The Brutality Arms Race- I.S.I.S., Taliban, al-Shadaab, and Others

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.

**Easy E**

ISIS has forced all the other militant groups to up their brutality game in order to attract more foreign recruits in a grim arms race. What levels of brutality will appear next?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/04/22/hazara_beheadings_in_afghanistan_isis_has_set_off_an_arms_race_of_competitive.html

Earlier this week I wrote about how ISIS’s strategy of broadcasting its most horrific acts of violence to the world is an integral part of its recruiting strategy. While it alienates the vast majority of the public, even people who might otherwise be sympathetic to the group’s political goals, for a certain kind of potential recruit, beheadings and the mass murder of civilians are selling points.

Competing jihadi groups now seem to be taking a page out of ISIS’s book. The New York Times reports Wednesday that the Taliban have been carrying out a wave of kidnappings and beheadings of members of Afghanistan’s Hazara ethnic group. Beheading hasn’t traditionally been a Taliban tactic, but as a Hazara member of parliament tells the paper, “The Taliban are trying to send out a new message that they are similar in their brutality to ISIS. … They’re trying to show they are as bad as ISIS.” Why? ISIS carried out its first attack in Afghanistan last weekend and has reportedly been making inroads among Taliban supporters. The veteran group may now feel it has to adjust to the times.

Advertisement

Some experts believe ISIS’s influence may also have played a part in al-Shabaab’s massacre of 147 people, mainly Christian students at a Kenyan university, on April 2. The Atlantic Council’s Bronwyn Bruton pointed out that al-Shabaab had previously moved away from attacks on students due to public backlash in Somalia, and the fact that it was re-embracing the tactic could be “a sign of a final evolution where it is no longer interested in maintaining political credibility or gaining the support of local communities.” The Somali group has reportedly been losing ground to the Islamic State in the competition for foreign recruits, so the attack may have been an effort to re-establish its credibility to an international audience. This could be part of an effort by the traditionally al-Qaida-linked group to either compete with ISIS or pivot to an alliance with it.

In other words, we’re getting to the point where al-Qaida’s brand of murder just isn’t dramatic enough.

**Tannhauser42**

It's things like this that make me think we might all be better off if we just busted out the nukes and glassed that entire region.

**Experiment 626**

Tannhauser42 wrote:
It's things like this that make me think we might all be better off if we just busted out the nukes and glassed that entire region.

I'd rather use something that would at least leave what little is left of the historical sites & treasures of that region intact...

**Spetulhu**

Tannhauser42 wrote:
It's things like this that make me think we might all be better off if we just busted out the nukes and glassed that entire region.

The locals are fighting these groups, even if some do control much land. And these terror groups get a lot (maybe even most) of their support and fighters from other "civilized" countries - maybe we should nuke everyone just to be sure?

No, probably not a good idea. Even empires fall and these guys are far from empires - their brutality might work for a time but eventually they'll go the way of Al-Quaeda. When bin Laden was killed his worst concerns weren't carrying out terror missions, it was how to get enough money and recruits to at least continue looking dangerous.

**Pacific**

Another issue for those living in the developed world is when some of the individuals involved in the fighting start filtering back to their countries of origin. I think this is most likely already happening.

In the UK at least, with the exception of 7/7 and some horrific isolated incidents, we have had to deal with people setting themselves on fire and accidentally crashing into gateways of airports, and declarations of Jihad from individuals that were on the borderline of being declared mentally disabled by doctors in terms of their IQ.

Replace these with psychopaths who have been trained how to fight, have murdered, learned how to use various weapons and have no regard for the lives of innocents.

I fear that we have created a hornet's nest in the Middle East following the military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, there is a strong possibility that both the frequency and potency of terrorist attacks in Europe and the US are going to increase.

**Grey Templar**

It might be prudent to blockade air travel to those locations to slow them filtering back.

Experiment 626 wrote:
Tannhauser42 wrote:
It's things like this that make me think we might all be better off if we just busted out the nukes and glassed that entire region.

I'd rather use something that would at least leave what little is left of the historical sites & treasures of that region intact...

That's easy. Airburst the nukes so just the fallout hits them.

**Iron_Captain**

We need to build a huge wall around the Middle East and Africa. Truly that will solve it.

But to be honest, I think the best course of action is for the West to completely ignore the fact that the Middle East and Africa even exist. Absolutely no interaction allowed. Given time, they will be able to sort the mess themselves. Western meddling only creates an even bigger mess (and is responsible for the current mess already).
Western civilisation has been able to develop without foreign involvement. Other civilisations should be allowed to do the same.

**Jihadin**

So what happens when international shipping (cargo/container ships) starts getting nailed the Suez Canal, Gulf of Aden, Red Sea, Persian Gulf, Gulf of Oman and Arabian Sea eh

**sebster**

Probably the best way to explain the brutality of these groups is by noting the very first response talks about nuclear annihilation of everyone in the region, and the first response to that expressed concern… for artifacts, but none for the hundreds of millions of people who would be annihilated.

feth it. No good will come of this thread. The OP’s article is interesting and worth discussion, but it won’t happen here.

**DarkLink**

Pacific wrote:

I fear that we have created a hornet's nest in the Middle East following the military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, there is a strong possibility that both the frequency and potency of terrorist attacks in Europe and the US are going to increase.

People have been violently murdering each other in large quantities for literally thousands of years over there. This is nothing new.

**BlaxicanX**

Read his post again.

**NuggzTheNinja**

Religion of...?

**hotsauceman1**

NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Religion of...?

Pie?
I want a religion of pie

Automatically Appended Next Post:

sebster wrote:
Probably the best way to explain the brutality of these groups is by noting the very first response talks about nuclear annihilation of everyone in the region, and the first response to that expressed concern… for artifacts, but none for the hundreds of millions of people who would be annihilated.

Nope nope nope nope nope, motyak

**Frazzled**

DarkLink wrote:
Pacific wrote:

I fear that we have created a hornet's nest in the Middle East following the military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, there is a strong possibility that both the frequency and potency of terrorist attacks in Europe and the US are going to increase.

People have been violently murdering each other in large quantities for literally thousands of years over there. This is nothing new.

Cyrus the Great agrees with you.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Here's a funny suggestion: what if we (the US and the EU) stopped flooding Africa with subsidized food and agricultural products that's sold at below-break-even prices? I have a feeling that people in Africa would be slightly less incentivized to become radicalized if we weren't taking their livelihoods from them in the first place.

hotsauceman1 wrote:

Maybe because they are backward savages who kill people who dont believe in what they preach, use religion to hold onto their societal dominance over women, they kill our soldiers.
These people are not human. They are disgusting. I say bomb the region to all hell.

Good job, you're now worse than the evil you wanted to destroy in the first place.

**Frazzled**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Here's a funny suggestion: what if we (the US and the EU) stopped flooding Africa with subsidized food and agricultural products that's sold at below-break-even prices? I have a feeling that people in Africa would be slightly less incentivized to become radicalized if we weren't taking their livelihoods from them in the first place.

So your solution to terrorism is...starvation? How very Tamerlame of you.

**hotsauceman1**

I know, at least I will give them a swift warriors death.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Here's a funny suggestion: what if we (the US and the EU) stopped flooding Africa with subsidized food and agricultural products that's sold at below-break-even prices? I have a feeling that people in Africa would be slightly less incentivized to become radicalized if we weren't taking their livelihoods from them in the first place.

So your solution to terrorism is...starvation? How very Tamerlame of you.

No, we're already causing starvation by driving local peasants out of business. The exports of EU- and US-subsidized agricultural products is driving people into unemployment, where they cannot afford even the subsidized food. If we're so set on having our farming subsidies in place and we're dead set on dumping the excess on Africa, at least we could give it to them for free. The African peasants would still be out of jobs, but at least they'd have food.

**Frazzled**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Here's a funny suggestion: what if we (the US and the EU) stopped flooding Africa with subsidized food and agricultural products that's sold at below-break-even prices? I have a feeling that people in Africa would be slightly less incentivized to become radicalized if we weren't taking their livelihoods from them in the first place.

So your solution to terrorism is...starvation? How very Tamerlame of you.

No, we're already causing starvation by driving local peasants out of business. The exports of EU- and US-subsidized agricultural products is driving people into unemployment, where they cannot afford even the subsidized food. If we're so set on having our farming subsidies in place and we're dead set on dumping the excess on Africa, at least we could give it to them for free. The African peasants would still be out of jobs, but at least they'd have food.

I don't know about you evilz Uropans but us Americans give away lots of free food. Because America Hurr.
Blaming terrorism on food aid is...a unique viewpoint.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Here's a funny suggestion: what if we (the US and the EU) stopped flooding Africa with subsidized food and agricultural products that's sold at below-break-even prices? I have a feeling that people in Africa would be slightly less incentivized to become radicalized if we weren't taking their livelihoods from them in the first place.

So your solution to terrorism is...starvation? How very Tamerlame of you.

No, we're already causing starvation by driving local peasants out of business. The exports of EU- and US-subsidized agricultural products is driving people into unemployment, where they cannot afford even the subsidized food. If we're so set on having our farming subsidies in place and we're dead set on dumping the excess on Africa, at least we could give it to them for free. The African peasants would still be out of jobs, but at least they'd have food.

I don't know about you evilz Uropans but us Americans give away lots of free food. Because America Hurr.
Blaming terrorism on food aid is...a unique viewpoint.

Hardly. Food riots aren't exactly rare throughout history.

**Frazzled**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Here's a funny suggestion: what if we (the US and the EU) stopped flooding Africa with subsidized food and agricultural products that's sold at below-break-even prices? I have a feeling that people in Africa would be slightly less incentivized to become radicalized if we weren't taking their livelihoods from them in the first place.

So your solution to terrorism is...starvation? How very Tamerlame of you.

No, we're already causing starvation by driving local peasants out of business. The exports of EU- and US-subsidized agricultural products is driving people into unemployment, where they cannot afford even the subsidized food. If we're so set on having our farming subsidies in place and we're dead set on dumping the excess on Africa, at least we could give it to them for free. The African peasants would still be out of jobs, but at least they'd have food.

I don't know about you evilz Uropans but us Americans give away lots of free food. Because America Hurr.
Blaming terrorism on food aid is...a unique viewpoint.

Hardly. Food riots aren't exactly rare throughout history.

WHEN THERE ISN'T ENOUGH. BLAMING COUNTRIES FOR PROVIDING FREE FOOD TO STARVING PEOPLE IS ABOUT AS ASININE AS YOU CAN GET.

Please cite one instance where the terrorists were unemployed farmers.
*France?
*ISIL fighters?
*Boko Haram

You're just blowing smoke out your ass boyo.

**Experiment 626**

Iron_Captain wrote:
We need to build a huge wall around the Middle East and Africa. Truly that will solve it.

But to be honest, I think the best course of action is for the West to completely ignore the fact that the Middle East and Africa even exist. Absolutely no interaction allowed. Given time, they will be able to sort the mess themselves. Western meddling only creates an even bigger mess (and is responsible for the current mess already).
Western civilisation has been able to develop without foreign involvement. Other civilisations should be allowed to do the same.

Russia has had a rather big hand in helping to create the giant clusterfeth that is currently the Middle East...

Besides, building a giant wall and ignoring them also means we effectively give the green light to let them make their dream of nuking Israel & eradicating the Jews come true.

**BlaxicanX**

It's no one's job to defend Israel sans Israel though. Comes with the territory of being a sovereign nation.

**DarkLink**

Which they do. Then people give them crap for it, but they don't care because they'd rather be alive than liked by naive US liberal college students.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Here's a funny suggestion: what if we (the US and the EU) stopped flooding Africa with subsidized food and agricultural products that's sold at below-break-even prices? I have a feeling that people in Africa would be slightly less incentivized to become radicalized if we weren't taking their livelihoods from them in the first place.

So your solution to terrorism is...starvation? How very Tamerlame of you.

No, we're already causing starvation by driving local peasants out of business. The exports of EU- and US-subsidized agricultural products is driving people into unemployment, where they cannot afford even the subsidized food. If we're so set on having our farming subsidies in place and we're dead set on dumping the excess on Africa, at least we could give it to them for free. The African peasants would still be out of jobs, but at least they'd have food.

I don't know about you evilz Uropans but us Americans give away lots of free food. Because America Hurr.
Blaming terrorism on food aid is...a unique viewpoint.

Hardly. Food riots aren't exactly rare throughout history.

WHEN THERE ISN'T ENOUGH. BLAMING COUNTRIES FOR PROVIDING FREE FOOD TO STARVING PEOPLE IS ABOUT AS ASININE AS YOU CAN GET.

Please cite one instance where the terrorists were unemployed farmers.
*France?
*ISIL fighters?
*Boko Haram

You're just blowing smoke out your ass boyo.

We aren't providing free food, that's the problem. You're conflating aid to famine-stricken areas with unfair trade practices in areas where the local farmers cannot compete with the cheap imports, and they can't export their goods because both the EU and the US have massive trade barriers in place.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/eu-subsidies-deny-africas-farmers-of-their-livelihood-478419.html

http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/oct/11/eu-agriculture-hurts-developing-countries

http://www.ifpri.org/blog/hidden-costs-us-and-eu-farm-subsidies

http://www.dw.de/eu-doesnt-consider-effects-of-farming-policies/a-16310008

If you honestly cannot understand that taking away people's livelihood is going to have a destabilizing effect on the region then I cannot help you, but I'm going to demand an apology from you. Accusing someone of "blowing smoke out his ass" when you yourself have absolutely no clue what you are talking about is rather infuriating, to say the least.

**BlaxicanX**

DarkLink wrote:
Which they do. Then people give them crap for it, but they don't care because they'd rather be alive than liked by naive US liberal college students.

Apparently not, since Benji's been visibly butthurt at Obama's lack of willingness to blow up Iran for months.

**Sienisoturi**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Here's a funny suggestion: what if we (the US and the EU) stopped flooding Africa with subsidized food and agricultural products that's sold at below-break-even prices? I have a feeling that people in Africa would be slightly less incentivized to become radicalized if we weren't taking their livelihoods from them in the first place.

Maybe because some groups fiercly oppose such suggestions.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Here's a funny suggestion: what if we (the US and the EU) stopped flooding Africa with subsidized food and agricultural products that's sold at below-break-even prices? I have a feeling that people in Africa would be slightly less incentivized to become radicalized if we weren't taking their livelihoods from them in the first place.

So your solution to terrorism is...starvation? How very Tamerlame of you.

No, we're already causing starvation by driving local peasants out of business. The exports of EU- and US-subsidized agricultural products is driving people into unemployment, where they cannot afford even the subsidized food. If we're so set on having our farming subsidies in place and we're dead set on dumping the excess on Africa, at least we could give it to them for free. The African peasants would still be out of jobs, but at least they'd have food.

I don't know about you evilz Uropans but us Americans give away lots of free food. Because America Hurr.
Blaming terrorism on food aid is...a unique viewpoint.

Hardly. Food riots aren't exactly rare throughout history.

WHEN THERE ISN'T ENOUGH. BLAMING COUNTRIES FOR PROVIDING FREE FOOD TO STARVING PEOPLE IS ABOUT AS ASININE AS YOU CAN GET.

Please cite one instance where the terrorists were unemployed farmers.
*France?
*ISIL fighters?
*Boko Haram

You're just blowing smoke out your ass boyo.

We aren't providing free food, that's the problem. You're conflating aid to famine-stricken areas with unfair trade practices in areas where the local farmers cannot compete with the cheap imports, and they can't export their goods because both the EU and the US have massive trade barriers in place.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/eu-subsidies-deny-africas-farmers-of-their-livelihood-478419.html

http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/oct/11/eu-agriculture-hurts-developing-countries

http://www.ifpri.org/blog/hidden-costs-us-and-eu-farm-subsidies

http://www.dw.de/eu-doesnt-consider-effects-of-farming-policies/a-16310008

If you honestly cannot understand that taking away people's livelihood is going to have a destabilizing effect on the region then I cannot help you, but I'm going to demand an apology from you. Accusing someone of "blowing smoke out his ass" when you yourself have absolutely no clue what you are talking about is rather infuriating, to say the least.

I completely agree...which is weird.

**PhantomViper**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

We aren't providing free food, that's the problem. You're conflating aid to famine-stricken areas with unfair trade practices in areas where the local farmers cannot compete with the cheap imports, and they can't export their goods because both the EU and the US have massive trade barriers in place.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/eu-subsidies-deny-africas-farmers-of-their-livelihood-478419.html

http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/oct/11/eu-agriculture-hurts-developing-countries

http://www.ifpri.org/blog/hidden-costs-us-and-eu-farm-subsidies

http://www.dw.de/eu-doesnt-consider-effects-of-farming-policies/a-16310008

If you honestly cannot understand that taking away people's livelihood is going to have a destabilizing effect on the region then I cannot help you, but I'm going to demand an apology from you. Accusing someone of "blowing smoke out his ass" when you yourself have absolutely no clue what you are talking about is rather infuriating, to say the least.

Funny how none of the countries mentioned in those articles is the source for these terrorists. But hey, you're from Sweden so everything that happens all over the world is the West's fault, right?

**Frazzled**

Evidently.
Also no mention of the tariff structures for those countries. But again its all the evil West, even though half the food I get isn't made here.

But hey its never the Evil Chinese is it...

**hotsauceman1**

I mean, providing supplies deny people the ability to create their own infrastructure and industrialization. many sociologista believe the only way for a country to modernize is to go through the industrial revolution itself because that bring societal evolution that is sorely needed.
But it being the source of terrorist I doupt.