Jordan to ISIS: Kill our pilot, your bitches get hanged!

[xfire]

http://www.newsweek.com/4000-strong-christian-militia-formed-fight-isis-northern-iraq-304371

4,000-Strong Christian Militia Formed to Fight ISIS in Northern Iraq

Thousands of Iraqi Christians have established their own militia and are training to fight the Islamic State (ISIS) in the Nineveh Plains of northern Iraq.

The Nineveh Plains Protection Units (NPU) has 3,000 Assyrian Christian men registered to be trained, while another 500 are already training for combat. The militia was founded by the Iraqi political party, the Assyrian Democratic Movement.

Another 500 volunteers from the group are already situated in Assyrian villages in northern Iraq, the majority of which were captured by ISIS when they marched across the country last summer. Approximately 30,000 Christians have since fled the Nineveh Plains for fear of falling into the hands of the radical Islamists.

(more at the link)

Welcome to the age of the New Crusades, what took these Assyrian Christians so long to enter the fray? The war drums are beating, American boots on the ground isn't a question of if, but when. Is Obama waiting to hand it off to the next president? I don't know, hope that's not the case, but it's going to have to be dealt with sooner or later, and the sooner probably the better. Oooop, there goes the price of gas back up, small problem I suppose, fast track that Keystone motherfucker and start fracking the fuck out of ANWAR, everything's going to be alright. I suggest to my countrymen, now's the time to get back on or get to that fitness regimen you've been pondering since October, fighting a war isn't for the out-of-shape and if those fucks start bringing jihad to our shores just sitting around talking about fighting on the Internet isn't going to be enough.

 

[Jagger69]

I agree totally that we the United States or it's western allies cannot solve this militarily. This is a problem of fanaticism run amok within the Arab world and it is their homegrown problem that is spreading like a disease. The only real hope that we have is that countries like Saudi Arabia, Jordan now that ISIS have made it clear that they don't mind killing Muslims either in the most brutal ways imaginable, will take a stand against this and deal with it accordingly in a manner in which they see fit. ISIS' main goal is to destabilize the Middle East even more. We can't act even tit for tat but other Arab countries can and judging by Jordan's response yesterday they will. Believe me, I have some real problems with Saudi Arabia specifically and their implementation of justice as it translates to Islamic law. That said, if Islamic countries want to deal with it in their own special way I am willing to look the other way when it comes to dealing with these bastards. Better them to deal with it than us, and maybe now it will start happening. It is the only other option I can see at the moment.

I wouldn't have a problem with that approach if it had any chance of coming to fruition. However, right now, letting Jordan take care of them is the plan? What other Muslim nations would join that fight?

Because they (the leftists) have their priorities fucked up. If you can't call a spade a spade, what are you supposed to call it? Seriously, what does he think this achieves? The only thing it does is strengthen the belief that he is a weak president. Why do you suppose the prisoners in Guantanamo receive Korans and prayer rugs? Because we have a freedom of religion? No, that's not it. It's because they're Islamists.

How do you segue from "they" to "he" with no data to bridge the gap? Again I will ask, what is your plan? If you don't have one, you're simply complaining. How do we defeat these assholes? What would you do differently than is currently being done?

His failures, including a failure to identify what we're fighting against are tying our hands behind our backs.

So....Islam is the enemy then? OK....under that premise, how do you deal with Muslims wherever they are encountered? Deportation? Incarceration? Genocide? No exceptions ala a "Final Solution" approach? If none of these, what then?

It's time to terrorize them.

OK. How? Details please.

 

[sean miguel]

OK. How? Details please.

Kinetic energy.

 

[zeeblofowl_1969]

Kinetic energy.

Round up the radical clerics and ALL of their underlings cutting their heads off and throwing their corpses into the sea.
Without this pipeline of misled youth they cannot sustain their numbers.
Again I hate that this is how the world works but this is a cold hard reality and if you want change to come you must embrace it for they certainly have.

 

[Jack Davenport]

I wouldn't have a problem with that approach if it had any chance of coming to fruition. However, right now, letting Jordan take care of them is the plan? What other Muslim nations would join that fight?

The real problem that we have here is that the is the first war that an honest broker will not work. Think about that for a moment, because in every other conflict people have been able to sit down and at least discuss a resolution even if it did not always happen. Of course Jordan can't go it alone and right now, besides the Saudis, I really don't see any others that would join in unless they have been affected like Jordan has. In the grand scheme of things (and I don't want to sound insensitive) it was just one pilot who met a horrific end and the images will start to fade in people's minds and it is back to usual until the next event occurs. That is the thing about terrorism, it is more psychological than anything. kill as many as possible, cool it for a while and kill again when they least expect it. With all of the advances in weaponry. still in the past year the most terrifying weapons are a sword a knife and a flame. So I guess I am saying, short of a war again we will not win this piece meal.

Obama would not commit a significant deployment during his presidency. He wants his legacy to be the president who brought troops home and implemented health care. I am afraid that he will leave that responsibility to the next president. Something else to consider, I believe a president Hillary Clinton would come closer to committing troops in the region than a Jeb Bush. Jeb would have the stigma of the itchy fingered warmongering Bush family and would avoid it at all costs, whereas the first woman president would have to react swiftly as to not look weak.

I have said all that to say this. Shy of nuking them and the innocents that surround them into oblivion there is no solution from our end. We have already witnessed even after a sustained presence in a country how quickly they regroup and reorganize. This is a Muslim problem and it must be solved by Muslims. The only other scenario I can envision that may halt this is one that I hope that I never see and that the world beyond my time on this earth never sees. A nuclear device detonated by the hands of terrorists in a major European or American city will elicit such a response that the world will demand retaliation. So basically we learn to live with the status quo, try and isolate them and hope that beheadings, planes into buildings and pilots on fire is as bad as it gets.

 

[Jagger69]

Round up the radical clerics and ALL of their underlings cutting their heads off and throwing their corpses into the sea.
Without this pipeline of misled youth they cannot sustain their numbers.
Again I hate that this is how the world works but this is a cold hard reality and if you want change to come you must embrace it for they certainly have.

OK. So, who does this? The US Army? Seal Team Six? Jack Bauer? How do they do it....round up the radical clerics that is? Do you see Muslim nations who are under Sharia law allowing this? Would we cross the Iranian frontier in an invasive manner in order to find these radical clerics? What do you think their response would be? How would the Russians react? I understand your anger and desire to respond to the horror that ISIS represents but the solution to this problem is way more complex than your proposal could possibly serve.

The real problem that we have here is that the is the first war that an honest broker will not work. Think about that for a moment, because in every other conflict people have been able to sit down and at least discuss a resolution even if it did not always happen. Of course Jordan can't go it alone and right now, besides the Saudis, I really don't see any others that would join in unless they have been affected like Jordan has. In the grand scheme of things (and I don't want to sound insensitive) it was just one pilot who met a horrific end and the images will start to fade in people's minds and it is back to usual until the next event occurs. That is the thing about terrorism, it is more psychological than anything. kill as many as possible, cool it for a while and kill again when they least expect it. With all of the advances in weaponry. still in the past year the most terrifying weapons are a sword a knife and a flame. So I guess I am saying, short of a war again we will not win this piece meal.

Obama would not commit a significant deployment during his presidency. He wants his legacy to be the president who brought troops home and implemented health care. I am afraid that he will leave that responsibility to the next president. Something else to consider, I believe a president Hillary Clinton would come closer to committing troops in the region than a Jeb Bush. Jeb would have the stigma of the itchy fingered warmongering Bush family and would avoid it at all costs, whereas the first woman president would have to react swiftly as to not look weak.

I have said all that to say this. Shy of nuking them and the innocents that surround them into oblivion there is no solution from our end. We have already witnessed even after a sustained presence in a country how quickly they regroup and reorganize. This is a Muslim problem and it must be solved by Muslims. The only other scenario I can envision that may halt this is one that I hope that I never see and that the world beyond my time on this earth never sees. A nuclear device detonated by the hands of terrorists in a major European or American city will elicit such a response that the world will demand retaliation. So basically we learn to live with the status quo, try and isolate them and hope that beheadings, planes into buildings and pilots on fire is as bad as it gets.

:goodpost:

As awful as it sounds, I completely agree with your viewpoint. It is literally a classic example of Stalin's famous quote "One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.". In the end, you are correct....this is a Muslim issue. The Americans who continue to put themselves in harm's way do so at their own risk. I really don't believe that ISIS is capable of presenting a legitimate military threat to the United States unless we choose to commit our troops to another unwinnable war over there. I don't believe that anyone in the US is capable of putting a solution to this problem in play, unfortunately.

 

[sean miguel]

So basically we learn to live with the status quo, try and isolate them and hope that beheadings, planes into buildings and pilots on fire is as bad as it gets.

That's not acceptable or at least shouldn't be. What we're dealing with (islamic terrorism) is not a new phenomenon the west or even the U.S. has had to face. This is a problem our forefathers were confronted with and the U.S. Marines were tasked to deal with (the shores of Tripoli) in the 1700's. We dealt with another form of religious fanaticism gone from thought to deed in Imperial Japan who worshiped their emperor as a living god. It wasn't until after Japan's total military defeat that their emperor publicly denounced his divinity to his entire nation and the Allied Supreme Commander General MacArthur saw this and was pleased lol.

Is it going to take a couple of nuclear warheads and sending the kaaba stone in mecca into orbit to achieve victory? I sure hope not. If we can take decisive military action against ISIS and then stop trying to topple secular dictators like the Shah of Iran, Saddam, Mubarak, Ghadaffi, Assad, et al. then we could go back to the good 'ol days of the middle east when they just hated us. That's a status quo we can at least live with.

 

[Jack Davenport]

That's not acceptable or at least shouldn't be. What we're dealing with (islamic terrorism) is not a new phenomenon the west or even the U.S. has had to face. This is a problem our forefathers were confronted with and the U.S. Marines were tasked to deal with (the shores of Tripoli) in the 1700's. We dealt with another form of religious fanaticism gone from thought to deed in Imperial Japan who worshiped their emperor as a living god. It wasn't until after Japan's total military defeat that their emperor publicly denounced his divinity to his entire nation and the Allied Supreme Commander General MacArthur saw this and was pleased lol.

Is it going to take a couple of nuclear warheads and sending the kaaba stone in mecca into orbit to achieve victory? I sure hope not. If we can take decisive military action against ISIS and then stop trying to topple secular dictators like the Shah of Iran, Saddam, Mubarak, Ghadaffi, Assad, et al. then we could go back to the good 'ol days of the middle east when they just hated us. That's a status quo we can at least live with.

Well, that is my first choice but war fatigue is a fact of life in this country. And we cannot go it alone. In the past week citizens from other countries have been murdered and not the usual Americans or Brits. They (ISIS) have thrown down the gauntlet to the rest of the world so the rest of the world has to join in to fight them, uintil that happens I am afraid my doomsday scenario or learning to live with the threat are the only options we have. I don't find it acceptable more than I find it to be a harsh reality. If we could get 10 countries to equally commit the same amount of resources and military personnel say around 20,000 each, I believe we would have the credibility and the support to move in and take them out. Talk about your pipe dreams.

 

[Johan]

So what would you do? We've amended our constitution and allowed foreign nationals to run for president, and because you're so charming you won it. President Johan, what would you do about ISIS? Nevermind Al-Qaeda, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, Boko Haram, Ansar Al-Sharia, Al-Shabaab, Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and a host of others all of which would not think twice about committing a mass casualty event including lighting off a nuke in any western city.

I would do nothing. I would say to the all world the tdays when the US acted like fucking world's cops are over and that now on, we won't go at war unless we are attacked.
Such a policy would allow drastic cuts in the defense budget and the money could be used on things that would actually be profitable for the american people.
Also I would end all partnerships with allies that are unclear, such as Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.

 

[Jack Davenport]

 

[Mr. Daystar]

I would do nothing. I would say to the all world the tdays when the US acted like fucking world's cops are over and that now on, we won't go at war unless we are attacked.
Such a policy would allow drastic cuts in the defense budget and the money could be used on things that would actually be profitable for the american people.
Also I would end all partnerships with allies that are unclear, such as Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.

Ya know, that is your one redeeming quality....you, are a funny, funny guy.

 

[Jack Davenport]

Ya know, that is your one redeeming quality....you, are a funny, funny guy.

Since he's French, maybe he could become our Jerry Lewis.

 

[Little Red Wagon Repairman]

Since he's French, maybe he could become our Jerry Lewis.

Jerry Lewis should do telethons for Islamic State. I'd totally watch.

"Thank you for your generous pledges for Jerry's Jihadis!"

 

[Mr. Daystar]

I wouldn't have a problem with that approach if it had any chance of coming to fruition. However, right now, letting Jordan take care of them is the plan? What other Muslim nations would join that fight?

I don't think Jordan will be taking care of anything, or anyone but themselves. It's my opinion that what they are doing is solely for their own revenge...which I have no problem with, but I doubt they will rally any other muslim countries for any actual REAL action. It will all be chest pounding, and hollow words. I don't think the islamic countries really want radical islam to go away...I think they want the USA to pull out of all of their countries, and to exterminate all of the Jews.

 

[sean miguel]

I don't think Jordan will be taking care of anything, or anyone but themselves. It's my opinion that what they are doing is solely for their own revenge...which I have no problem with, but I doubt they will rally any other muslim countries for any actual REAL action. It will all be chest pounding, and hollow words. I don't think the islamic countries really want radical islam to go away...I think they want the USA to pull out of all of their countries, and to exterminate all of the Jews.

^this.

and to exterminate all of the Jews

That's the one thing that would unite them, shiite and sunni alike.

 

[Jack Davenport]

^this.

That's the one thing that would unite them.

Yep. A bit of wishful thinking on my part.

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

So....Islam is the enemy then? OK....under that premise, how do you deal with Muslims wherever they are encountered? Deportation? Incarceration? Genocide? No exceptions ala a "Final Solution" approach? If none of these, what then?

"Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die;
but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world." ~ Winston Churchill

Fanatical muslims crave an atmosphere of strict discipline. They love the close adherence to Islamic doctrine. They live to obey their sacred text. But in their hearts the fanatic fears liberty. Muslim fanatics have never fought for liberty; instead they fight for a theocratic fascism. Muhammad designed Islam to be a great equalizer, to make everyone level with everyone else. Any Muslim who observes the five pillars will be accepted by others as a good Muslim. Nothing more is required of him. Islam does not encourage the sort of deep soul searching and reformation of character which characterizes Christianity and Judaism. Soul searching puts a sharp focus on the individual. Islam was designed to be a mass religious-military movement.

The word Islam means “submission.” The word Muslim means “one who submits.” It is the essence of Islam as a mass movement that has made it a menace to its non-Muslim neighbors down through the centuries.

Islam did not grow so quickly because of the brilliance of its doctrine, which is little more than cut-and-paste of Jewish, Christian and Zoroastrian texts, but because of its corporate structure which was quick to absorb so many people who were living meaningless individual lives. The ideal of Islam is total worldwide submissiveness. Muslim fanatics use the Quran as a blindfold. To sustain his faith he must labor daily to maintain his disbelief in reason and direct observation.

That being said, the best way to deal with ISIS or any other fanatical branch of Islam is to beat them at their own game. Beating the living shit out of them and leaving no doubt that we have the resolve to beat them continuously. These are people willing to burn people alive (It kind of makes waterboarding look tame in comparison, doesn't it?); willing to defile female Christians with their own religious icons (I've seen a few pictures and it's horrifying); these people are willing to take young boys and girls and either indoctrinate them or crucify them or bury them alive.

I'm not suggesting we should commit war crimes on a grand scale but this isn't a sovereign nation we're dealing with. The Geneva accords don't come into play when you're dealing with people who willingly disregard common humanity on a wholesale level. A little dirty fighting is called for. Letting them know we'll be dipping bullets in pig's blood would do a lot to demoralize them.

 

[Little Red Wagon Repairman]

John Sununu just weighed in on Greta. I've missed him. Seemed a bit decaffeinated tonight.

"You shut your whore mouth when John Sununu is talking!"

 

[Jagger69]

I don't think Jordan will be taking care of anything, or anyone but themselves. It's my opinion that what they are doing is solely for their own revenge...which I have no problem with, but I doubt they will rally any other muslim countries for any actual REAL action. It will all be chest pounding, and hollow words. I don't think the islamic countries really want radical islam to go away...I think they want the USA to pull out of all of their countries, and to exterminate all of the Jews.

:goodpost:

Yep. Anyone who doesn't want that to happen will expect the USA to make it so and we are war-weary as BC already stated. Any president who once again commits US ground troops to a war in that area will not find much enthusiasm for same and I predict a similar outcome ala Iraq and Afghanistan. It's a no-win situation and could be an Armageddon scenario if things don't fall just right. Sucks donkey balls big time.

 

[Jagger69]

That being said, the best way to deal with ISIS or any other fanatical branch of Islam is to beat them at their own game. Beating the living shit out of them and leaving no doubt that we have the resolve to beat them continuously. These are people willing to burn people alive (It kind of makes waterboarding look tame in comparison, doesn't it?); willing to defile female Christians with their own religious icons (I've seen a few pictures and it's horrifying); these people are willing to take young boys and girls and either indoctrinate them or crucify them or bury them alive.

I'm not suggesting we should commit war crimes on a grand scale but this isn't a sovereign nation we're dealing with. The Geneva accords don't come into play when you're dealing with people who willingly disregard common humanity on a wholesale level. A little dirty fighting is called for. Letting them know we'll be dipping bullets in pig's blood would do a lot to demoralize them.

I don't disagree at all with your premise but you still don't outline how to accomplish it. You want to commit US ground troops to a house-to-house effort to flush these cocksuckers out and get rid of them? Sounds eerily similar to previous strategies that didn't work out. What's that definition of insanity again??