Maybe Beheading Isn't So Bad After All

[JohnStOnge]

And if they were let at them ISIS would be absolutely slaughtered. Total mismatch.

Meanwhile... 14 years later in Afghanistan...

Here's the thing: People in the West need to understand that this is a long term situation. This stuff of thinking in terms of "get in and get out" isn't going to work. The enemy does not put time limits on itself. And we have created a situation that gives them hope because we think we can operate in terms of timelines. The enemy doesn't care if it takes 1,000 years, 2,000 years, 3,000 years, whatever.

And the fact that we in the west think that 14 years is long time is the only thing that gives them a chance because otherwise they wouldn't have one. They are hopelessly outclassed in terms of actual capability.

14 years is not a long time. And we shouldn't even be thinking like that. We should be thinking in terms of doing what we need to do for as long as we need to do it. We should not be thinking in terms of endpoints or in terms of thinking that military efforts need to have some definable end in terms of time. The job is done when the job is done. And if it's never done in terms of maintaining a constant effort to suppress the problem for an indefinite period that's the way it is.

Again, the fact that we can't come to grips with that is what gives the enemy a chance. It's like controlling rats or cockroaches. They will always be with us. You don't think in terms of saying, "OK, we're going to go ALL out to defeat the cockroaches for five years and then we can stop." No. You continue to do what you need to do to control the cockroaches.

[Skjellyfetti]

You're right - but, don't be so blase about sending in our troops and say that we'd "slaughter" them. Certainly makes it seem like you think it would be a short term situation.

Also, makes it seem like you would be ok with us beheading them, burning them alive, etc. as long as it accomplished the objective. Would you? I know you've suggested carpet bombing the region...

[Grizalltheway]

I would be willing to bet that if someone would do a poll of the US Military right now the results would show that the overwhelming majority of members of it want at those ISIS guys right now. They probably have for a while but at this point I'd bet it's really getting intense. I think they'd really love to kick some ISIS ass at this point. Full bore.

I think they'd love to say, "You wanted the US Military, assholes? You've got it."

And if they were let at them ISIS would be absolutely slaughtered. Total mismatch.

But, alas, we have a Pussy in the White House.

How did the tough guy cowboy who preceded him do?
You are completely detached from reality.

[YoUDeeMan]

I would be willing to bet that if someone would do a poll of the US Military right now the results would show that the overwhelming majority of members of it want at those ISIS guys right now. They probably have for a while but at this point I'd bet it's really getting intense. I think they'd really love to kick some ISIS ass at this point. Full bore.

I think they'd love to say, "You wanted the US Military, assholes? You've got it."

And if they were let at them ISIS would be absolutely slaughtered. Total mismatch.

But, alas, we have a Pussy in the White House.

How did the tough guy cowboy who preceded him do?
You are completely detached from reality.

My guess is that Bush killed more bad guys than Obama...so what is your point?

[YoUDeeMan]

BTW, I am not sure why anyone is upset about ISIS killing a Jordanian pilot...even in a supposedly cruel way.

The pilot was part of an air force coalition, and a foreign one, that is killing many Syrian and Iraqi ISIS members. ISIS should kill the pilot...and they should send a message that other pilots will die if they continue to attack ISIS. Heck, if I were ISIS, I'd be targeting every air field in the area...and around the world. I'd start taking down passenger planes at airports, blowing up trains, (passenger trains, freight trains, anything on wheels).

The thing is, if you are at war with a superior enemy force, you use whatever way necessary to inflict casualties on the enemy. They can't fight us head to head (or, as that clown Joe Biden said, mano-a-mano), so why try? Hit us where it hurts...hospitals, schools, sporting events...anywhere where we are defenseless.

We are trying to kill them...but somehow we expect them to fight a fair war?

[Ibanez]

So Jordan has begun the executions....

[Chizzang]

BTW, I am not sure why anyone is upset about ISIS killing a Jordanian pilot...even in a supposedly cruel way.

The pilot was part of an air force coalition, and a foreign one, that is killing many Syrian and Iraqi ISIS members. ISIS should kill the pilot...and they should send a message that other pilots will die if they continue to attack ISIS. Heck, if I were ISIS, I'd be targeting every air field in the area...and around the world. I'd start taking down passenger planes at airports, blowing up trains, (passenger trains, freight trains, anything on wheels).

The thing is, if you are at war with a superior enemy force, you use whatever way necessary to inflict casualties on the enemy. They can't fight us head to head (or, as that clown Joe Biden said, mano-a-mano), so why try? Hit us where it hurts...hospitals, schools, sporting events...anywhere where we are defenseless.

We are trying to kill them...but somehow we expect them to fight a fair war?

This ^ is the unpublished reality of where we are right now in the world....
Well said Cluckster

[Ibanez]

Meanwhile... 14 years later in Afghanistan...

Here's the thing: People in the West need to understand that this is a long term situation. This stuff of thinking in terms of "get in and get out" isn't going to work. The enemy does not put time limits on itself. And we have created a situation that gives them hope because we think we can operate in terms of timelines. The enemy doesn't care if it takes 1,000 years, 2,000 years, 3,000 years, whatever.

And the fact that we in the west think that 14 years is long time is the only thing that gives them a chance because otherwise they wouldn't have one. They are hopelessly outclassed in terms of actual capability.

14 years is not a long time. And we shouldn't even be thinking like that. We should be thinking in terms of doing what we need to do for as long as we need to do it. We should not be thinking in terms of endpoints or in terms of thinking that military efforts need to have some definable end in terms of time. The job is done when the job is done. And if it's never done in terms of maintaining a constant effort to suppress the problem for an indefinite period that's the way it is.

Again, the fact that we can't come to grips with that is what gives the enemy a chance. It's like controlling rats or cockroaches. They will always be with us. You don't think in terms of saying, "OK, we're going to go ALL out to defeat the cockroaches for five years and then we can stop." No. You continue to do what you need to do to control the cockroaches.

Spare us the lecture. Total war. We aren't fighting a total war. That is the only way to fight. Sherman knew it. Jackson knew it. Alexander the Great, Rommell, Patton, etc...they knew it.

[Ibanez]

BTW, I am not sure why anyone is upset about ISIS killing a Jordanian pilot...even in a supposedly cruel way.

The pilot was part of an air force coalition, and a foreign one, that is killing many Syrian and Iraqi ISIS members. ISIS should kill the pilot...and they should send a message that other pilots will die if they continue to attack ISIS. Heck, if I were ISIS, I'd be targeting every air field in the area...and around the world. I'd start taking down passenger planes at airports, blowing up trains, (passenger trains, freight trains, anything on wheels).

The thing is, if you are at war with a superior enemy force, you use whatever way necessary to inflict casualties on the enemy. They can't fight us head to head (or, as that clown Joe Biden said, mano-a-mano), so why try? Hit us where it hurts...hospitals, schools, sporting events...anywhere where we are defenseless.

We are trying to kill them...but somehow we expect them to fight a fair war?

But they are meanies!!!!!!!!!!!

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

I would be willing to bet that if someone would do a poll of the US Military right now the results would show that the overwhelming majority of members of it want at those ISIS guys right now. They probably have for a while but at this point I'd bet it's really getting intense. I think they'd really love to kick some ISIS ass at this point. Full bore.

I think they'd love to say, "You wanted the US Military, assholes? You've got it."

And if they were let at them ISIS would be absolutely slaughtered. Total mismatch.

But, alas, we have a Pussy in the White House.

How did the tough guy cowboy who preceded him do?
You are completely detached from reality.

I TOTALLY remember all the ISIS beheading when Bush was in office...............it happened almost never.

Maybe andy isnt so bad after all

[Grizalltheway]

How did the tough guy cowboy who preceded him do?
You are completely detached from reality.

I TOTALLY remember all the ISIS beheading when Bush was in office...............it happened almost never.

Maybe andy isnt so bad after all

Do you remember the 3,000 civilians who died on Bush's watch?
Andy is a genius compared to you.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

http://allenbwest.com/2014/02/us-milita ... ket-obama/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

http://allenbwest.com/2014/02/us-milita ... ket-obama/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[kalm]

http://allenbwest.com/2014/02/us-milita ... ket-obama/

ONE link to Allen West is one too many.

[andy7171]

Me thinks ISIS has a plan of what they think they want to do. What with this being release the day of King Abdullah being at the White House. Not really sure what that plan is though. It doesn't make sense to me why ISIS is killing other Muslins. I would think they would want to get everyone on their side.

We nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki to avoid years of going island to island and onto Honshu and incurring massive casualties to our own soldiers. MacArthur was fired wanting to use weapons in our arsenal to desicively win battles in Korea. That tactic has been removed from the field of battle.
Until we decide that killing the innocent civilians that ISIS is hiding amongst is better than having our own soldiers die and/or suffer loss of limb/sight/mind/ect in a never ending scenario, what we have today will continue.
What I do know, this president is not going to make that call.

[andy7171]

http://allenbwest.com/2014/02/us-milita ... ket-obama/

ONE link to Allen West is one too many.

Racist-fuck!

[Ibanez]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/after ... le/2559770" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Members of the House Armed Services Committee met with Jordan's King Abdullah Tuesday not long after news broke that ISIS had burned to death a Jordanian pilot captured in the fight against the terrorist group. In a private session with lawmakers, the king showed an extraordinary measure of anger — anger which he expressed by citing American movie icon Clint Eastwood.

"He said there is going to be retribution like ISIS hasn't seen," said Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter Jr., a Marine Corps veteran of two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan, who was in the meeting with the king. "He mentioned 'Unforgiven' and he mentioned Clint Eastwood, and he actually quoted a part of the movie."

[YoUDeeMan]

Me thinks ISIS has a plan of what they think they want to do. What with this being release the day of King Abdullah being at the White House. Not really sure what that plan is though. It doesn't make sense to me why ISIS is killing other Muslins. I would think they would want to get everyone on their side.

We nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki to avoid years of going island to island and onto Honshu and incurring massive casualties to our own soldiers. MacArthur was fired wanting to use weapons in our arsenal to desicively win battles in Korea. That tactic has been removed from the field of battle.
Until we decide that killing the innocent civilians that ISIS is hiding amongst is better than having our own soldiers die and/or suffer loss of limb/sight/mind/ect in a never ending scenario, what we have today will continue.
What I do know, this president is not going to make that call.

We've killed many innocent civilians in our bombing attacks..we just prefer to limit the reporting of that number.

In fact, Obama didn't like the reported number of civilians killed in our drone attacks, so he simply decided to change the way we count civilian casualties. I'm not making this up...Obama's administration decided that anyone of military age (not specifically defined) that is killed in a US attack is a militant.

Why? Well, the thinking goes that if anyone is in the area of one of our attacks, they are, "probably up to no good."



This is a good article about the change:

"The Times’ report also reveals that President Obama personally authorised a broadening of the term ‘civilian’, helping to limit any public controversy over ‘non-combatant’ deaths."

http://www.juancole.com/2012/05/how-oba ... woods.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also...

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/06/ ... -zone.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



This article, from July 2011, investigated 10 drone attacks in the previous year and found 45 civilian deaths, despite the Administration declaring that there were no civilian casualties.

"Claims by President Obama’s chief counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan that ‘there hasn’t been a single collateral [civilian] death’ in Pakistan since August 2010 are found to be untrue today, following a major Bureau investigation.

According to Brennan, Barack Obama himself has ‘insisted’ that US drone strikes are ‘exceptionally surgical and precise’ and ‘do not put… innocent men, women and children in danger’.

Yet a detailed examination by the Bureau of 116 CIA ‘secret’ drone strikes in Pakistan since August 2010 has uncovered at least 10 individual attacks in which 45 or more civilians appear to have died.

The Bureau has identified and can provide the family names for, six children among those killed."

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/20 ... e-strikes/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...but Obama says we're only killing the bad guys.

[Ibanez]

Me thinks ISIS has a plan of what they think they want to do. What with this being release the day of King Abdullah being at the White House. Not really sure what that plan is though. It doesn't make sense to me why ISIS is killing other Muslins. I would think they would want to get everyone on their side.

We nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki to avoid years of going island to island and onto Honshu and incurring massive casualties to our own soldiers. MacArthur was fired wanting to use weapons in our arsenal to desicively win battles in Korea. That tactic has been removed from the field of battle.
Until we decide that killing the innocent civilians that ISIS is hiding amongst is better than having our own soldiers die and/or suffer loss of limb/sight/mind/ect in a never ending scenario, what we have today will continue.
What I do know, this president is not going to make that call.

We've killed many innocent civilians in our bombing attacks..we just prefer to limit the reporting of that number.

In fact, Obama didn't like the reported number of civilians killed in our drone attacks, so he simply decided to change the way we count civilian casualties. I'm not making this up...Obama's administration decided that anyone of military age (not specifically defined) that is killed in a US attack is a militant.

Why? Well, the thinking goes that if anyone is in the area of one of our attacks, they are, "probably up to no good."



This is a good article about the change:

"The Times’ report also reveals that President Obama personally authorised a broadening of the term ‘civilian’, helping to limit any public controversy over ‘non-combatant’ deaths."

http://www.juancole.com/2012/05/how-oba ... woods.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also...

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/06/ ... -zone.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



This article, from July 2011, investigated 10 drone attacks in the previous year and found 45 civilian deaths, despite the Administration declaring that there were no civilian casualties.

"Claims by President Obama’s chief counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan that ‘there hasn’t been a single collateral [civilian] death’ in Pakistan since August 2010 are found to be untrue today, following a major Bureau investigation.

According to Brennan, Barack Obama himself has ‘insisted’ that US drone strikes are ‘exceptionally surgical and precise’ and ‘do not put… innocent men, women and children in danger’.

Yet a detailed examination by the Bureau of 116 CIA ‘secret’ drone strikes in Pakistan since August 2010 has uncovered at least 10 individual attacks in which 45 or more civilians appear to have died.

The Bureau has identified and can provide the family names for, six children among those killed."

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/20 ... e-strikes/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...but Obama says we're only killing the bad guys.

Obama is using the "guilty by association" rationale, meaning, you're guilty b/c your Arab/Brown/In the building/Breathing/etc...

[kalm]

Me thinks ISIS has a plan of what they think they want to do. What with this being release the day of King Abdullah being at the White House. Not really sure what that plan is though. It doesn't make sense to me why ISIS is killing other Muslins. I would think they would want to get everyone on their side.

We nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki to avoid years of going island to island and onto Honshu and incurring massive casualties to our own soldiers. MacArthur was fired wanting to use weapons in our arsenal to desicively win battles in Korea. That tactic has been removed from the field of battle.
Until we decide that killing the innocent civilians that ISIS is hiding amongst is better than having our own soldiers die and/or suffer loss of limb/sight/mind/ect in a never ending scenario, what we have today will continue.
What I do know, this president is not going to make that call.

We've killed many innocent civilians in our bombing attacks..we just prefer to limit the reporting of that number.

In fact, Obama didn't like the reported number of civilians killed in our drone attacks, so he simply decided to change the way we count civilian casualties. I'm not making this up...Obama's administration decided that anyone of military age (not specifically defined) that is killed in a US attack is a militant.

Why? Well, the thinking goes that if anyone is in the area of one of our attacks, they are, "probably up to no good."



This is a good article about the change:

"The Times’ report also reveals that President Obama personally authorised a broadening of the term ‘civilian’, helping to limit any public controversy over ‘non-combatant’ deaths."

http://www.juancole.com/2012/05/how-oba ... woods.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also...

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/06/ ... -zone.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



This article, from July 2011, investigated 10 drone attacks in the previous year and found 45 civilian deaths, despite the Administration declaring that there were no civilian casualties.

"Claims by President Obama’s chief counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan that ‘there hasn’t been a single collateral [civilian] death’ in Pakistan since August 2010 are found to be untrue today, following a major Bureau investigation.

According to Brennan, Barack Obama himself has ‘insisted’ that US drone strikes are ‘exceptionally surgical and precise’ and ‘do not put… innocent men, women and children in danger’.

Yet a detailed examination by the Bureau of 116 CIA ‘secret’ drone strikes in Pakistan since August 2010 has uncovered at least 10 individual attacks in which 45 or more civilians appear to have died.

The Bureau has identified and can provide the family names for, six children among those killed."

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/20 ... e-strikes/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...but Obama says we're only killing the bad guys.

It's an extremist creation machine.

[bluehenbillk]

Me thinks ISIS has a plan of what they think they want to do. What with this being release the day of King Abdullah being at the White House. Not really sure what that plan is though. It doesn't make sense to me why ISIS is killing other Muslins. I would think they would want to get everyone on their side.

We nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki to avoid years of going island to island and onto Honshu and incurring massive casualties to our own soldiers. MacArthur was fired wanting to use weapons in our arsenal to desicively win battles in Korea. That tactic has been removed from the field of battle.
Until we decide that killing the innocent civilians that ISIS is hiding amongst is better than having our own soldiers die and/or suffer loss of limb/sight/mind/ect in a never ending scenario, what we have today will continue.
What I do know, this president is not going to make that call.

Spot on Andy. I watched the video this morning on Fox News - I think they still have a link to it on their site. People brought up 14 years & whether that's too long or not long enough. You want to make a statement - I'm with Andy - nuclear weapons aren't worth anything if you don't use them occasionally. Not too many places in the Middle East that I'd miss - so just light em up!

[Ibanez]

Me thinks ISIS has a plan of what they think they want to do. What with this being release the day of King Abdullah being at the White House. Not really sure what that plan is though. It doesn't make sense to me why ISIS is killing other Muslins. I would think they would want to get everyone on their side.

We nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki to avoid years of going island to island and onto Honshu and incurring massive casualties to our own soldiers. MacArthur was fired wanting to use weapons in our arsenal to desicively win battles in Korea. That tactic has been removed from the field of battle.
Until we decide that killing the innocent civilians that ISIS is hiding amongst is better than having our own soldiers die and/or suffer loss of limb/sight/mind/ect in a never ending scenario, what we have today will continue.
What I do know, this president is not going to make that call.

Spot on Andy. I watched the video this morning on Fox News - I think they still have a link to it on their site. People brought up 14 years & whether that's too long or not long enough. You want to make a statement - I'm with Andy - nuclear weapons aren't worth anything if you don't use them occasionally. Not too many places in the Middle East that I'd miss - so just light em up!

http://video.foxnews.com/v/403058397700 ... show-clips" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[andy7171]

I realize that we've killed innocent civilians over the last 14 years, I used to hear about it more when that other guy was in office though. What I was alluding to was exterminating an entire city at once. And again. and again. Until this shit stops.
The problem is the Japs cared about their own people, and these fucker don't.

Unfortunately, I think we'll have to endure one, or more, strikes at the homeland to get the cowards in DC(both sides) to have enough nerve to think they have enough people behind them to push the button.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

[LeadBolt]

Andy for President!