International Jihadis and the West's Response

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
281

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

Pretty obvious…a year later too…no strategy…still.[/quote]

He has never taken ISIS seriously. I don’t expect a strategy from obama and quite frankly given obama’s track record that’s probably better for the next president to come up with one.
If we leave it to obama, we will lose. It drives me nuts that so much blood and treasure was put into Iraq only to go piss it away.

Seeing as how the Kurds seem to be the only people who are dedicated to truly eradicating and extricating ISIS from the region, why the hell we are not providing arms directly to them is a wonder.
Why the hell have we not taken down their social media outlets?
Why the hell have we not yet impacted their cash flow significantly?
Why the hell have we not cut their supply chain?
These are all bloodless ways of beating up on them and we have now had plenty of time to make in roads on all this stuff and we are just barley starting on it.
[/quote]

Many critics assert that the current policy of limited air strikes is insufficient to defeat or seriously weaken ISIL and have offered radical alternatives. However, these “cures” are far worse than the disease. The best plan is to aggressively move forward within the broad parameters of the current strategy, known in defense analysis circles as “hammer and anvil”.

The strategy puts ISIL in a catch-22: It could either choose to concentrate its forces to achieve local superiority over opposing ground troops and then be decimated by the United States’ airpower “hammer”; or it could avoid airstrikes by dispersing its forces into small units and so be vulnerable to defeat by the opposing ground force “anvil.” Either way, ISIL loses.

[/quote]

Well I did not offer any radical alternatives, as these are things we are starting to actually do. What I do not understand is why it took so long to get started on it.
If there is a valid explanation regarding intelligence gathering based on these systems remaining in tact for a time, I could buy that however, there is no indication that was the case. There is just no sense of urgency to remove ISIS from the planet.
I do not have a problem with the air campaign except I think it’s to small in scope and that ‘60 country coalition’ is a joke.

282

These 2 articles combine the war on Jihadists & political correctness, and why we will never win the war on terror.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/08/25/3694783/scott-walker-muslim-handful/

don’t wanna hurt anyone’s feelings, especially when they are out to kill ya.

283

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
These 2 articles combine the war on Jihadists & political correctness, and why we will never win the war on terror.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/08/25/3694783/scott-walker-muslim-handful/

don’t wanna hurt anyone’s feelings, especially when they are out to kill ya.[/quote]

Interesting articles, as I have said many times the first victim of political correctness is the truth. We need someone to lead us who is the absolute opposite of Obama.

We need a plain speaking individual who is unafraid to call Muslim terrorists exactly what they are.

We need to ditch this pc nonsense and the sooner the better, or it will eat us alive from within.

284

Meanwhile…

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/08/25/father-and-his-sons-take-fight-to-isis/?intcmp=hpcmt

285

[quote]2busy wrote:
Meanwhile…

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/08/25/father-and-his-sons-take-fight-to-isis/?intcmp=hpcmt[/quote]

What Varq has prophesied has come true. If our nation won’t commit to fight them, at least someone has.

286

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]2busy wrote:
Meanwhile…

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/08/25/father-and-his-sons-take-fight-to-isis/?intcmp=hpcmt[/quote]

What Varq has prophesied has come true. If our nation won’t commit to fight them, at least someone has.[/quote]

Happy hunting devil dogs.

Are we not at war with ISIL currently? Has it occurred to you that ISIL may want US ground forces to be deployed?

287

Yes. of course. If we are at war with ISIS with a 60 plus country force, why hasn’t a single nation (except Iran, who is not part of the alliance) attacked ISIS on the ground? I mean, we might as well say we are in a cold war with ISIS. What do you expect, Bismark? Do you think air power alone can destroy them? The history of air warfare has shown us other results in regards to destroying an enemy.

288

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Yes. of course. If we are at war with ISIS with a 60 plus country force, why hasn’t a single nation (except Iran, who is not part of the alliance) attacked ISIS on the ground? I mean, we might as well say we are in a cold war with ISIS. What do you expect, Bismark? Do you think air power alone can destroy them? The history of air warfare has shown us other results in regards to destroying an enemy.[/quote]

If 60 countries even lifted a finger against ISIS, they would have been a grease-spot by now. We did not have that big an alliance in WW2. We have 60 countries who have condemned the actions of ISIS, not 60 countries who are actually interested in fighting them. Imagine if 60 countries truly deployed in a combat mission against ISIS? They would have been gone long ago.
The problem is, nobody save for the victims, care. 60 countries have more than enough resources to kill them all with minimal casualties. We have the power we lack the will.

289

886×960 111 KB

I’ll just leave this right here…

290

[quote]2busy wrote:
I’ll just leave this right here…[/quote]

A trite myth. In reality, Jewish dietary laws are more restrictive than those of Islam. Al-Baqara 2:173 reads, “He has only forbidden you carrion, blood, pig’s meat, and animals over which any name other than God’s has been invoked. But if anyone is forced to eat such things by hunger, rather than desire or excess, he commits no sin: God is most merciful and forgiving.” Shooting jihadists with pig laced ammunition would not be theologically disconcerting to them in the least. Through their ostensibly faithful acts, martyrs are exempt from the practice of ghusl. Even if they were not, forced contact with pork products would not constitute a sin, much less a damnation worthy one capable of deterring them.

291

[quote]Bismark wrote:
Al-Baqara 2:173 reads, “He has only forbidden you carrion, blood, pig’s meat, and animals over which any name other than God’s has been invoked. But if anyone is forced to eat such things by hunger, rather than desire or excess, he commits no sin: God is most merciful and forgiving.” [/quote]

Sounds like an easy religion. No wonder it’s popular.

But you still haven’t said, is an air war enough? How should the 60 nation alliance combat ISIS? Do you agree ISIS is even a threat?

292

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:
Al-Baqara 2:173 reads, “He has only forbidden you carrion, blood, pig’s meat, and animals over which any name other than God’s has been invoked. But if anyone is forced to eat such things by hunger, rather than desire or excess, he commits no sin: God is most merciful and forgiving.” [/quote]

Sounds like an easy religion. No wonder it’s popular.

But you still haven’t said, is an air war enough? How should the 60 nation alliance combat ISIS? Do you agree ISIS is even a threat?[/quote]

It isn’t for those who live it. Islam is a lifestyle as much as it is a religion. The most reverent Christian denominations are not nearly as stringent, not that there is anything wrong with that.

As the American experience in Bosnia attests, with air power alone, a superpower was unable to coerce a minor power. A great work on the subject of air power is Robert A. Pape’s Bombing to Win.

I do believe that the US air power “hammer” and the peshmerga, Iraqi security forces, Sunni tribes, and the Free Syrian Army “anvil” hold enough promise to aggressively go forward within the parameters of the administration’s strategy. I do not believe that the US should deploy ground combat forces. Max Boot offers some thoughtful revisions and additions to the administration’s current strategy that I’d like to see incorporated.

http://www.cfr.org/iraq/defeating-isis/p33773

293

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]2busy wrote:
I’ll just leave this right here…[/quote]

A trite myth. In reality, Jewish dietary laws are more restrictive than those of Islam. Al-Baqara 2:173 reads, “He has only forbidden you carrion, blood, pig’s meat, and animals over which any name other than God’s has been invoked. But if anyone is forced to eat such things by hunger, rather than desire or excess, he commits no sin: God is most merciful and forgiving.” Shooting jihadists with pig laced ammunition would not be theologically disconcerting to them in the least. Through their ostensibly faithful acts, martyrs are exempt from the practice of ghusl. Even if they were not, forced contact with pork products would not constitute a sin, much less a damnation worthy one capable of deterring them.[/quote]

I took it as a modern day play of General “Black Jack” Pershing’s legend.

294

http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-probing-alleged-distorting-war-intelligence-162450221.html

This article says exactly what people on here have been saying for a long time, that officials at U.S. Central Command overseeing the anti-Islamic State campaign distorted or altered intelligence assessments to exaggerate progress against the militant group,

295

[quote]Bismark wrote:

I do believe that the US air power “hammer” and the peshmerga, Iraqi security forces, Sunni tribes, and the Free Syrian Army “anvil” hold enough promise to aggressively go forward within the parameters of the administration’s strategy. I do not believe that the US should deploy ground combat forces. Max Boot offers some thoughtful revisions and additions to the administration’s current strategy that I’d like to see incorporated.

http://www.cfr.org/iraq/defeating-isis/p33773

[/quote]

Ah, the “hammer and anvil” strategy…worked especially well against the Taliban in Afghanistan with the US being the hammer & Pakistan being the anvil, moral is you’ve got to have committed partners if you are going to begin something like this. You have neither in either theater of war we are currently engaged in.

But as far as ISIS is concerned:

A lot of the anti-ISIS coalition have a vested hand in keeping the terrorist group alive. They see them as a counter to Iran’s influence in the Gulf.

Turkey won’t touch them, tipped them off and used the war as a smoke screen to attack another partner, the Kurds.

The Iranian backed Shia militia will not fight if the US is backing them in an air war.

The Sunni tribes are feel betrayed because we backed the Shia government in Baghdad and left them to fend for themselves against ISIS. They were once our allies but basically have no choice but to join them now that we pulled out and the chips are down.

The free Syrian army is a joke and was betrayed to Al-Nursa by our allies & NATO members the Turks and are as much as a threat to ISIS as the Iraqi national army we paid billions to arm.

The Kurds are surrounded and are being pounded by both Turkey & ISIS.

What happened to the threats Jordan made against ISIS after they burned the pilot alive? They seemed to evaporate once they lost interest, or are Jordan still bombing them?

In any event, none of this seems to matter since ISIS still stands, is still making threats and is growing in places across the globe due to our own ignorance of meddling in places we should have left alone, like Libya & Syria.

296

Wow, what a mess in Syria. I say enough already, let the Russians have a shot at it.

297

The West’s non-response I guess:

298

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
The West’s non-response I guess:

http://www.businessinsider.com/white-house-dithering-paralyzes-the-best-us-ally-for-fighting-isis-via-washingtonpost-2015-9[/quote]

I’m not surprised.

299

The Russians make their own anti-ISIS alliance…and cut us out.

This is one of the worst strategic things that could happen.

edit- what we should have done is this: split the country into 3 while we were still friendly with the Kurds & anti-Al-Qaeda Sunnis. Forget about the central government headed by a man in bed with our enemies Iran. If we had done this, we would be friends with an oil rich area of Iraq and there would be no ISIS today.

300

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
These 2 articles combine the war on Jihadists & political correctness, and why we will never win the war on terror.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/08/25/3694783/scott-walker-muslim-handful/

don’t wanna hurt anyone’s feelings, especially when they are out to kill ya.[/quote]

Interesting articles, as I have said many times the first victim of political correctness is the truth. We need someone to lead us who is the absolute opposite of Obama.

We need a plain speaking individual who is unafraid to call Muslim terrorists exactly what they are.

We need to ditch this pc nonsense and the sooner the better, or it will eat us alive from within.

[/quote]

Thanks. Interesting indeed.