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.

 Jihadin wrote:
Believe US and Turkey would go with a creation of Kurdistan being Marliki(sp) is soup sandwich

We should refer to the PM of Iraq as All-Malarky from now on instead of Al-Maliki.

ISIS kidnapping women.

BAGHDAD (AP) — Hundreds of women from the Yazidi religious minority have been taken captive by Sunni militants with "vicious plans," an Iraqi official said Friday, further underscoring the dire plight of Iraq's minorities at the hands of the Islamic State group.
Kamil Amin, the spokesman for Iraq's Human Rights Ministry, said hundreds of Yazidi women below the age of 35 are being held in schools in Iraq's second largest city, Mosul. He said the ministry learned of the captives from their families.

"We think that the terrorists by now consider them slaves and they have vicious plans for them," Amin told The Associated Press. "We think that these women are going to be used in demeaning ways by those terrorists to satisfy their animalistic urges in a way that contradicts all the human and Islamic values."

The U.S. has confirmed that the Islamic State group has kidnapped and imprisoned Yazidi women so that they can be sold or married off to extremist fighters, said a U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the information came from classified intelligence reports. There was no solid estimate of the number of women victimized, the official said.

 Ahtman wrote:
ISIS kidnapping women.

BAGHDAD (AP) — Hundreds of women from the Yazidi religious minority have been taken captive by Sunni militants with "vicious plans," an Iraqi official said Friday, further underscoring the dire plight of Iraq's minorities at the hands of the Islamic State group.
Kamil Amin, the spokesman for Iraq's Human Rights Ministry, said hundreds of Yazidi women below the age of 35 are being held in schools in Iraq's second largest city, Mosul. He said the ministry learned of the captives from their families.

"We think that the terrorists by now consider them slaves and they have vicious plans for them," Amin told The Associated Press. "We think that these women are going to be used in demeaning ways by those terrorists to satisfy their animalistic urges in a way that contradicts all the human and Islamic values."

The U.S. has confirmed that the Islamic State group has kidnapped and imprisoned Yazidi women so that they can be sold or married off to extremist fighters, said a U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the information came from classified intelligence reports. There was no solid estimate of the number of women victimized, the official said.

I try to abstain from outright hating groups of people but ISIS are different. I would not have a problem if someone were to kill every last one of them in unique and novel ways. Hell, I'd probably volunteer to shove I couple into chummed waters full of tiger sharks. (The chum being pork-related...haha, no martyrdom for you!!!)

I won't say it often, but this is a time I agree with the Presidents actions. This has come to a point we can no longer stand by, and I'm glad we're devoting some of our capability. Maybe just the limited strikes that we conduct will be enough to make ISIS back it down a notch, not wanting to reawaken the sleeping bear, so to speak.

 djones520 wrote:
I won't say it often, but this is a time I agree with the Presidents actions. This has come to a point we can no longer stand by, and I'm glad we're devoting some of our capability. Maybe just the limited strikes that we conduct will be enough to make ISIS back it down a notch, not wanting to reawaken the sleeping bear, so to speak.

at the same time, I think there's far too many guys who were actually there, in Mosul and Tall Afar, and other place in Iraq who are severely disgruntled at this whole situation... with some others getting pissed about the draw downs, and are itching for that call to go in and lay the smack down on these turds.

I do not see a justification on putting "Boots on Grounds" in Iraq. Though I can see relocating the Christians being moved to Kuwait and processed to the US as refugee's

 Jihadin wrote:
I do not see a justification on putting "Boots on Grounds" in Iraq. Though I can see relocating the Christians being moved to Kuwait and processed to the US as refugee's

Neither do I, however I was merely suggesting that there are soldiers and former soldiers who would, at least vocally, have no problems going back in.

Can definitely see a sort of "Berlin Airlift" where we get as many Yazidi off of Sinjar mountain, or other isolated Christians that are around that area.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
I do not see a justification on putting "Boots on Grounds" in Iraq. Though I can see relocating the Christians being moved to Kuwait and processed to the US as refugee's

Neither do I, however I was merely suggesting that there are soldiers and former soldiers who would, at least vocally, have no problems going back in.

Can definitely see a sort of "Berlin Airlift" where we get as many Yazidi off of Sinjar mountain, or other isolated Christians that are around that area.

Depends on ISIS's AA capabilities. That would require a heavy helicopter foot print, and if they've got SA-7's every fifth man out there, we won't be sending gak in.

I'm pretty anti-intervention - I think we've had enough foreign adventures for a while... but on the other hand, feth these guys. Unlike Syria, where there are no clear good guys, it's pretty clear here that ISIS are pretty unambiguously bad guys, almost cartoonishly so.

I suspect Frazzled will probably disagree with me - I think he's probably the most isolationist person on the forum - but I'm OK with playing Reaper tag with these guys.

Agreed on "Reaper Tag"...

Throw a little Spectre action...

and maybe arm the Kurds pretty good.

Then... let 'em have it.

Frazzled doesn't care about humans.

But if they start posting videos of them decapitating dachshunds he would be breaking into the White House to find the fire button himself

 djones520 wrote:
I won't say it often, but this is a time I agree with the Presidents actions. This has come to a point we can no longer stand by, and I'm glad we're devoting some of our capability. Maybe just the limited strikes that we conduct will be enough to make ISIS back it down a notch, not wanting to reawaken the sleeping bear, so to speak.

I doubt it will be so simple to stop them at this point. But hey, something's better than nothing.

Following this, makes it seem like all the interventions in Iraq were just pissing into the wind.

 Ouze wrote:
I'm pretty anti-intervention - I think we've had enough foreign adventures for a while... but on the other hand, feth these guys. Unlike Syria, where there are no clear good guys, it's pretty clear here that ISIS are pretty unambiguously bad guys, almost cartoonishly so.

I suspect Frazzled will probably disagree with me - I think he's probably the most isolationist person on the forum - but I'm OK with playing Reaper tag with these guys.

While I don't think of myself as a warmonger or agree with the ideas that the US/UK/Canada have to be the world's police force, in this case, I firmly believe that it's in our best interest to intervene...

Right now the greatest threat to global peace & western security is the Islamist. There is no reasoning or negotiating with these melonfethers. If you are "kaafir" (unbeliever), then you must convert or be 'justly killed as an apostate' (murtad)
The Islamists don't and never will recognise other religions like Christianity. They believe that all Jews are their sworn mortal enemy and must die. Women are purely objects and in cases are treated as less than cattle. Even other Muslims are targeted by these gakheads where their belief system opposes the Islamists very narrow views.
Hell, most of their so-called religious values aren't even that, instead being built upon the barbaric practices of medieval tribal traditions.

We've pandered long enough and buried our heads in the sand & ignored just how horrific a "society" the Islamists will build. ISIS's own stated goal is to build a new world-wide Caliphate over the ashes of every non-Muslim empire.
The only real reason they haven't become any kind of real threat yet is that they can't organise and spend the bulk of their time infighting and killing each other.

I say bomb the fethers off the face of the planet and good riddance!
Hell, I want them all dead even if only to protect the relics & treasures of the ancient Middle Eastern civilisations! Think of all the ancient artifacts and histories that have already been lost. Imagine if say Egypt were to ever fall into Islamist hands - they'd burn the museums to the ground and smash every last icon & artifact they could find.

Frazz is not the only anti-interventionist on dakka. The hypocrisy of my country (the UK) and the USA is breath taking. They turned a blind eye to Saddam doing similar activities in the 1980s, but all of a sudden, they take the moral high ground.

It was foreign intervention in Iraq and Syria that caused this mess in the first place. To interfere further is pouring petrol on the flames.

 Da Boss wrote:
Following this, makes it seem like all the interventions in Iraq were just pissing into the wind.

They were actually counter productive. IF a meaningful and well thought out plan for what to do AFTER victory had been in place and carried out, sure. But without that the world would have been a better place WITH Saddam.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

It was foreign intervention in Iraq and Syria that caused this mess in the first place. To interfere further is pouring petrol on the flames.

It was actually poorly planned intervention and war profiteering htat did this. In and of itself the interventions that were carried out might have succeeded if they had planned past 'We Win!'. Look at how a successful post war occupation of a fanatical xenocidal society that believed in suicide attacks such as Japan was carried out, and then look at what was done in Iraq.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Frazz is not the only anti-interventionist on dakka. The hypocrisy of my country (the UK) and the USA is breath taking. They turned a blind eye to Saddam doing similar activities in the 1980s, but all of a sudden, they take the moral high ground.

That's playing a little bit of revisionist history here...

When lives are at stake... so fething what?!?!


Yeah, he was a bastard... but, for a time, he was our bastard.

Then, when he wasn't, he met the "business end".

Point being, our past actions/dalliances shouldn't really impact our actions today.

In other news... if you have twitter, ISIS started a propaganda "war" with the US with this hashtag:
#AmessagefromISIStoUS

US twitter user hijacked that hashtag in awesome ways:
#AmessagefromUStoISIS


EDIT: here's a Twitchy stream:
http://twitchy.com/2014/08/08/screw-you-americans-hijack-amessagefromisistous/

Meh. I don't find the twitter stuff awesome at all.

It's pretty depressing watching this play out. I wonder what the spin will be if ISIS end up in control of Iraq? Be pretty destabilsing for an already unstable reason, and it's hard to believe they'd stop there.

Experiment 626 wrote:


Right now the greatest threat to global peace & western security is the Islamist. There is no reasoning or negotiating with these melonfethers. If you are "kaafir" (unbeliever), then you must convert or be 'justly killed as an apostate' (murtad)

Not exactly true. Non-believers can pay a tax (jizya) which ISIS has implemented in some areas they control.

 CptJake wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:


Right now the greatest threat to global peace & western security is the Islamist. There is no reasoning or negotiating with these melonfethers. If you are "kaafir" (unbeliever), then you must convert or be 'justly killed as an apostate' (murtad)

Not exactly true. Non-believers can pay a tax (jizya) which ISIS has implemented in some areas they control.

Yeah, that is the moderate belief. They are going with that for now, because they need the money. Take a look at Afghanistan in the 90's to find out what happens once they get total power.

Even the strict Sharia law proclamations they are making are revenue sources right now. "No Smoking" translates to "No Smoking unless you are paying off the local ISIS head guy" for example.

The amounts they collect in jizya are nothing compared to the banks (and other sources) they knock off and the revenue they are getting from kidnapping for ransom.

Jizya is really not a moderate concept at this point either. It has rarely been implemented in modern times, and when it has it tends to be the nut jobs doing so.

And it does not mean they won't kill you anyway, either.

Hearing news reporting today, their beheading children over the conversion to Islam issue now.

Children.

Is there any doubt we should be delivering every means of death we have to these people now?

We need to beat their forces, and then we need to address the causes of the wretched ideology that could lead people to take those sorts of actions.

Man. I'm not normally the type to be all "rah rah vengeance" on the internet, but some things need to be stopped.

Edit: I say we, but unfortunately there probably won't be any Irish troops there. Neutrality is a nice idea, except in situations like this. We already let US planes land in Shannon, we're not neutral, but we won't do anything about this anyhow, and we'll claim the moral high ground for our neutrality. Blech.

Surely the security council wouldn't veto action against them now?

 djones520 wrote:
Hearing news reporting today, their beheading children over the conversion to Islam issue now.

Children.

Is there any doubt we should be delivering every means of death we have to these people now?

Plenty of children CHILDREN killed in Rwanda and other places too. Didn't mean we jumped in and started raining death and destruction. Hell, how many strikes have we executed against Boku Haram or Assad's forces in Syria?

Just for gits and shiggles, what do you guys think are the objectives (from a national/strategic level, what is the US trying to accomplish) of these strikes? What should they be? How do you think 'success' should be measured? What other elements of power can/should we be using to achieve our strategic objectives/goals?

Should the President (or Sec State or Sec Def) be on TV letting us know what these objectives are, tell us what mechanisms they are using to achieve them, why they think those mechanisms will work, and how they intend to measure if they have worked?

I'm just saying, I see a lot of folks* who claim the US interferes all over, and now we are being called on to interfere without our leadership explaining why THIS is the time to do so. I see lots of folks* who think we should cut foreign aid and focus on 'home' who are now calling for strikes, when in many cases a well planned and executed aid and mil-to-mil program can preclude groups like this from coming into power.

Now, I'm not an isolationist. And I am a firm believer that some people should be made room temp, and a believer that there are things worth killing for (and even dying for though frankly I prefer the killing to the dying).

But I'm not convinced we are doing more than Something for the sake of Doing Something!

* Folks not necessarily on Dakka or in this topic, but on other forums I frequent

 djones520 wrote:
Hearing news reporting today, their beheading children over the conversion to Islam issue now.

Children.

Is there any doubt we should be delivering every means of death we have to these people now?

Well, gee, I suppose that depends on if we're all still saying 'WTF does the Baron know? He just wants to get us involved in another war, F him'.

As I said before, it's easy to say not to get involved when it's not your kids they're slaughtering. So they went from Muslim kids to Christian kids, and now we're offended? Really?

Wait until they draw and quarter an American kid on live TV. Because they will if they get the chance, just for the lolz.

These are the guys that (according to rumor) Hamas field commanders in Syria were even willing to temporarily ally with Israel AGAINST. The ones too savage for AQ and the Taliban? These are the guys, and they've got quite a bit of momentum going.

Maybe you all are slowly beginning to comprehend just how bad this is currently, and might even have an inking now of how bad it could still get. And make no mistake, it has a the potential to get very, very bad indeed.

A lot of you are comparing this to the Taliban. These guys will make them look positively chivalrous.

The world is going to get very dark in the near future. Not all of us will make it through the night.




"We are told that the American soldier does not know what he was fighting for. Now, at least he will know what he is fighting against." - Gen Dwight Eisenhower.



I do not disagree with CaptJake that a solid plan needs ot be devised, but it needs to be one that does not just end with victory.

I'll set out an easy first objective that needs to be achieved immediately, though,

'Halt ISIS momentum.'

This is the first time I am posting in the off-topic forum so please bear with me.

I want to know how many of you have watched the isis propaganda/recruitment video in its full length. And by that I mean the 1 hour one.

I am going to post a link to it but am already warning those about to follow it in advance, that it contains many extremely graphic scenes and will leave you sick to your stomach, though of course the gore you will see here is the sort common in "real wars" and not the explicit type you may find on certain *cough* imageboards.

If any admin has a problem with me posting the link, please let me know and I will remove it.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=efe_1403037495

The reason I want to share this is because I want more people to wake up to what is really happening in Iraq now.

Everyone keeps crying about Gaza and the international media is full of it (and ebola) when in reality the actual horror is happening at a scale a thousand times larger in Iraq and most people do not have a clear picture of what is actually going on. So I just want more people to watch this video and realize why we must wipe ISIS from the face of this planet as soon as possible.

Any post-video discussion is, of course, welcome.

a bunch of unarmed kids are probably not on their way to join military units, and are just randomly being gunned down on the freeway.

They honestly seem to think its okay to kill people who are not them, and they are doing allahs work and will be rewarded. They honestly should be feared.

The content of the music going with the video is even creepier.



There's an american stonehenge.

http://archive.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/17-05/ff_guidestones

its also a modern rosetta stone so if our world gets wiped out people or aliens, or whatever can use it to figure out of some of the worlds major languages.

It also has instructions for rebuilding society from an apocalypse.

and not letting humanity go past 500,000,000 in population.

I often wonder if there were less people in the world would we value each others existence and possible individuality more than we value our need to belong to something to feel special and then force our ideals on each other.

Seen that vid awhile back. Not very nice.

blaktoof wrote:

I often wonder if there were less people in the world would we value each others existence and possible individuality more than we value our need to belong to something to feel special and then force our ideals one each other.

I think, honestly if there were less people, things would be worse, rather than better... Because there'd be more reason to defend "us" against "them". I mean, look at all of the wars prior to say... 1200, and see how many of them were about that "us vs. them" mentality as opposed to where we're at now, where there are so many people, and depending on where one lives, there's some modicum of respect for the individual.