Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

That they were standing around taking selfies before the blood was even dry should tell you which one was implied.

 Ouze wrote:

 whembly wrote:
So... you're saying there's some redeeming qualities that these people have, that deserves some legitimacy?

No, but attempting to annihilate a population to eradicate an ideology via violence in 2016 is sort of a crazyperson idea, even just considering the pragmatic, practical considerations and not the whole moral concept of "we need to murder a ton of innocent people to bring justice to these people who are murdering a ton of innocent people".

It's not that crazy when those same people would happily eradicate us all just for not following their ideology.

Believe me, if Obama and Hillary (if she gets elected) have their way and start bringing in more of those military-age male refugees from the Middle East, we're gonna start seeing more of these kind of attacks here in the US.

My condolences to all the families of victims in France. Truly a terrible thing.

 ZergSmasher wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 whembly wrote:
So... you're saying there's some redeeming qualities that these people have, that deserves some legitimacy?

No, but attempting to annihilate a population to eradicate an ideology via violence in 2016 is sort of a crazyperson idea, even just considering the pragmatic, practical considerations and not the whole moral concept of "we need to murder a ton of innocent people to bring justice to these people who are murdering a ton of innocent people".

It's not that crazy when those same people would happily eradicate us all just for not following their ideology.

Believe me, if Obama and Hillary (if she gets elected) have their way and start bringing in more of those military-age male refugees from the Middle East, we're gonna start seeing more of these kind of attacks here in the US.

My condolences to all the families of victims in France. Truly a terrible thing.

You may kill the people but you will not kill the ideology, is the point that Ouze is making. All that stuff that they preach is all over the internet and in books and other literature. In the modern world you cannot defeat an ideology with bullets and bombs.

Dropbear Victim wrote:
That they were standing around taking selfies before the blood was even dry should tell you which one was implied.

They're also too 'excited' looking in my opinion. When gak like that happened here in the past people either walked around in a rage or a shocked daze of horror.

You may kill the people but you will not kill the ideology, is the point that Ouze is making.

Actually we've had several dictatorships in the past that were pretty adapt at killing the ideology by killing everyone involved. I am in no way advocating this, just pointing it out.
Ask the Aztecs, Dacians, and Koolats how their ideologies are doing...

I know some ways to fight back but they're utterly brutal. And mostly involve using their own beliefs against them.

@ Frazzled

That's true. I don't ever remember Saddam's Iraq having an Islamic problem.

 Frazzled wrote:

You may kill the people but you will not kill the ideology, is the point that Ouze is making.

Actually we've had several dictatorships in the past that were pretty adapt at killing the ideology by killing everyone involved. I am in no way advocating this, just pointing it out.
Ask the Aztecs, Dacians, and Koolats how their ideologies are doing...

As they all had internet access and the means to record and spread said Ideals..

 Future War Cultist wrote:
We'll never know then, but my instinct tells me the worst.

This tells us more about you then it does about the person in the clip.

 Easy E wrote:
This tells us more about you then it does about the person in the clip.

Don't give me that.

Killing them all does a pretty good job. Then we can fight the ideology after their dead. Which will be much easier.

 SickSix wrote:
Killing them all does a pretty good job. Then we can fight the ideology after their dead. Which will be much easier.

Unleashing an official campaign of genocide would cause far more problems than it could possibly solve and would legitimise attacks against the US and the West in general for far more groups than is currently happening. Thinking that "well, it's difficult to fight them directly as it is but if we killed them all..." is charitably described as incredibly stupid.

 SickSix wrote:
Killing them all does a pretty good job. Then we can fight the ideology after their dead. Which will be much easier.

How do you tell who needs to be killed and who doesn't?

 feeder wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
Killing them all does a pretty good job. Then we can fight the ideology after their dead. Which will be much easier.

How do you tell who needs to be killed and who doesn't?

If this goes the way the usual "kill 'em all" rhetoric goes then you don't bother trying to distinguish between legitimate targets and everyone else. You just drop enough explosives on the area to ensure nobody survives then brand them all as supporting ISIS afterwards as anyone who didn't support them wouldn't be there.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
A few Moderate Muslims on scene flashing the V for victory.

https://sendvid.com/o8nho6o0

You realize that you using these few guys as evidence that all Muslims are evil can go both ways right?

The incredibly stupid and shortsighted calls to "kill them all" in this thread by a minority of morons can be used by radicals over there to "prove" that all the West is trying to exterminate Islam.

Rosebuddy wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
Killing them all does a pretty good job. Then we can fight the ideology after their dead. Which will be much easier.

Unleashing an official campaign of genocide would cause far more problems than it could possibly solve and would legitimise attacks against the US and the West in general for far more groups than is currently happening. Thinking that "well, it's difficult to fight them directly as it is but if we killed them all..." is charitably described as incredibly stupid.

Ah I see you as well went to the Liberal School of hyperbole.

Genocide was never in the equation. Killing all ISIS memebers was. You guys are so predictable.

 SickSix wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
Killing them all does a pretty good job. Then we can fight the ideology after their dead. Which will be much easier.

Unleashing an official campaign of genocide would cause far more problems than it could possibly solve and would legitimise attacks against the US and the West in general for far more groups than is currently happening. Thinking that "well, it's difficult to fight them directly as it is but if we killed them all..." is charitably described as incredibly stupid.

Ah I see you as well went to the Liberal School of hyperbole.

Genocide was never in the equation. Killing all ISIS memebers was. You guys are so predictable.

How do you propose to identify and kill every ISIS member with absolutely no innocent casualties?

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 SickSix wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
Killing them all does a pretty good job. Then we can fight the ideology after their dead. Which will be much easier.

Unleashing an official campaign of genocide would cause far more problems than it could possibly solve and would legitimise attacks against the US and the West in general for far more groups than is currently happening. Thinking that "well, it's difficult to fight them directly as it is but if we killed them all..." is charitably described as incredibly stupid.

Ah I see you as well went to the Liberal School of hyperbole.

Genocide was never in the equation. Killing all ISIS memebers was. You guys are so predictable.

How do you propose to identify and kill every ISIS member?

I'm not saying Sicksix is doing this, but generally speaking these calls to "glass em all" are less about actual, thought out solutions and more about participating in the internet rage boner circle jerk

... weren't you in my homeroom class at the Liberal School of Hyperbole?

 Ouze wrote:
... weren't you in my homeroom class at the Liberal School of Hyperbole?

I believe they ran against you in the election of class president, if I remember correctly.

Stories appearing now that the French government suppressed details about the Bataclan massacre that are revolting, victims were tortured in the most horrendous sexual ways with eyes and genitals being stabbed or cut off in men and women. Seems this is coming out now because some are fed up of hiding details after the attacks yesterday.

A Town Called Mallus wrote:

How do you propose to identify and kill every ISIS member with absolutely no innocent casualties?

Nice edit. You can minimize them fairly well with modern methods. No war is without innocent loss.

Ouze wrote:... weren't you in my homeroom class at the Liberal School of Hyperbole?

Probably was.

 Ouze wrote:
Do you really believe it's possible to use "overwhelming force" without killing innocent people, and a lot of them? At least 200,000 civilians died in Iraq, and that was much less force then you guys seem to be suggesting.

I don't have an answer for solving the ISIL problem, or dangerous religious fundamentalism. I simply realize that large scale military force is as unworkable and impractical as it is simplistic - any functional solution would require decades of multi-national concerted effort.

Many of those 200k were killed by AQI (and their associated allies) and by the Mahdi Army (and their associated allies). In fact, a lot of them died because we did not shut down the militias brutally and quickly enough and instead allowed them to grow and fester and imbed themselves within the population.

All we can do is react to the attacks.

Another successful peace mission by the Religion of Peace. Keep it up Islam, you are truly winning hearts and minds.

 SickSix wrote:

A Town Called Mallus wrote:

How do you propose to identify and kill every ISIS member with absolutely no innocent casualties?

Nice edit. You can minimize them fairly well with modern methods. No war is without innocent loss.

Look at the "success" that is Afghanistan to see how well modern methods work at eliminating the threat while minimizing casualties.

ISIS is supporting and suggesting attacks like this to lone-wolf type terrorists to bait the West into inappropiately violent responses, like another rash combat mission - because polarisation is what they want and need to recruit even more terrorists and strengthen their position at home. One of the old truths of warfare is to never give the enemy what he wants, so for that reason alone a military response should be critically evaluated in my eyes.

I'm all up for removing a few heads of the Hydra, so to speak, simply to disrupt their planning, their long-term strategies and cause internal power struggles. Pinpoint strikes by any means necessary on leaders and recruiters behind this are something that could be done, I think.

 Witzkatz wrote:
ISIS is supporting and suggesting attacks like this to lone-wolf type terrorists to bait the West into inappropiately violent responses, like another rash combat mission - because polarisation is what they want and need to recruit even more terrorists and strengthen their position at home. One of the old truths of warfare is to never give the enemy what he wants, so for that reason alone a military response should be critically evaluated in my eyes.

I'm all up for removing a few heads of the Hydra, so to speak, simply to disrupt their planning, their long-term strategies and cause internal power struggles. Pinpoint strikes by any means necessary on leaders and recruiters behind this are something that could be done, I think.

Quiet those facts, Liberal Scum! (tm) We're trying to have a good ol' Islamophobic circle jerk in here. Last guy to finish has to eat the cracker.

Actually, DaIsh gains recruits from having successful attacks, not from any western response, overdone or not. Study their propaganda and recruiting material.

 CptJake wrote:
Actually, DaIsh gains recruits from having successful attacks, not from any western response, overdone or not. Study their propaganda and recruiting material.

Recuits in the west, I agree. However, I'm pretty sure that those people living in or close to their territories in the middle east are more easily swayed to join them when a stealth bomber accidentally hits a few children along with the local milita leader. That's something more direct for the local populace to get angry about, I'd think - especially for those on the fence on whether or not ISIS is a good or a bad thing for the region. Because I'm pretty sure their propaganda machine on milking such collateral damage is running pretty smoothly by now.

 CptJake wrote:
Actually, DaIsh gains recruits from having successful attacks, not from any western response, overdone or not. Study their propaganda and recruiting material.

People become radicalised because someone 7,000 miles away shot up a night club, not because a drone blew up their mother?

That seems counter intuitive.