VP Mike Pence says Islamic State is carrying out genocide on Christians. Vows to destroy it.

a reply to: mOjOm

I think you misunderstand what I'm saying... I'm not for keeping up the targeted/limited missile or bombing, I'm saying level the whole damn city/cities. We need to make it so horrific that we take the will to fight out of them.

If we are not willing to do that then we should get out.

a reply to: LockNLoad

Hmm, "destroying anything and everything they hold dear", in a thread about bombing innocents. Those are ISIS tactics son. Calling names and degrading my reading comprehension is your only defense because my comment is exactly where your logic leads.

To say that I'm wrapped up in a little ball of hatred when you are arguing in favor of killing innocent people is laughable.

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: mOjOm

Even Japan surrendered after 2 nukes. If jihadists don't surrender, then they will be killed by modern technology they don't have.

Japan was a military power that had no support in its arena. They weren't guerrilla militants.

This is not a nation to bomb into submission because there IS no nation of DAESH. The areas that they hold captive are just that - captives. Often the people are terrorized and brutalized by DAESH to keep them under control (or have you not seen the reports about the way they're killing men that they suspect are gay?)

DAESH raids and demolishes the infrastructure (which wasn't theirs to begin with; they have no investment in it) and they don't have a standing army and tanks and jets and so forth. Bombing things generally destroys local businesses, houses, and livelihoods (as well as civilians.) It seldom harms them directly and any strike that harms civilian property or civilians is just added propaganda for them -- "you don't like seeing your houses destroyed and businesses destroyed and families killed by American bombs, right? Join us and fight the American monsters!"

This is guerrilla warfare. It's a whole different breed of action.

originally posted by: LockNLoad
a reply to: mOjOm

I think you misunderstand what I'm saying... I'm not for keeping up the targeted/limited missile or bombing, I'm saying level the whole damn city/cities. We need to make it so horrific that we take the will to fight out of them.

If we are not willing to do that then we should get out.

It won't work.

Those aren't their families in the cities. That's just territory that they've won and people they're holding hostage. In fact, they're killing people in those cities and using the cities' heavy machinery (like bulldozers) to knock down monuments, museums, archaeological sites, and so forth. They're stealing goods and artifacts from museums to sell on the black market.

They don't care if we bomb them... and when we do, that just gives them a nice recruitment tool: "foreigners are bombing innocents in this nation! Rise up and fight against them!"

First of all that is just an assumption since we don't know what would happen since it never happened.

Second and most important of all, Soldiers are soldiers and civilians are civilians. Soldiers put their lives on the line willing. That's why they are hero's of the people. Civilians didn't volunteer for that. That's why we don't kill civilians or it's called terrorism.

Wars are fought by armies who know full well what they've volunteered for and that it may mean their life. Civilians haven't. Soldiers can defend themselves and understand battle. Civilians are innocent and don't stand a chance against armies.

I understand you point and I don't like losing soldiers either. But at least they volunteer their lives for war. We killed over 100,000 civilians in one day and who knows how many more from the fallout and effects that came after. That's not including all other deaths from WW2.

So, you are saying that if the draft was enacted and our citizens were forced to go to war in the middle east...then you could see the sense in doing whatever to end the war quickly to avoid non-volunteered American citizens being killed?

a reply to: LockNLoad

Jesus man. You're talking about genocide. Do you understand that means killing thousands of innocent people including children???

Are you really ok with that???

a reply to: CynConcepts

Huh??? No that's not what I'm saying.

Also, Drafting people into war doesn't make them volunteers either. That's just forcing people into a war.

Do you understand the difference between soldiers and civilians???

Some of the videos are too graphic to post here. The following link is not too graphic.

www.almasdarnews.com...

a reply to: Byrd

It really comes down to 'can we kill an ideology', because that's what we really need to do. I think if we make the consequences of following that ideology too horrifying to contemplate then there will be less interest in following the ideology.

Don't get me wrong I don't think we should be there an any capacity, I think with the killing of Ben Laden we exacted any need for revenge for 9/11.

But that's not what we are dealing with, with our representatives (on both sides with few exceptions) hell bent on continuing this "war on terror", and until that changes I would rather have them and theirs die and be maimed then ours.

So... we are at war, do we at least try make it so that 'any' combative action towards our troops is meet with such horrifying consequences that any more hostilities would be unthinkable, or do we just continue to pump more bodies and money into an unwinnable war???

a reply to: mOjOm

I don't think it would really come to that, we did some pretty horrific things and killed a lot of civilians in WW2 but didn't come close to genocide.

"Are you really ok with that???"

Do I really need to answer that?

originally posted by: SteamyJeans
Lol. I'm all about wiping the scum that is "isis" off the face of the planet but this cheering on yo bomb women and children is insane.

As others have said, This is not the way forward. I'm not sure you'd like to be bombed to smithereeens just because of something your stupid little brother did...

But it sure is a nice way to drum up support for murdering people on the other side of the globe .. appeal to the morals and emotions of the idiots and you're good to go!
Praise the lord and pass the ammunition! For Jesus!

ETA I get that kids are trained young but so was I (in religion) and i eventually made my own decisions and peeled away... which they could very well do if we didn't kill their families and justify their hatred.

a reply to: allsee4eye

Yeah...about killing their women and children..

Maybe they shouldn't have started doing that to everyone else in the first place.

Besides, they love them some family martyrs.

a reply to: LockNLoad

What do you mean it won't come to that??? That's what you said you wanted to do. Here's what you said:

I'm not for keeping up the targeted/limited missile or bombing, I'm saying level the whole damn city/cities. We need to make it so horrific that we take the will to fight out of them.

If you carpet bomb whole cities full of people you'll be committing Genocide. ISIS isn't a bunch of families and people collectively living in cities. They're a terrorist organization of militants, like a large gang or network of assassins or something. They may be within those cities but they are not the populace of them. Those are normal people doing normal people stuff. That's who you'd be killing and they aren't ISIS.

Are you just wanting to wipe out all Muslim People, is that what you're saying???

Is that what you think ISIS is, just all the Muslims in the Middle East???

originally posted by: LockNLoad
a reply to: Deaf Alien

Who ever said war is "mentally healthy", it's not, that's why we have cases of PTSD or "shell shock" as it used to be called.

But which is worse... Ending a war we have chosen to engage in, quickly by taking the fight out of our adversary, or continuing to send more of 'our' citizens in to a protracted war???

We've had "boots on the ground" in the Middle East for how long now??? 15 - 20 years

Yep, time to wrap it up.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: LockNLoad

Jesus man. You're talking about genocide. Do you understand that means killing thousands of innocent people including children???

Are you really ok with that???

Genocide of what? Every muslim in the mid east?

Seriously?

That's they are doing to christians!

a reply to: burgerbuddy

Really?? So you think Every Muslim in the middle east is ISIS too???

a reply to: allsee4eye

Reminds me of what the Antichrist started to do near the end of the Left Behind Saga to the people who escaped to the exact same geographical locations in that book. Complete with fabricated stories of the atrocities committed by the people he was persecuting, and exaggerations of claims of victories over them, as well as the demonized media campaign .... woah man, was this book a blueprint for ISIS, or he world government?? Creepy man.

Im not really for killing their kids or wives unless they are engaging directly on the field. Well I guess this is how we win wars though right?? Intentionally go after the women and kids??? Why do I have feeling God is bout to come out of nowhere and mess things up??? Or at lest, some kind of aliens ... that could be perceived as God??

a reply to: LockNLoad

We'll never be able to kill an ideology.

But we can be so god-damned brutal, so unmerciful, so ####ing monstrous that they will crap themselves with the thought of attacking the west again.

a reply to: DBCowboy

They will see their Allah will not protect them from America's bombs. They will see their path is wrong. They will see their clerics have lied to them about 72 virgins.

a reply to: mOjOm

Sorry I was operating on the real meaning of the word genocide... "genocide is a combination of the Greek word génos ("race, people") and the Latin suffix -cide ("act of killing")" (cite). So no I don't want to kill off a race of people, if you want to go by the redefining of the word (1948) then I guess I am advocating "genocide" just like we did in WW2.

No

No, and is ISIS the only Middle Eastern terror group???

And before it get asked: No all Muslims are not terrorist, 'but' all the terrorist we are "at war" with are Muslim (or at least proclaim to be)

a reply to: allsee4eye

I doubt it.

They are cowards.

They respect strength. Their culture respects strength. They see diplomacy as weakness.

So we hit them hard, then we hit them harder.

When they ask us to stop, we hit them again and again.

Only then will they stop with the terrorist attacks.