When do we go in and wipe out ISIS? (2 Viewers)

[Leviathan]

My brother served 2 tours in Afghanistan and 2 tours in Iraq. He isn't the same person. I'm sure that applies to many who have served in each and every one our military conflicts.

 

[jonessed]

If stats are to be believed, the suicide rate for our soldiers and vets of the most recent wars is something like 22 per day. That saddens me greatly. Maybe tap the brakes a little on deploying another generation of our young to war until we figure out how to treat them upon return and get that suicide rate way way down.

The age breakdown puts most of those as Vietnam vets.

So? Doesn't change the point he was trying to make. Whether it is one per day (probably the number you found on a google search), or 22, it is too many.

Not necessarily. I was just clarifying the recent wars would include Vietnam (and WW2 actually) and that's the age group most of the suicides are occurring in. Male suicides in general are alarmingly high.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

If stats are to be believed, the suicide rate for our soldiers and vets of the most recent wars is something like 22 per day. That saddens me greatly. Maybe tap the brakes a little on deploying another generation of our young to war until we figure out how to treat them upon return and get that suicide rate way way down.

The age breakdown puts most of those as Vietnam vets.

So? Doesn't change the point he was trying to make. Whether it is one per day (probably the number you found on a google search), or 22, it is too many.

Not necessarily. I was just clarifying the recent wars would include Vietnam (and WW2 actually). Male suicides in general are alarmingly high, especially amongst the elderly.

Veterans suicide rate is about 50% higher than their civilian counterparts.

One interesting fact about veterans suicide rates is that combat veterans are less likely to commit suicide than their non-combat brethren.

 

[jonessed]

If stats are to be believed, the suicide rate for our soldiers and vets of the most recent wars is something like 22 per day. That saddens me greatly. Maybe tap the brakes a little on deploying another generation of our young to war until we figure out how to treat them upon return and get that suicide rate way way down.

The age breakdown puts most of those as Vietnam vets.

So? Doesn't change the point he was trying to make. Whether it is one per day (probably the number you found on a google search), or 22, it is too many.

Not necessarily. I was just clarifying the recent wars would include Vietnam (and WW2 actually). Male suicides in general are alarmingly high, especially amongst the elderly.

Veterans suicide rate is about 50% higher than their civilian counterparts.One interesting fact about veterans suicide rates is that combat veterans are less likely to commit suicide than their non-combat brethren.

I imagine the female rate in the general population pulls it down quite a bit. What's the percentage of females in the military? (Looks like 15%).Here's a good article that does the calculation already:

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/01/16/defense-department-suicides-2013-report/21865977/

That's active-duty though and the rates are higher for the older vets. Little to no PTSD treatment after the war probably plays a lot into that. It's interesting. Makes sense, but not something I would have guessed.

 

[Dickies]

Why don't you join the army?

How old are your kids? I think they can join up at 16 or 17 with your approval?

It's not my path. I'm turning 40, and I missed my chance. But I'm lucky to live in a country filled with dudes who are tougher than I am and who signed up to do specifically and precisely this, who are trained for it, and who and are just DYING for some combat action.

Let those dudes loose on these animals.

Yeah, like I was saying, Captain America types who want to send America's sons and daughters to their deaths are always the best.

Sure there are plenty of guys just "DYING" to deploy again, 15 months on, 15 months off to places where it's 120 during the day in the summer, getting shot at and IED'd by a bunch of crazies. Their families are fine, they'll be back in one piece for sure. They'll miss their kids growing up, they'll get to see their buddies die, they'll probably get PTSD and they'll be stressed out the minute they get back thinking about the next time they have to go. They'll be hungry a lot, bitten by bugs more, shot at some, in danger most of the time, but they are just DYING to be out there.

The 32k documented and 100k estimated wounded warriors form Afghanistan and Iraq need company, plenty of hospital beds available for fresh IED and suicide bomber shrapnel victims. It's all speedboats and super models from there, injured vets just walk into high paying jobs because the same Captain America guy who wanted them to go would love to put them right in there because they are aren't damaged or risky. Because Captain America knows exactly what the vets went through, he understands the skills of the veteran and the value they bring to an operation of any kind.

We also wouldn't have to worry that vets are almost twice as likely to live in poverty than their non military counterparts, or that 50% of those homeless vets are disabled. They'll have good jobs when discharged, people lining up to serve those who served.

We can spend $1.7 trillion on this new war, then dedicate a few billion paying for the disabilities and recovery of all our vets. We wouldn't do it because there is a clear goal, or because America's National Security was threatened, we'd do it because the guy who would never go to war and never would send his son or daughter thinks its best. We'll all make that sacrifice to send Jimmy and Sally to Syria to fight a ground war, what could go wrong?

When Captain and Mrs America are angry their internet connection was lost for 12 minutes, so angry they make a call to the provider and threaten to discontinue, Jimmy and Sally are dodging mortars and bullets. Maybe they'll donate to veteran's organizations, or go to the airport to welcome the troops back home sometime. Or maybe they won't. It's good to be the Captain though, he knows what's best for America.

That's fine. I never said I want a war, or that I want our GI Joes to die. If we don't want to send to war the guys who signed up for the job of going to war, I'm fine with that.

This is your fundamental misunderstanding of the armed forces.

The mission of the Department of Defense is to provide the military forces needed to deter war and to protect the security of our country.

HTH

It's like a bigger, dumber, more arrogant, and much older version of Eminence.

Oh I see. Someone doesn't see your point, insult them. Neat strategy.

Now he's going RBM on us.

 

[cstu]

The solution is ending the rift between the Sunni and Shia Muslims. Easier said than done.

I would actually argue that, in terms of fighting terrorism (and ESPECIALLY in terms of fighting ISIS), that rift has worked to our benefit.

How, exactly, do you come to that conclusion?

Iran is opposed to iSIS, mainly because ISIS is made up of Sunnis and Iran is made up of Shias. The Shiite government in Baghdad is also opposed to ISIS, mainly for the same reason. If all extremist Muslims were either only Sunni or only Shia, it seems to me that the threat to us would be much greater. You know the old saying, the enemy or our enemy...

Sunnis hit the World Trade Center with airliners. Shias bombed the Khobar towers. Sayin'.

The Shia terrorist attacks usually have political goals (the group behind Khobar wanted to overthrow the Saudi government). Shiites are more likely to become progressive because their leaders can interpret the Koran - this is one of the reasons why they are not considered 'true' Muslims by Sunnis. One Shia sect - Ismaili - is extremely progressive and can drink/smoke/etc.

 

[Daywalker]

How is ISIS extracting oil? Isn't that an easy target?

If we didn't care about the oil, sure.

Bombing oil fields runs the risk of an environmental catastrophe.

How does a tanker leave the fields without getting blown up on road?

 

[cstu]

Shia can get a religious leader to give them a temporary marriage (prostitution) and sleep with two chicks at the same time.

 

[msommer]

The solution is ending the rift between the Sunni and Shia Muslims. Easier said than done.

I think that might even make it worse, but those dogs and cats will likely never get along. That argument goes back 14 centuries. Indonesia is the most populous Muslim nation and they probably have the least issues with Islamists. I think the eastern and Hindu influences in the Islam practiced makes a difference, and their existence as an island nation also insulates them from powerful external forces that are easily spread in the ME and Central Asia. The governments willingness to not only tolerate but recognize other faiths is also helpful.

How would it make it worse? Protestant and Catholic Christians eventually worked "things" out, for lack of a better term. Impossible in this case?

Well because a united Islam might not be the best thing for the West. The whole Huntington theory, clash of civilizations and the like.Also Protestants and Catholics still have their issues, and they were killing each other over them in my lifetime. Fortunately religion is dying almost everywhere in Europe, and slowly dying in America. Less religion the better. Need to spread that love to Qatar and Kuwait next. Give up on God people!

Maybe. Sure, I understand that Protestant and Catholic Christians have killed each other in our lifetimes. It seems, to me, that those sects have negotiated a solution sans violence. Can Islam do the same?

Not in my lifetime.

So what is the solution? I've read the "nuke it from orbit" option (ridiculous), and the "let them sort it out" option. Where/how does it end?

People will fight over religion, territory, water, beads, whatever. It never ends as long as we are only using a small portion of our brains.

War...

War never changes

PS The next wars may well be over water, and in the same region...

 

[msommer]

If stats are to be believed, the suicide rate for our soldiers and vets of the most recent wars is something like 22 per day. That saddens me greatly. Maybe tap the brakes a little on deploying another generation of our young to war until we figure out how to treat them upon return and get that suicide rate way way down.

The age breakdown puts most of those as Vietnam vets.

So? Doesn't change the point he was trying to make. Whether it is one per day (probably the number you found on a google search), or 22, it is too many.

Not necessarily. I was just clarifying the recent wars would include Vietnam (and WW2 actually). Male suicides in general are alarmingly high, especially amongst the elderly.

Veterans suicide rate is about 50% higher than their civilian counterparts.

One interesting fact about veterans suicide rates is that combat veterans are less likely to commit suicide than their non-combat brethren.

Could it be that combat vets are more likely to get checked/treated for PTSD?

 

[Short Corner]

Couple ways we can do this. We can drop some more pamphlets and maybe set up some clinics, as these guys continue to blow themselves up in our urban areas. They eventually will be all blowed up, but probably not until they kill off 200 innocents for every 8 or so of the loons.

Another options I we just go in and nuke them into the stratosphere. I guess the question is would we be able to kill less than 200 or so innocents there for every 8 bad guys. Although it's actually a little more complicated than that, right? Because I'd gladly see a bunch of strangers go before my wife and children. So there's some +EV in us getting to choose the innocents that have to go.

Or maybe if we upgrade to the glossy paper for the pamphlets.

Hitler could have used a guy like you.

Or Roosevelt or Churchill. Both bombed German cities.

Oats seems to be endorsing something closer to a 'final solution' than fire bombing a few cities.

When you boil this down to its simplest form, we're at a fork in the road. We can go one way or the other. We can do more, or we can do less. You can debate the degree of more or less, but in the end, that's it, more, or less. Because "what we're doing now" is getting good innocent people in the Western world kilt. But I think people on both sides agree that "the same" ain't working. So it's either less, or more.

I advocate more. Because less is not an option. We can't turn our backs on France when innocent Parisians are mass murdered. We can't overlook the threats these to our major cities these animals put on Youtube. We can't pretend isolationism is a solution or even an option on 2015. It's not. The world is a whole lot smaller than it used to be. That's a fact of life.

So we're left with only one option. More. Does that mean "boots on the ground." Maybe. Maybe it's small special forces platoons with all sorts of surgical strikes and takeovers of the major cities, killing these animals one at a time. Maybe it's a massive coalition ground invasion. Or maybe it's neither: maybe there's no reason we should be killing thousands of our folks at the expense of thousands of their good folks. War is fraught with hard decisions. Maybe the hard decision here is to decimate a few major cities in Syria and Iraq. There's an innocent toll. But that's war.

War is not pretty. War is not fun. War is not what any of us normal human beings want. But it's what these animals bring to our doorstep. And you can say it's because we bombed their stupid dirt huts, but let's be frank, these are people who want us dead simply because we sit around and watch Monday Night Football and eat wings and talk about hot chicks. They want us dead for our way of life. Not because we accidentally killed Ishmael in a raid that popped off Jihadi John and 3 of his best goat-screwing pals. They're bringing this misery and death to our doorstep, based on their ideologies.

Do you think any of us would give a crap otherwise? We'd be in the Yoga Pants thread or the Jamous Winsten thread or that ####ty NBA thread that the current failed iteration of the Gekko alias is polluting. We'd be doing something we would rather do. The ONLY reason we're having this discussion is because these jackknobs keep killing and/or threatening to kill us where we live. If the tables were turned and we could all agree to just leave each other alone? Guess what, we'd be totally cool with it. But these animals would still be trying to kill us.

So yeah. We need less or more. And it seems to me, by process of elimination, we have no choice but more. So rain that fire, baby. Because my girls are too precious to let some spiteful cave dwellers deprive them of their lives or their parents.

END THREAD

Well obviously, when all you have is a hammer and every problem MUST be a nail, the only choice you have is to hammer more or less. The problem here may be a bit more sophisticated than that.

Point of clarification though, are we only eradicating the ISIS members in Iraq and Syria? What about other ME countries? What about the ones in France? Germany? The US? Do we go after those with the same recklesness as we do in Syria? Surely it is worth one American life to rid ourselves of this problem for good. How about 10 American lives? 100? Where do you want to draw the line?

You'll agree with me, won't you, that if we take out of all of ISIS in Syria and Iraq, those implanted in the West and elsewhere will die on the vine, right? No funding, no support, no leadership, no organization to speak of? We can at least agree on that? Please god?

I don't think that those ends will be achieved by the means proposed - not without spawning another generation of radicals that are just as bad if not worse.

This fear of "OMG we're going to make even worse terrorists if we fight the terrorists!" is so irrational.

So is the false dichotomy you are arguing

 

[Jobber]

So here are the Republican suggestions for dealing with ISIS:

1. We need to be sure to mention that they're Islamic. We have to do that every time we speak about them, otherwise we're s bunch of politically correct pansies.

2. We need to get tough with them. This may mean ground troops but probably doesn't. It may mean more bombings or it may not. Much like replacing Obamacare, we can leave the details for later. But Obama is weak and we need to be strong!!

3. No Syrian refugees. They're Muslim and from the Middle East and Arabic, so one of them might be a terrorist. Why take a chance?

Am I missing anything?

Sounds about right. Now give us the Democrat side.

1. Avoid ground troops.

2. Support the Kurds, the Baghdad government, and friendly Syrian Rebels (those who oppose Assad) to combat and contain ISIS- give these groups money, aid, arms, and training.

3. Use information and informants to hopefully learn about terrorist attacks before they happen- that means the NSA gets to do its thing.

4. Identify ISIS leaders and assassinate them through drone attacks or other means.

5. Continue to aid Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, UAE and anyone else we seem to be a friendly "moderate" Muslim country- in this case moderate means anyone not inclined to commit terrorism.

This is the "establishment" Democratic strategy of Obama and Hillary. Bernie Sanders has some different ideas.

All except point 2. Support Assad, IMO. Those moderate groups are fanatics and also themselves want to establish a radical Islamic government. Assad is the better choice.

 

[Short Corner]

Dumb question I'm sure, but with these bomb threats tonight -- how on earth would anybody get a bomb on a plane leaving someplace in America in 2015? The security measures seem (thankfully) really great.

I've never felt safer on a plane than I have this year, for whatever reason.

Outside of an inside job it would be pretty tough, and our airport security isn't nearly as tough as in Germany or the UK.

Germany is more lax IMO. Shoes stay on. Never been to secondary while I get it close to half the time flying the other way. Going through customs on their end is virtually voluntary.

 

[Sabertooth]

Just watched a video of Turkish fans chanting Alluha Akbar during a moment of silence. That's not good. It wasn't 10 guys either, more like a few thousand.

 

[Otis]

Just watched a video of Turkish fans chanting Alluha Akbar during a moment of silence. That's not good. It wasn't 10 guys either, more like a few thousand.

Nuke it. Seriously. Despicable.

 

[dschuler]

Just watched a video of Turkish fans chanting Alluha Akbar during a moment of silence. That's not good. It wasn't 10 guys either, more like a few thousand.

Yeah whoever said it was a few people are blindly following what they have been told.

https://twitter.com/zaidbenjamin/status/666751680583761924

 

[Rove!]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ccdeANvo2bg

 

[Otis]

If stats are to be believed, the suicide rate for our soldiers and vets of the most recent wars is something like 22 per day. That saddens me greatly. Maybe tap the brakes a little on deploying another generation of our young to war until we figure out how to treat them upon return and get that suicide rate way way down.

I'm not rushing to send our boys over there. I'm more on the bomb-it-to-smithereens side at this point, because why should we risk our folks. But it's an option we need to consider. Because I'd rather this war be fought by our trained warriors in the bad guys' homeland than by mothers and kids on 5th Avenue during rush hour. I recognize not everyone has the same personal stake as I do, but there you have it.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

I don't think I ever seriously proposed nuking all of Syria off the map.

I'm more on the bomb-it-to-smithereens side at this point,

 

[The General]

Just watched a video of Turkish fans chanting Alluha Akbar during a moment of silence. That's not good. It wasn't 10 guys either, more like a few thousand.

This was talked about in the other thread and there is some question of what the crowd is chanting. I watched it and couldn't tell what was going on.

If it's true those people are below scum.

If it's not true the person who put that story up, which is the ultimate in clickbait, is a huge ####### who needs a beating.

 

[Otis]

I don't think I ever seriously proposed nuking all of Syria off the map.

I'm more on the bomb-it-to-smithereens side at this point,

Big difference between bombing a city that is widely believed to be our enemies' HQ and indiscriminately nuking an entire country off the map. I'm sorry if that confuses you.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Just watched a video of Turkish fans chanting Alluha Akbar during a moment of silence. That's not good. It wasn't 10 guys either, more like a few thousand.

Nuke it. Seriously. Despicable.

Good internet rule: when you type the words "nuke it", stop, erase it, and go watch some porn.

It's even more offensive when smart folks who should know better use it.

 

[mr roboto]

I could most definitely use the boot camp. But I'm too old and fat to help out much over there. As a younger man, I bet I could have done some damage.

You could be a meat shield for one of the good soldiers.DO MORE. THAT IS THE ONLY OPTION.

You're on board with the mini cheeseburger parachutes, aren't you.

I have no idea what "solution" I prefer. Ideally, there would be a big ISIS meetup somewhere and we could just gas or burn them all but I don't that'll happen.Like you, and probably 99% of this board, I have no idea what the situation is like over there, so ranting like an iTough guy or using up all the internets bandwidth like Tim and his merry band of idiots is pointless.

Turns out they're not planning a big Burning Man event on a giant red X in the desert in Syria. I agree with you, seems like a great solution if it's available. But I don't think it is.

Come on, try at least. It's not an easy exercise. And we don't know crap about crap. I get all that.

But you've got two choices: either withdraw and hope for the best, or get dirty. Which makes more sense to you?

Sorry, three choices. Burgerchutes always a low cost option.

I'd say targeted raids by a coalition. Bomb specific targets. Cut off their money. There isn't a quick fix.Even if you killed all the ones from Syria and Iraq today, there could be an attack tomorrow by their supporters that are all around the world already. Then what? Kill more people in Syria? Bomb some innocents?

Terrorism is here to stay whether it is by ISIS, another group or random nutjobs.

See this defeatist attitude is bull####. I'm not taking Otis' side here but incremental action significantly reducing their power and effectiveness is a great starting point. We don't have to perfectly and surgically remove every individual terrorist to claim we are making strides. Sure there will 'always be terrorists.' But there won't always be groups as strong as Daesh or AQ. And those little cells around the world - they won't do #### if the head of the organization is chopped off.

 

[Chadstroma]

Shia can get a religious leader to give them a temporary marriage (prostitution) and sleep with two chicks at the same time.

That's it? If you were Shia, you'd do two chicks at the same time?

 

[Otis]

I could most definitely use the boot camp. But I'm too old and fat to help out much over there. As a younger man, I bet I could have done some damage.

You could be a meat shield for one of the good soldiers.DO MORE. THAT IS THE ONLY OPTION.

You're on board with the mini cheeseburger parachutes, aren't you.

I have no idea what "solution" I prefer. Ideally, there would be a big ISIS meetup somewhere and we could just gas or burn them all but I don't that'll happen.Like you, and probably 99% of this board, I have no idea what the situation is like over there, so ranting like an iTough guy or using up all the internets bandwidth like Tim and his merry band of idiots is pointless.

Turns out they're not planning a big Burning Man event on a giant red X in the desert in Syria. I agree with you, seems like a great solution if it's available. But I don't think it is.

Come on, try at least. It's not an easy exercise. And we don't know crap about crap. I get all that.

But you've got two choices: either withdraw and hope for the best, or get dirty. Which makes more sense to you?

Sorry, three choices. Burgerchutes always a low cost option.

I'd say targeted raids by a coalition. Bomb specific targets. Cut off their money. There isn't a quick fix.Even if you killed all the ones from Syria and Iraq today, there could be an attack tomorrow by their supporters that are all around the world already. Then what? Kill more people in Syria? Bomb some innocents?

Terrorism is here to stay whether it is by ISIS, another group or random nutjobs.

See this defeatist attitude is bull####. I'm not taking Otis' side here but incremental action significantly reducing their power and effectiveness is a great starting point. We don't have to perfectly and surgically remove every individual terrorist to claim we are making strides.Sure there will 'always be terrorists.' But there won't always be groups as strong as Daesh or AQ. And those little cells around the world - they won't do #### if the head of the organization is chopped off.

This.

By the way, where the heck do these dopes get all this money to fund these organizations? Need to stop the money, take out the leaders and any central organization, and then they're just a bunch of lonely, sexless, angst-filled kids.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Agence France-Presse Verified account ‏@AFP

#BREAKING Lavrov says pre-conditions on Assad departure 'unacceptable' for joining forces against IS

 

[Otis]

Just watched a video of Turkish fans chanting Alluha Akbar during a moment of silence. That's not good. It wasn't 10 guys either, more like a few thousand.

Nuke it. Seriously. Despicable.

Good internet rule: when you type the words "nuke it", stop, erase it, and go watch some porn.

It's even more offensive when smart folks who should know better use it.

The minute a bunch of folks celebrate what happened in Paris, all words become fair game.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I could most definitely use the boot camp. But I'm too old and fat to help out much over there. As a younger man, I bet I could have done some damage.

You could be a meat shield for one of the good soldiers.DO MORE. THAT IS THE ONLY OPTION.

You're on board with the mini cheeseburger parachutes, aren't you.

I have no idea what "solution" I prefer. Ideally, there would be a big ISIS meetup somewhere and we could just gas or burn them all but I don't that'll happen.Like you, and probably 99% of this board, I have no idea what the situation is like over there, so ranting like an iTough guy or using up all the internets bandwidth like Tim and his merry band of idiots is pointless.

Turns out they're not planning a big Burning Man event on a giant red X in the desert in Syria. I agree with you, seems like a great solution if it's available. But I don't think it is.

Come on, try at least. It's not an easy exercise. And we don't know crap about crap. I get all that.

But you've got two choices: either withdraw and hope for the best, or get dirty. Which makes more sense to you?

Sorry, three choices. Burgerchutes always a low cost option.

I'd say targeted raids by a coalition. Bomb specific targets. Cut off their money. There isn't a quick fix.Even if you killed all the ones from Syria and Iraq today, there could be an attack tomorrow by their supporters that are all around the world already. Then what? Kill more people in Syria? Bomb some innocents?

Terrorism is here to stay whether it is by ISIS, another group or random nutjobs.

See this defeatist attitude is bull####. I'm not taking Otis' side here but incremental action significantly reducing their power and effectiveness is a great starting point. We don't have to perfectly and surgically remove every individual terrorist to claim we are making strides.Sure there will 'always be terrorists.' But there won't always be groups as strong as Daesh or AQ. And those little cells around the world - they won't do #### if the head of the organization is chopped off.

This.

By the way, where the heck do these dopes get all this money to fund these organizations? Need to stop the money, take out the leaders and any central organization, and then they're just a bunch of lonely, sexless, angst-filled kids.

From Muslim to Emo.

 

[RBM]

I could most definitely use the boot camp. But I'm too old and fat to help out much over there. As a younger man, I bet I could have done some damage.

You could be a meat shield for one of the good soldiers.DO MORE. THAT IS THE ONLY OPTION.

You're on board with the mini cheeseburger parachutes, aren't you.

I have no idea what "solution" I prefer. Ideally, there would be a big ISIS meetup somewhere and we could just gas or burn them all but I don't that'll happen.Like you, and probably 99% of this board, I have no idea what the situation is like over there, so ranting like an iTough guy or using up all the internets bandwidth like Tim and his merry band of idiots is pointless.

Turns out they're not planning a big Burning Man event on a giant red X in the desert in Syria. I agree with you, seems like a great solution if it's available. But I don't think it is.

Come on, try at least. It's not an easy exercise. And we don't know crap about crap. I get all that.

But you've got two choices: either withdraw and hope for the best, or get dirty. Which makes more sense to you?

Sorry, three choices. Burgerchutes always a low cost option.

I'd say targeted raids by a coalition. Bomb specific targets. Cut off their money. There isn't a quick fix.Even if you killed all the ones from Syria and Iraq today, there could be an attack tomorrow by their supporters that are all around the world already. Then what? Kill more people in Syria? Bomb some innocents?

Terrorism is here to stay whether it is by ISIS, another group or random nutjobs.

See this defeatist attitude is bull####. I'm not taking Otis' side here but incremental action significantly reducing their power and effectiveness is a great starting point. We don't have to perfectly and surgically remove every individual terrorist to claim we are making strides.Sure there will 'always be terrorists.' But there won't always be groups as strong as Daesh or AQ. And those little cells around the world - they won't do #### if the head of the organization is chopped off.

This.

By the way, where the heck do these dopes get all this money to fund these organizations? Need to stop the money, take out the leaders and any central organization, and then they're just a bunch of lonely, sexless, angst-filled kids.

Selling their oil on the black market. Trump is right that's the first thing we should've bombed to high hell.

 

[Chadstroma]

Dumb question I'm sure, but with these bomb threats tonight -- how on earth would anybody get a bomb on a plane leaving someplace in America in 2015? The security measures seem (thankfully) really great.

I've never felt safer on a plane than I have this year, for whatever reason.

Honestly, most of the screening process is no more safe than it was before 9/11. I would give us slightly better chance of detecting a threat through the screening now than before. Most of it amounts to window dressing. Kind of like how just having a black and white patrol a neighborhood often tends to prevent crime by it's visible presence. Same with all of the extra security from TSA.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

I don't think I ever seriously proposed nuking all of Syria off the map.

I'm more on the bomb-it-to-smithereens side at this point,

Big difference between bombing a city that is widely believed to be our enemies' HQ and indiscriminately nuking an entire country off the map. I'm sorry if that confuses you.

Nuke it. Seriously. Despicable.

 

[Otis]

I don't think I ever seriously proposed nuking all of Syria off the map.

I'm more on the bomb-it-to-smithereens side at this point,

Big difference between bombing a city that is widely believed to be our enemies' HQ and indiscriminately nuking an entire country off the map. I'm sorry if that confuses you.

Nuke it. Seriously. Despicable.

Fine, you're right. Let's nuke it.

 

[Otis]

Since this thread was started about 14 months ago, we've done a pretty neat job of going in and wiping out ISIS

 

[The General]

Since this thread was started about 14 months ago, we've done a pretty neat job of going in and wiping out ISIS

You are right. It's should be so simple.

 

[dickey moe]

Dumb question I'm sure, but with these bomb threats tonight -- how on earth would anybody get a bomb on a plane leaving someplace in America in 2015? The security measures seem (thankfully) really great.

I've never felt safer on a plane than I have this year, for whatever reason.

http://www.today.com/news/can-tsa-find-hidden-weapons-rossen-reports-goes-undercover-t56626

 

[Cliff Clavin]

I'd say targeted raids by a coalition. Bomb specific targets. Cut off their money. There isn't a quick fix.

Even if you killed all the ones from Syria and Iraq today, there could be an attack tomorrow by their supporters that are all around the world already. Then what? Kill more people in Syria? Bomb some innocents?

Terrorism is here to stay whether it is by ISIS, another group or random nutjobs.

See this defeatist attitude is bull####. I'm not taking Otis' side here but incremental action significantly reducing their power and effectiveness is a great starting point. We don't have to perfectly and surgically remove every individual terrorist to claim we are making strides.Sure there will 'always be terrorists.' But there won't always be groups as strong as Daesh or AQ. And those little cells around the world - they won't do #### if the head of the organization is chopped off.

So you agree with everything but call it a bull#### attitude? mmmkay.

 

[Otis]

Don't worry guys, in another couple of weeks, folks won't be mad anymore, and then we can sit back and have lots of really good cerebral debates as we wait for the ***OFFICIAL*** ISIS Attack Lottery to pick the location and style of the next attack.

:fingers crossed: ooh ooh, hope it's not my plane, place of employment, or local sports team venue!

And I know what you're thinking "oh, but Otis, that could take sooo long." Don't fret about that, I'm certain they'll fill the space with some good old fashioned beheadings of journalists and humanitarian workers on Youtube. Phew!

 

[Otis]

Since this thread was started about 14 months ago, we've done a pretty neat job of going in and wiping out ISIS

You are right. It's should be so simple.

Well it's hard, so we probably just shouldn't do anything.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

Dumb question I'm sure, but with these bomb threats tonight -- how on earth would anybody get a bomb on a plane leaving someplace in America in 2015? The security measures seem (thankfully) really great.

I've never felt safer on a plane than I have this year, for whatever reason.

Its called "inside job".

 

[The General]

Since this thread was started about 14 months ago, we've done a pretty neat job of going in and wiping out ISIS

You are right. It's should be so simple.

Well it's hard, so we probably just shouldn't do anything.

Yup they aren't doing anything.

How many threads have you started about buying patio furniture or losing 10 pounds in 14 months?

 

[cstu]

Just watched a video of Turkish fans chanting Alluha Akbar during a moment of silence. That's not good. It wasn't 10 guys either, more like a few thousand.

Nuke it. Seriously. Despicable.

Good internet rule: when you type the words "nuke it", stop, erase it, and go watch some porn.

It's even more offensive when smart folks who should know better use it.

The minute a bunch of folks celebrate what happened in Paris, all words become fair game.

New Yorkers do a lot that pisses me off - nuke it.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Since this thread was started about 14 months ago, we've done a pretty neat job of going in and wiping out ISIS

You are right. It's should be so simple.

Well it's hard, so we probably just shouldn't do anything.

That has been my guiding philosophy for all life situations outside of having an erection.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Nuke them, nuke them all.

Sincerely,

Otis and his Snicker Bar Wrapper Army

 

[dickey moe]

The Jihadists produce a slick monthly mag:

https://ia601502.us.archive.org/14/items/Dabiq12/Dabiq%2012.pdf

These guys are master propagandists.

 

[Otis]

Just watched a video of Turkish fans chanting Alluha Akbar during a moment of silence. That's not good. It wasn't 10 guys either, more like a few thousand.

Nuke it. Seriously. Despicable.

Good internet rule: when you type the words "nuke it", stop, erase it, and go watch some porn.

It's even more offensive when smart folks who should know better use it.

The minute a bunch of folks celebrate what happened in Paris, all words become fair game.

New Yorkers do a lot that pisses me off - nuke it.

You'd be lost without us, friend.

 

[mr roboto]

I'd say targeted raids by a coalition. Bomb specific targets. Cut off their money. There isn't a quick fix.

Even if you killed all the ones from Syria and Iraq today, there could be an attack tomorrow by their supporters that are all around the world already. Then what? Kill more people in Syria? Bomb some innocents?

Terrorism is here to stay whether it is by ISIS, another group or random nutjobs.

See this defeatist attitude is bull####. I'm not taking Otis' side here but incremental action significantly reducing their power and effectiveness is a great starting point. We don't have to perfectly and surgically remove every individual terrorist to claim we are making strides.Sure there will 'always be terrorists.' But there won't always be groups as strong as Daesh or AQ. And those little cells around the world - they won't do #### if the head of the organization is chopped off.

So you agree with everything but call it a bull#### attitude? mmmkay.

No. I agree with you prescriptive ideas. I disagree with the follow up attitude (even if you killed all the terrorists in Iraq and Syria terrorism still exists). Maybe I misunderstood.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

I'd say targeted raids by a coalition. Bomb specific targets. Cut off their money. There isn't a quick fix.

Even if you killed all the ones from Syria and Iraq today, there could be an attack tomorrow by their supporters that are all around the world already. Then what? Kill more people in Syria? Bomb some innocents?

Terrorism is here to stay whether it is by ISIS, another group or random nutjobs.

See this defeatist attitude is bull####. I'm not taking Otis' side here but incremental action significantly reducing their power and effectiveness is a great starting point. We don't have to perfectly and surgically remove every individual terrorist to claim we are making strides.Sure there will 'always be terrorists.' But there won't always be groups as strong as Daesh or AQ. And those little cells around the world - they won't do #### if the head of the organization is chopped off.

So you agree with everything but call it a bull#### attitude? mmmkay.

No. I agree with you prescriptive ideas. I disagree with the follow up attitude (even if you killed all the terrorists in Iraq and Syria terrorism still exists). Maybe I misunderstood.

You can call it 'defeatist'. I'll call it reality.

 

[timschochet]

We give them money, are they grateful?

No they're spiteful and they're hateful!

Let's drop the big one and see what happens...

 

[mr roboto]

I'd say targeted raids by a coalition. Bomb specific targets. Cut off their money. There isn't a quick fix.

Even if you killed all the ones from Syria and Iraq today, there could be an attack tomorrow by their supporters that are all around the world already. Then what? Kill more people in Syria? Bomb some innocents?

Terrorism is here to stay whether it is by ISIS, another group or random nutjobs.

See this defeatist attitude is bull####. I'm not taking Otis' side here but incremental action significantly reducing their power and effectiveness is a great starting point. We don't have to perfectly and surgically remove every individual terrorist to claim we are making strides.Sure there will 'always be terrorists.' But there won't always be groups as strong as Daesh or AQ. And those little cells around the world - they won't do #### if the head of the organization is chopped off.

So you agree with everything but call it a bull#### attitude? mmmkay.

No. I agree with you prescriptive ideas. I disagree with the follow up attitude (even if you killed all the terrorists in Iraq and Syria terrorism still exists). Maybe I misunderstood.

You can call it 'defeatist'. I'll call it reality.

It's true but not a good enough reason to remove any options off the table.

 

[Eminence]

Otis, you're scaring me. :(