalized? What, civil war?

Time is up, we know who the enemy is. If they only 'influenced' others to take this action that is enough. They must be dealt with. Evil men will do evil until they are stopped.

Inaction by the West only instills confidence and a great recruiting atmosphere for these groups. "Look! The US and its allies are too afraid to come fight us".

At some point Nato has to put an end to this shit and moment has arrived.

Of course lets endeavor to out barbarian the barbarians, that's always worked so well in the past. I guess it hasn't occurred to you that a massive new military commitment in the Middle East is exactly what the radical Islamic elements want. Such action lends credence to their claims that the Western Nations are nothing more the modern day crusaders, apparently ISIS has learned some lessons from history, the question is, can we?

"An eye for an eye ends up making the whole world blind" -- Mohandas K. Gandhi

If we could change the past, there's a lot of things we could do differently in the Middle East to prevent the rise of Islamic terrorism. However, we can't roll back the clock. ISIS, Al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups are well established and there're not going to disappear nor are they going to abandon their goal of a worldwide Jihad just because we ignore them. The time for that has long past.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

I say we react in kind: Highly surgical, coordinated attacks by the Navy SEALs after ascertaining positions and movements of ISIS cells through intel. Sure worked on bin Laden.

I say we consult our military experts to see what they think. Of course Hussein would probably go against their advice like he did in Iraq.

Sort of like Bush did when he asked the generals in 2002? Their answer was to carpet bomb the entire region and then take over the oil fields. Job would be done in 3 weeks. Cheney turned them down (since he was actually the one running things) because there was no money in it for Halliburton, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, G.E., Raytheon, KBR, et al. That's the truth.

It was a clusterfuck from beginning to end.


Missing Iraq money may have been stolen, auditors say
U.S. Defense officials still cannot say what happened to $6.6 billion, sent by the planeload in cash and intended for Iraq's reconstruction after the start of the war.
June 13, 2011|By Paul Richter, Los Angeles Times
Iraq: Missing Iraq money may have been stolen, auditors say

Reporting from Washington — After the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the George W. Bush administration flooded the conquered country with so much cash to pay for reconstruction and other projects in the first year that a new unit of measurement was born.

Pentagon officials determined that one giant C-130 Hercules cargo plane could carry $2.4 billion in shrink-wrapped bricks of $100 bills. They sent an initial full planeload of cash, followed by 20 other flights to Iraq by May 2004 in a $12-billion haul that U.S. officials believe to be the biggest international cash airlift of all time.

This month, the Pentagon and the Iraqi government are finally closing the books on the program that handled all those Benjamins. But despite years of audits and investigations, U.S. Defense officials still cannot say what happened to $6.6 billion in cash — enough to run the Los Angeles Unified School District or the Chicago Public Schools for a year, among many other things.

For the first time, federal auditors are suggesting that some or all of the cash may have been stolen, not just mislaid in an accounting error. Stuart Bowen, special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, an office created by Congress, said the missing $6.6 billion may be "the largest theft of funds in national history."

The mystery is a growing embarrassment to the Pentagon, and an irritant to Washington's relations with Baghdad. Iraqi officials are threatening to go to court to reclaim the money, which came from Iraqi oil sales, seized Iraqi assets and surplus funds from the United Nations' oil-for-food program.

It's fair to say that Congress, which has already shelled out $61 billion of U.S. taxpayer money for similar reconstruction and development projects in Iraq, is none too thrilled either.

"Congress is not looking forward to having to spend billions of our money to make up for billions of their money that we can't account for, and can't seem to find," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Beverly Hills), who presided over hearings on waste, fraud and abuse in Iraq six years ago when he headed the House Government Reform Committee.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I say we react in kind: Highly surgical, coordinated attacks by the Navy SEALs after ascertaining positions and movements of ISIS cells through intel. Sure worked on bin Laden.

I say we consult our military experts to see what they think. Of course Hussein would probably go against their advice like he did in Iraq.

Sort of like Bush did when he asked the generals in 2002? Their answer was to carpet bomb the entire region and then take over the oil fields. Job would be done in 3 weeks. Cheney turned them down (since he was actually the one running things) because there was no money in it for Halliburton, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, G.E., Raytheon, KBR, et al. That's the truth.


Missing Iraq money may have been stolen, auditors say
U.S. Defense officials still cannot say what happened to $6.6 billion, sent by the planeload in cash and intended for Iraq's reconstruction after the start of the war.
June 13, 2011|By Paul Richter, Los Angeles Times
Iraq: Missing Iraq money may have been stolen, auditors say

Reporting from Washington — After the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the George W. Bush administration flooded the conquered country with so much cash to pay for reconstruction and other projects in the first year that a new unit of measurement was born.

Pentagon officials determined that one giant C-130 Hercules cargo plane could carry $2.4 billion in shrink-wrapped bricks of $100 bills. They sent an initial full planeload of cash, followed by 20 other flights to Iraq by May 2004 in a $12-billion haul that U.S. officials believe to be the biggest international cash airlift of all time.

This month, the Pentagon and the Iraqi government are finally closing the books on the program that handled all those Benjamins. But despite years of audits and investigations, U.S. Defense officials still cannot say what happened to $6.6 billion in cash — enough to run the Los Angeles Unified School District or the Chicago Public Schools for a year, among many other things.

For the first time, federal auditors are suggesting that some or all of the cash may have been stolen, not just mislaid in an accounting error. Stuart Bowen, special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, an office created by Congress, said the missing $6.6 billion may be "the largest theft of funds in national history."

The mystery is a growing embarrassment to the Pentagon, and an irritant to Washington's relations with Baghdad. Iraqi officials are threatening to go to court to reclaim the money, which came from Iraqi oil sales, seized Iraqi assets and surplus funds from the United Nations' oil-for-food program.

It's fair to say that Congress, which has already shelled out $61 billion of U.S. taxpayer money for similar reconstruction and development projects in Iraq, is none too thrilled either.

"Congress is not looking forward to having to spend billions of our money to make up for billions of their money that we can't account for, and can't seem to find," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Beverly Hills), who presided over hearings on waste, fraud and abuse in Iraq six years ago when he headed the House Government Reform Committee.

So liberal blog rumors are the truth now?

 

[Kondor3]

...You guys are so fun to play with.... You want to bomb whole cities that have 15,000 civilians and 150 ISIS members? Brilliant.

150 ISIS members my ass...

It is the fighters, their infrastructure, and those supporting them, actively or passively...

As to the effectiveness of aerial bombing...

Why don't we ask the Germans or Japanese, about the effectiveness of American and Allied bombing campaigns, in a Total War scenario?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

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.

This is correct, of course, which is why it will never happen.

“And be clear, Nato will have forces in that region for decades to come.”

Which is why it will never happen.

Calling the attacks an 'act of war' is political-speak intended for public consumption, nothing more.

Unlike most American conservatives, Europe and the rest of the world acknowledge the fact that using conventional military tactics to address terrorism will fail, and terrorists would love nothing more than conventional military forces from the West to deploy to the ME.

That's funny. The EU allowed these radicals in and then tried to suppress anybody who spoke against these radicals, letting them form sharia law and other atrocities in their own countries. Now we see the fruits of such irrational absurd thought.

 

[Kondor3]

...That's funny. The EU allowed these radicals in and then tried to suppress anybody who spoke against these radicals, letting them form sharia law and other atrocities in their own countries. Now we see the fruits of such irrational absurd thought.

Truth.

Unfortunately, it will probably take another dozen or so such Militant Muslim attacks, and another million or two Muslim refugees, before the Euros pull their heads out of their asses, and begin backpedaling - assuming it isn't already too late.

Euro-Trash Fools.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

...That's funny. The EU allowed these radicals in and then tried to suppress anybody who spoke against these radicals, letting them form sharia law and other atrocities in their own countries. Now we see the fruits of such irrational absurd thought.

Truth.

Unfortunately, it will probably take another dozen or so such Militant Muslim attacks, and another million or two Muslim refugees, before the Euros pull their heads out of their asses, and begin backpedaling - assuming it isn't already too late.

Euro-Trash Fools.

Absolutely.

 

[leftwinger]

They missed Christiana Amamanpour her twisted mouth is running on CNN

 

[the_human_being]

And if it turns out to be French nationals who self-radicalized? What, civil war?

Time is up, we know who the enemy is. If they only 'influenced' others to take this action that is enough. They must be dealt with. Evil men will do evil until they are stopped.

Inaction by the West only instills confidence and a great recruiting atmosphere for these groups. "Look! The US and its allies are too afraid to come fight us".

At some point Nato has to put an end to this shit and that moment has arrived.

So how do you propose a counter-attack will be mounted? Where? Upon whom? The attackers killed themselves or were killed by the Gendarmerie. The others within this terrorist group in Paris are so heavily embedded into the local outlying neighborhoods, predominantly Muslim areas, as to be invisible.

In Iraq and Syria, where they are. It would be a relatively quick campaign and 'Isis' would be no more. There would only be the scattered remnants of a failed 'caliphate' which also cannot be underestimated.

What psychological impact will it have when the 'caliphate' is destroyed in a week.

All the nutjobs around the world will continue isolated attacks here and there now and then, no matter what we do or don't do. Doesn't matter, you have to kill the queen and the hive will eventually die.

In Syria? Really? Over quickly? With Russia and Iran in Syria by the invitation of Assad? LOL!!

 

[IsaacNewton]

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

You aren't going either so stop the whining, you are not in a position to pontificate to anyone else.

You seem to be saying only people actually in the military should have the right to voice an opinion on when and where the military should be used?

That is called a military dictatorship.

And to try to say American citizens should have no say about where their military should be used is ludicrous. The military exists to exert OUR will, not theirs.

If we commit the military to a mission, politicians can't tie their hands with ridiculous rules of engagement. Been there done that, it does nothing but get people killed and accomplishes little or nothing. The military is there for one reason, break things and destroy the enemy. Innocent folks will get caught in the cross fire, that's war.

I agree, its time to simply point at a map for our military and say THERE.

Where is THERE?

The Sea

Take your immigration stuff to another post, this one is Act of War re the French leader's speech. There are endless threads for wailing on immigration, thanks for participating in USMB and have a nice day.

Time is up, we know who the enemy is. If they only 'influenced' others to take this action that is enough. They must be dealt with. Evil men will do evil until they are stopped.

Inaction by the West only instills confidence and a great recruiting atmosphere for these groups. "Look! The US and its allies are too afraid to come fight us".

At some point Nato has to put an end to this shit and that moment has arrived.

So how do you propose a counter-attack will be mounted? Where? Upon whom? The attackers killed themselves or were killed by the Gendarmerie. The others within this terrorist group in Paris are so heavily embedded into the local outlying neighborhoods, predominantly Muslim areas, as to be invisible.

In Iraq and Syria, where they are. It would be a relatively quick campaign and 'Isis' would be no more. There would only be the scattered remnants of a failed 'caliphate' which also cannot be underestimated.

What psychological impact will it have when the 'caliphate' is destroyed in a week.

All the nutjobs around the world will continue isolated attacks here and there now and then, no matter what we do or don't do. Doesn't matter, you have to kill the queen and the hive will eventually die.

You sound like Bush in 2003 selling the Iraq war. I think he said it would only take a couple of months and a couple of billion dollars.
And you didn't answer my question. How would it be a relatively quick campaign when ISIS members will hide in local village and town households where they will hold their hosts hostage by pointing a gun to their children's heads?

Notice they don't do the big black flag-waving parades anymore. There's a reason for that. They have become invisible.

For more information on this subject, pick up a copy of "Chasing Ghosts" by Paul Rieckhoff, founder of IAVA.org and Iraq war veteran.

You're selling books?

Go away.

Thanks for another stunning example of low-information rightwing flaming ignorance.
It's not my book, but it IS a very important book to thousands of returning and wounded Iraq veterans, oh patriotic one.
Go pound your stupidity elsewhere, I see you can't respond to my salient point of sacrificing innocent people in another war.

Fair enough, if a book for returning vets by all means sell away. My apologies.

I did offer this in my post above: All the nutjobs around the world will continue isolated attacks here and there now and then, no matter what we do or don't do.

These groups are like cancer, it is hard to completely irradicate them. But you have to do what you can do rather than nothing. We CAN eliminate them from controlling any territory, which will very much diminish their 'glow' in the minds of the dimwits who have been joining them.

And you can check my other posts, I am far from a 'right-winger'. I do recognize when violent force is required, personally and militarily. It is one of those very unpleasant realities of life.
The time for hesitation is now over. We have to act decisively.

 

[IsaacNewton]

...You guys are so fun to play with.... You want to bomb whole cities that have 15,000 civilians and 150 ISIS members? Brilliant.

150 ISIS members my ass...

It is the fighters, their infrastructure, and those supporting them, actively or passively...

As to the effectiveness of aerial bombing...

Why don't we ask the Germans or Japanese, about the effectiveness of American and Allied bombing campaigns, in a Total War scenario?

You're kidding right. Allied bombing during WW2 reduced the war making capacity of both German and Japan to levels where they could not effectively resist, except on the ground with their troops basically acting like cannon fodder.