Just below the lowest of the low and I think a dignified and sickened world has completely had enough

Let the obliteration begin....

 

Low grade nukes -< 5 kilotons are in the US arsenal for deployment by their field artillery in Syria
Precise accuracy is achievable from a standard howitzer.
Time for these ****** to be taught a lesson by the west.

 

Jordan didn't **** about, two ISIS hostages have been executed in retaliation.

http://news.sky.com/story/1420872/ir...-murders-pilot

I'm all for killing every ISIS member in captivity TBH.

 

It's a horrifying piece of slick theater designed to recruit.

 

Yes the UK and America do have a lot to answer for, they're all as bad as one another in my eyes, I'm sure plenty of innocent Iraqis were burned to death by bombs being dropped from 10,000 feet, but somehow most seem able to overlook that and forget that it's the greed and corruption of the west that has led to this current situation, we should have left Saddam to it. So now some of the people on this thread want us to go back again.

No lessons learnt whatsoever.

 

How long are you going to give ISIS this excuse for?

 

Just point me to the text I have written that gives them an excuse.

They're all as bad as one and other, ie, no difference in my eyes, burning someone to death from 10 feet or 10,000 feet the end result is the same.

 

This ^^^^^ and of course it's exactly what ISIS want.

If we go in all guns blazing the collateral damage will be huge (civilian lives) as they are not all neatly corralled in a single place, they are deliberately spread out amongst people who are basically hostages. They die for the cause and become 'martyrs' which just fuels more extremism towards the West and the whole sorry cycle repeats.

Bear in mind that when we went into Afghanistan to eliminate the Taliban there were estimated to be about 5000 Taliban, today they number 30,000..... all we do with these missions is fuel the hatred towards the West and moderate Islam and the extremists take it out on their own people as well as us.

The answer for me has to involve the neighbouring countries putting aside their differences and working together to remove the ISIS threat piece by piece, but we are a long way off that.

 

We've been down this route before and look where it got us. I don't see how sending in our troops will solve or make the situation any better. We are not allies of Syria and we could find our troops fighting both IS and the Syrian Army. As long as IS are there trying to establish a caliphate, they are contained, if we send in troops and drive out IS terrorists, who knows where they would disperse to and risk dragging western forces in to another long and drawn out guerilla war with IS and a possible confrontation with Syrian forces. Use drones and precision arial bombardment to limit their spread and their abilities. You can't defeat an ideology with military force.

 

Politics trump a non-existent Human Rights Act in Jordan.
A popular decision in Jordan no doubt. And with some of those watching from outside that have to operate with more restraint.

 

The vast majority were killed by extremists, yet you failed even mention this.

If you want to talk about population displacement go look at what is happening in Syria, where we did nothing.

 

What do you mean by "extremists", Martin?

 

lol, you are so unbelievably transparent

presumably you trying to hammer home the simple message Islam = Extremism

I see you do it on every thread

 

Sir richard dannett said we uk should send in the army and **** them up bombs are doing very little fight them face to face and they will lose.

 

Its one tribe against another ffs

 

Will there ever be a right answer?? ........probably not!! Ultimately damned if we do and damned if we don't....

.....religion and money.....root of all evil.....

 

Clash of ideologies, the world is being westernised through globalisation and Islamists don't like it. Foreign policy is just one of many catalysts and by no means the fundamental reason. It's an excuse.

 

I think we ought to start calling Jihadis Jihadis and drop this appeasing and dishonest moniker that's thrown about to protect Islam's sensibilities i.e. 'extremists'. It's as bad as the use of the word 'moderate' to describe apathetic and nominal Muslims. People believe (or want to believe) that the latter are the true Muslims and the former are a perversion of the ideology, when the reality is that the inverse is true when dealing with Salafists and their ilk. Let's start dealing with the obvious truth.

 

Theres Muslims the world over , they're not all intent on enforcing sharia

 

*****

 

You mean there are nominal, apathetic Muslims.

 

That bloke on the tv show last leg got it spot on with his stats not sure what he said but something like 0000.3 percent out of 1.6 billion are warped into islamic ideology.

 

How can you beat an ideology? Guns and bombs certaintly aren't the answer.

 

Incredibly difficult, isn't it? Love is the answer, but I'm unsure how that plays out in practical terms. One hopes and prays that the hearts of the jihadis will be softened and that they'll turn away from evil. We need a miracle.

 

And how many of the remainder are in a grey area of varying sympathy?

 

This.
When it comes to our wars overseas, concern for the victims is limited to Our troops. When concern for the innocent native populations is expressed through the MSM it tends to be more strategic than empathetic, the Jordanian fighter pilot is just one horrific publicised death ,we are talking women, children, babies blown to pieces by our governments another 4million refuges,the health effects of war.
We are now sowing what we reap, ISIS was trained and funded by the US.
I'm my eyes the west is more barbaric than ISIS could ever be.

 

A text book doesn't provide all the answers.

 

It must be so incredibly stressful for him just walking down the street

Knowing everyone them muzzies is potentially wearing a bomb

 

To poach a line from Al Gore, it's an Incovenient Truth.
You certainly cannot beat ideology with bullets. The more you fight a belief, the more attractive it becomes as a cause celebre.

 

You aren't taking into consideration that Bashad's chemical stock pile was/is real and now at leat some if not most of it is in the hands of ISIS. That is fact, not debatable iffy inteligence on whether it exists or not like Saddam's WMD's were. The only question on that fact now is how capable are ISIS in making use of it hence the active operations against their known recruited chemical weapons engineers, the main one who has already been killed by a drone strike. They aren't going after them for nothing, there is a credible threat there and any chemical weapons developed will be used on foreign soil as they have no need for it on home turf.

How long does the World sit back and wait before it gets bad enough to go in and take more proactive action against them? Wait for that very terrorist attack to happen? Won't there then be cries of why wasn't something done sooner?

ISIS may not be in one place or a conventional army wearing a uniform complying with the Geneva Convention however it is known where their strongholds are, where there main bases of operations are and these need destroying and air strikes aren't being effective enough. What do you do then, just sit back and let them continue doing what they are doing and expanding further and further afield allowing them to increase in power and size?

They should have been crushed before they ever got this big and the World sat back and let them grow, letting them continue to do so in my opinion is a huge misjudgement.