Jump to content
Gump

ISIS

Recommended Posts

I don't necessarily agree with hunting Al Baghdadi, I'm waiting for the media to portray him as the next terrorist to go after, along with their religious war oriented rants.

One has to wonder if we need to let ISIS form a true state, in one location, under a flag, after they've driven out or killed those not like them, just so we finally have a localized and concentrated target to annihilate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many many people predicted this type of thing would happen by taking Hussein out.When will the US learn to stay out of other countries business. We (the US) cannot expect the world to be like us, or even believe in the same lifestyle. Some are happy being in a life we would call primitive.

Yes we did.This was an epic Bush fuck up and the reason you should never vote for a republican!

We will be paying for his stupidity for decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Removing Saddam was not necessarally a terrible thing. Eliminating the Baathist (sp?) party was a very poor decisions and left the country without a way to effectively maintain control. Eliminating the army just left a bunch of Iraqis anrgy, without work, and with weapons... If the process of effective nation building had actually been executed Iraq may have turned into a functioning country. Unlikely, but maybe.

 

ISIS is a nasty group of militants that have learned exactly how to use terror, crime, and intimidation to force all around them to join them or die. I agree that they need to be eliminated, but I don't think US troops need to be on the ground again (Other than SOCOM and black). This group is not under the Geneva convention, or any other real set of rules.

If we are going to remove this group, we need to do it the right way: Low yeild tactical nuclear weapons. They have done us a favor by removing anyone not friendly to their cause from anywhere they are, so we don't even have to worry about RoE and collateral damage. Liquify 30,000 terrorists and their supporters, specfically targeting a major CnC region, and you eliminate a major leadership resource. A juicy secondary target would be logistics and supply locations. The key thing is no hesitation. We go all in: no warnings and no pussyfooting around. We send a message that we (The US) is done tolerating this, the gloves are off, and we will kill you and everyone around you.

At the same time we coordinate strikes from Kurdish and Iraqi forces to swing in after the detonation and eliminate any survivors with no quarter. Should get most of them, and the rest should scatter or be significatly weakened.

 

Militant and muslim groups might hate us more for it, but who cares? We will have eliminated a threat in a quick and effective manner with minimal friendly casualties, all while broadcasting a nice deterrance message. We also will have regained control of the oil regions, which is always economically beneficial.

Our allies will bitch and moan about the use of nuclear arms, but that is all they will do. No nation really has the balls to attack anyone else anymore over something that isn't directly threatening them. So let's go wave our dick around again, but without getting troops killed/wounded this time.

 

Oh yea, some infrastructure and policital building needs to happen afterwords, which we should monitor, but if we do it all for them, it all will fall apart as soon as we turn control over...

Edited by BDBGoalie
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mess...at least iraq's regained control of the dam from IS recently. This is a situation of jockeying for financial gains and support the group who is less likely to gain enough money to blow you up later. No matter what is done, it will be ugly sooner or later.

Edited by Gump

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently IS recently beheaded an American journalist.

I'd support sending them free birth control.

Edited by Gump

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes we did.This was an epic Bush fuck up and the reason you should never vote for a republican!

We will be paying for his stupidity for decades.

And Obama is the reason why you should never vote for a democrat!  We will be paying for his bs for decades!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Obama is the reason why you should never vote for a democrat!  We will be paying for his bs for decades!

You're probably right,and where does that leave us...we desperately need to get rid of the two party system.They are just two sides of the same coin.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're probably right,and where does that leave us...we desperately need to get rid of the two party system.They are just two sides of the same coin.

Ding, ding, ding...... We have a winner!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're probably right,and where does that leave us...we desperately need to get rid of the two party system.They are just two sides of the same coin.

Absolutely.  Campaign reform should have occurred before healthcare reform, imho.  But problem is, the people needing to make those changes are the ones who are going to lose benefits.....the politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say don't get sucked into fighting them wit "boots on the ground"...won't work...use air power, and drones..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say don't get sucked into fighting them wit "boots on the ground"...won't work...use air power, and drones..

 

Our troops will be getting sucked back in unfortunately, I really really fear that. They are already starting to be deployed, it is just not common knowledge yet. I agree that with massive air strikes we could inflict some serious damage, but we would also inflict allot of collateral damage which is what we always try to avoid. I say just arm everyone to the teeth over there who may be against ISIL, let them all fight it out and we will offer air support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say just arm everyone to the teeth over there who may be against ISIL, let them all fight it out and we will offer air support.

That's how isis got started in the first place.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These types of fights are unwinnable the United States public cannot handle or stomach what is needed to be done to win them. Maybe after they manage to nuke one of our major cities things will change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting is that islamic state is fighting an attack and hold territory war. That's a game the U.S. and other western militaries are pretty good at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure we're going to clean house in Syria soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

British news is claiming the US has made the decision to hit selected targets in Syria.

Also interested in tightening the Syria-Turkey border. Britain wants that also.

Edited by ReconRat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just stay out!

We really should learn something from history,especially recent history...it's a hell of a lot easier getting in than getting out,and we usually leave it worse than we found it.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting is that islamic state is fighting an attack and hold territory war. That's a game the U.S. and other western militaries are pretty good at.

 

Because they want an Islamic State.  It's right in their name.  They happened to go after the low-hanging fruit with the Sunni bloc that was being disenfranchised by the current Iraqi government, they sure as hell didn't want to fight for Maliki so they immediately surrendered and accepted ISIS rule.  The Kurds to the NE and the Syrians, on the other hand, is a completely different story.  The Kurds know with the power vacuum that this is basically the closest they've gotten to self-sufficiency in quite a long time, so when you have the "barbarians at the door" in the form of ISIS, the Peshmerga wanted to set an example that they are not to be fucked with, and I believe have done so.

 

I'm pretty sure we're going to clean house in Syria soon.

 

Not going to happen.  Syria is a Russian ally, and there's lots of Russian assets in the country.  If we were really going to clean house, we would have done it when we had the international backing following the chemical weapons attacks.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smarter people than all of us can't figure this one out either. Obstain? Innocents die, they grow powerful, Isreal is destroyed, US is in jeopardy. Invade? Who do we replace the current regimes with? The only thing the unsettled populace reasons with is fear. Then replacing bad with worse. I can't even begin to armchair quarterback this one.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only solution is a superpower taking over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they want an Islamic State. It's right in their name. They happened to go after the low-hanging fruit with the Sunni bloc that was being disenfranchised by the current Iraqi government, they sure as hell didn't want to fight for Maliki so they immediately surrendered and accepted ISIS rule. The Kurds to the NE and the Syrians, on the other hand, is a completely different story. The Kurds know with the power vacuum that this is basically the closest they've gotten to self-sufficiency in quite a long time, so when you have the "barbarians at the door" in the form of ISIS, the Peshmerga wanted to set an example that they are not to be fucked with, and I believe have done so.

Not going to happen. Syria is a Russian ally, and there's lots of Russian assets in the country. If we were really going to clean house, we would have done it when we had the international backing following the chemical weapons attacks.

I thought they were going after IS in Syria, pending airstrikes. What exactly is Russia's stance on IS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smarter people than all of us can't figure this one out either. Obstain? Innocents die, they grow powerful, Isreal is destroyed, US is in jeopardy. Invade? Who do we replace the current regimes with? The only thing the unsettled populace reasons with is fear. Then replacing bad with worse. I can't even begin to armchair quarterback this one.

If you think Israel is getting taken out by isis, you don't have any idea how much we've built Israel's military.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×