IS/Daesh Burn POW Alive

[icenine]

Originally Posted by whell

Yeah, BS. All those ISIS dudes had George Bush and the Iraq war top of mind while they were killing kids and torturing Christians.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...y-said-we-love

ISIS exists because Saddam Hussein was overthrown, creating the disenfranchisement of Sunnis in northern Iraq. I am not excusing their atrocities by any means. But if Saddam was still in power ISIS would not be inviting foreign fighters from all over the world to come join them in Anbar province.


You can have a right to your opinion, but you do not have the right ignore to the facts. When we broke the state structure of Iraq in 2003 we did not count on the insurgency, Al Qaeda In Iraq, the 2006-2008 civil war, we did not foresee the destruction of Syria by Assad/Al Nusra/ISIS, and we could not predict that a power vacuum in northern Syria would lead to the dissolution of state borders.

The United States wanted to bring democracy to the Middle East, not ISIS.
Powell was right. We broke it....who knows if it can be fixed.

[icenine]

Originally Posted by whell

Yeah, BS. All those ISIS dudes had George Bush and the Iraq war top of mind while they were killing kids and torturing Christians.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...y-said-we-love

By the way the Christian community in Bagdad supported Hussein because he gave them protection. As you know his Vice President was Christian. Not saying Sadam was a good guy, but he was not executing Christians just because they were Christians, unlike ISIS.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

Yup, we're dicking around. You might want to cheer-lead for Obama on this by counting air strikes (I think your 2000 might be a bit high). The enemy is still advancing. Here's an interactive map that shows how ISIS is gaining control of additional territory in spite of coalition air strikes. See for yourself.

http://securitydata.newamerica.net/isis/analysis

It ain't about "derangement syndrome", whatever the hell that's supposed to mean. Its about our results versus the enemy's. Right now they're advancing in spite of the coalition's efforts. I feat that this is what happens when you fight a war worrying about whom you might offend. However, I'm also hopeful that maybe we're coming to our senses and with the use of force request.

Do you even read the links you post?

Recent activity

January 31, 2015


Kirkuk
Contested
ISIS launched an attack inside Kirkuk at an abandoned hotel that local police were using as a headquarters. Peshmerga and Kurdish anti-terror units later raided the hotel, regaining control and killing three.



January 31, 2015


Maktab Khalid
ISIS-controlled
ISIS took over Maktab Khalid, an area about 12 miles southwest of Kirkuk, after heavy clashes with the Peshmerga, killing Brig. Gen. Shirko Fateh, the highest-ranking operational commander of the Peshmerga brigade located in Kirkuk.



January 26, 2015


Muqdadiyah
Iraqi-controlled
A top Iraqi army officer has claimed that Iraqi forces have "liberated" all of Diyala province from ISIS. At the very least, it appears that two dozen villages around the city Muqdadiyah in Diyala province are now under Iraqi control.



January 24, 2015


al Salehiyah
Kurd-controlled
Peshmerga forces now control the al-Salehiyah area in Tal-Afar district.



January 23, 2015


Klsik Kupri
Kurd-controlled
5,000 Kurdish soldiers have cleared ISIS insurgents from nearly 500 sq. km. (300 sq. mi.) of territory and broken a key ISIS supply line between Mosul and strongholds to the west near Syria. Assisted by U.S. air strikes that began the night before and continued during the...

[whell]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Do you even read the links you post?

Yes. Now only if you would. Yes, coalition / Pershminga forces have won several individual clashes with ISIS. But ISIS continues to expand the total area under its control in spite of the coalition air campaign. Some estimates suggest that their area of control has nearly doubled since the air strikes began. The map I linked to was probably a more conservative estimate of their gains.

BTW, The Pershminga bunch is probably less concerned about defeating ISIS than it is about using this conflict as an excuse to engage in a land grab.

http://www.newsweek.com/kurdish-land...baghdad-302303

[whell]

Originally Posted by [I

icenine[/I];259576]By the way the Christian community in Bagdad supported Hussein because he gave them protection. As you know his Vice President was Christian. Not saying Sadam was a good guy, but he was not executing Christians just because they were Christians, unlike ISIS.

More leftist propagandist BS. Sure, if Assyrians and Chaldeans adopted traditional Iraqi or Kurdish surnames and played by a limited set of rules, they were ethnically marginalized but otherwise left alone. If they didn't they were persecuted just like any other "infidel".

http://www.modbee.com/news/local/article3168728.html

“My parents fled Iraq after 26 members of their family were buried alive during Saddam Hussein’s reign,” Toma said. “It’s genocide, and it’s been going on for years.”

EDIT - there has been a significant Chaldean immigration to this US and many have settled here in Metro Detroit. Big spike in immigration in the ’80’s and early '90’s. If you ask them why, the vast majority will identify religious persecution as the driving reason for coming to the US.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

BTW, The Pershminga bunch is probably less concerned about defeating ISIS than it is about using this conflict as an excuse to engage in a land grab.\

Can't do the latter without accomplishing the former.

John

[icenine]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Iraq

Even if they had it pretty bad under Sadam it seems to have gotten much worse after we got rid of him.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Can't do the latter without accomplishing the former.

John

Sure it can. And it looks like it is.

[whell]

Originally Posted by icenine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Iraq

Even if they had it pretty bad under Sadam it seems to have gotten much worse after we got rid of him.

If the United States was doing anything like this to its own racial, ethnic or religious minorities, the left would be having a cow, and justifiably so.

http://m.hrw.org/reports/2004/iraq0804/4.htm

ISIS has changed the tactics and they certainly are a more blood-thirsty bunch, but persecution is what it is in whatever form it's delivered.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

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.

Then am I to understand that you are one of the crew that advocates sending our young men and women over there to engage in hand to hand combat? With an enemy that dresses just like all the civilians around them? Sorry DQ but your pious mutterings do not carry much weight,

I read most new posts in this group and I must confess that the absolute bias exhibited by many posters is appalling. Y'all cheerfully select which bits of history fit with your particular view and ignore the bits that do not. You have put me into some special pigeon hole of your own making and ignored anyting that I write which will not fit that pattern. You do not know me simply because you have no desire to know me. That is fine by me because I have no need of your acceptance or friendship. Tata