IS/Daesh Burn POW Alive

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by Boreas

I know that's what you've been saying and the above statement betrays either a complete lack of understanding of what Daesh has been up to (in between beheadings) or a similar lack of understanding of the rules of warfare as practiced by us and our allies.... or both. To put it bluntly, you simply don't know what the hell you're talking about.

John

And you do - oh that is so rich. I guess I should have been posting in American as English does not seem to be comprehended.

So I don't know what they have been up to between headings. Apart from torturing non ISIL children. Apart from raping Christian women and pre-pubescent females, apart from indiscriminately killing anyone in their way? What else having a few games of chess, perhaps?

Well the kitties are fed so that takes care of their evening meal.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

It has to do with your belief that a city should be burned, on grounds that they are less human than we are. The point is that humans everywhere are capable of extreme cruelty towards enemies they think deserve it. If that makes a group 'inhuman,' there are no humans on the planet.

Then pray tell me how else do you suggest we defeat them. I have tried too demonstrate that in war innocents suffer - but that was the only way to win the war. It is not a belief (at least not in how the OED describes belief) it is simply an effect of war. They will not come out and line up in the fields, that was the days of Napoleon and Wellington. In fact that lot over their seems to like using women and children as shields.

In case it is news I lived through WW II, saw all the newsreels, read the papers - it was not pretty.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

You hate ISIL because they ignore the rules. Then you scoff at the idea of rules. Does not compute.

We agree that punishment for those who have done evil things is in order. I completely disagree with assigning collective guilt however. That is a rationalization for following the promptings of anger and hate.

You've made comments before endorsing burning. Glad to see you've reflected a little on that one at least. You still want to blow up a whole town, I gather, if not half of a couple of countries....

Sigh, well once more into the breech dear friends. ISIS does not follow rules because there are no rule dammit. They murder because they love killing people.

So exactly how do you propose punishing the ISIL guilty, they will not surrender themselves to the gendarmerie. Will some possibly innocents die? If there are innocents in Raqqah yes they will be casualties of war.

You still insist that I feel anger and hate and nothing could be further from the truth. There is a cancer in the mid east and it must be removed. If you can come up with a way that it can be done surgically without the removal of healthy flesh please tell us.

It dawns on me that the folks attributing anger and hate to me are the ones allowing their own emotions to get the better of them.

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by Boreas

I know that's what you've been saying and the above statement betrays either a complete lack of understanding of what Daesh has been up to (in between beheadings) or a similar lack of understanding of the rules of warfare as practiced by us and our allies.... or both. To put it bluntly, you simply don't know what the hell you're talking about.

John

Zeke sock.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Good lord, Rob, we're just disagreeing with you and, if anyone is betraying a lack of thought, it's those who react emotionally to Daesh and promote the idea that their actions warrant a similar, or even more extreme, response from us.

John

Dear God how can I get the point across;

1) I don't hate ISIL

2) Emotional? The only people I get emotional about are my loved ones.

3) I have not suggested that we behead them but we must defeat them. if the only way to do that is bombing their cities then sadly that must done.

You see I have seen how a few wars have been fought (and even won) and to be brutally frank it is never pretty.

Oops should not have used that word as now I will be accused of brutality.

[merrylander]

Well screw this as it is time for a stiff drink rather than all this shouting up a dead horse's arse. Goodnight kiddies, sleep tight.

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Sigh, well once more into the breech dear friends. ISIS does not follow rules because there are no rule dammit. They murder because they love killing people.

So exactly how do you propose punishing the ISIL guilty, they will not surrender themselves to the gendarmerie. Will some possibly innocents die? If there are innocents in Raqqah yes they will be casualties of war.

You still insist that I feel anger and hate and nothing could be further from the truth. There is a cancer in the mid east and it must be removed. If you can come up with a way that it can be done surgically without the removal of healthy flesh please tell us.

It dawns on me that the folks attributing anger and hate to me are the ones allowing their own emotions to get the better of them.

Hey...don't let the effete intellectuals get ya down Rob. You're absolutely right, it's a cancer. And I agree removing cancer is impossible without taking out some of the surrounding healthy tissue...or even worse if you're doing chemo (which is the medical equivalent of saturation bombing). But even though the cancer cells decided to take aim on 3,000 innocent people one sunny Tuesday morning...somehow we need to treat them like human beings...a status which they continue to show they have relinquished with their jetliner assaults, their be-headings, their live incinerations, and their mortars and rockets launched into quiet neighborhoods.

It's MOAB time in eastern Syria and northern Iraq. We drop a bazillion leaflets letting the people know it's coming. ISIS will certainly behead anybody who they see hitting the road after the leaflets drop, or at least gun them down. But we're used to that after what we've seen there already...and the examples Hamas has been making, blowing the brains out of their own people in Gaza city who don't express enough Jew hate to satisfy them.

There are no appropriate rules nor should there be any humanitarian considerations for ISIS anymore. Humanitarian considerations are well spent on humans, not on fucking rabid dogs. And the news on Kayla Mueller is no surprise. ISIS, Hamas, Al Qaeda don't hide behind women and children. They might as well just put their own children on rooftops of the neighborhoods they inhabit. Because they aren't trying to discourage air strikes. They want dead children...it's part of their plan. The more dead, bloddy children being dragged around in front of the cameras by wailing parents, or wailing actors pretending to be parents, the more we are the animals. The more dead children, the more Israeli Jews are the animals. They wanted to be able to blame Kayla Mueller on the Jordanians, or us, or the Jews.

MOAB the shit out of them. It's long past due. The Jordanians figured it out before we did...if that isn't fucking unbelievable enough, I don't know what is. They enjoy watching humans being incinerated? We have the capacity to give them more than they thought possible. The only thing we lack is the will.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Well screw this as it is time for a stiff drink rather than all this shouting up a dead horse's arse. Goodnight kiddies, sleep tight.

Cheers Rob. I'd join ya but there's a ladder in my near future. The roofers are winding up their work here and I have to inspect it.

[Rajoo]

Wars usuall end on victory (surrender by the other side) or truce. In this war against ISIL, neither is an option. Total annihilation of ISIS is the only answer. How we accomplish that is where we disagree.

I would be all for total destruction since there is no other way and damn the collateral damage. What other choice do we have since it is the stated policy of these radicals to either convert or die; or in some instances get killed for any number of reasons even if you are a Muslim.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Sigh, well once more into the breech dear friends. ISIS does not follow rules because there are no rule dammit. They murder because they love killing people.

So exactly how do you propose punishing the ISIL guilty, they will not surrender themselves to the gendarmerie. Will some possibly innocents die? If there are innocents in Raqqah yes they will be casualties of war.

You still insist that I feel anger and hate and nothing could be further from the truth. There is a cancer in the mid east and it must be removed. If you can come up with a way that it can be done surgically without the removal of healthy flesh please tell us.

It dawns on me that the folks attributing anger and hate to me are the ones allowing their own emotions to get the better of them.

I'd hate to hear how you talk when you are under the influence of hate and anger. I truly can't imagine how a person can advocate and rationalize genocide of entire populations without being touched by emotionality. They must all be ISIS-supporters? A too-convenient assumption, sir. And as we've discussed before, we differ in our desire for the deaths of persons whose only crime is some level of assumed 'wrong loyalty.'

I'll admit to an emotion here. The emotion is called 'appalled.' Intellectually I know how this works, but I'm still surprised when a normally perfectly-decent person starts calling for the extermination of persons he calls bugs.

I would suggest that neither of us have the training or the specific intelligence of the situation on the ground to design a campaign to conquer and pacify the ISIS territory. But I doubt the effectiveness of bombing to wipe out an enemy able to shelter in deep bunkers, unless you are able to specifically target the bunkers with special weapons. I would suspect the casualties from 'carpet-bombing' to be 100 civilians per one ISIS fighter, or worse. You just wish for bombing because you imagine it to be an easy and painless-for-us way to kill an enemy you want killed. All this is by way of saying I don't think I assume the burden of generalship by opposing your desired air-tactics.