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

Gee, what about the chinese and koreans the japanese messed up?

They were just as bad as isis to them.

Keep killing them until they have no idea what a circle is.

Well thank you Republicans for proving that you really don't give a damn about life and it's just a campaign slogan.

Isn't it ironic that the same person that is alway persecuting others that aren't christian is crying that christians are being persecuted?

Maybe congress will fund it. I would like to see a volunteer Christian army go over to the middle east. Religious zealots can fight it out til the death and see which god wins.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: allsee4eye

Is this kind of like the admin of GB junior where he plays president wile Cheney makes war behind the scenes and profits from it?

The ploy was so successful then, why ruin a good thing?

Trump will buffoon his away around and Pence will take care of bu$ine$$.

Four more (endless war) years!

Or we can just leave ISIS alone right? I mean what do you suggest we do about ISIS? Or do you suggest we just let evil prosper?

.....

You missed the point. We are the warmongers, waging unjust aggressive war against hapless nations, in the name of Humanity. Or whatever prefab 'enemy' we invent.

a reply to: xpert11

I agree, and ten years seems about right. The only question is... Do we and whoever are allies are, go "all in" and possibly end it in 4-5 years or do we fight a limited WW and drag it out for generations?

a reply to: LockNLoad
I prefer the generations fight. It contributes to a more consistent and stable growth of our financials.

a reply to: MOMof3

Since Judaism it has been 1 god. The Kaaba in Mecca was built many thousands of years before there was Islam. Islam has nothing to do with Allah. Allah was worshiped many thousands of years before there was Islam. Islam is the final religion. Mohammad made it that way.

a reply to: allsee4eye

I don't care. That's what I'm saying. All you zealots fight it out.

a reply to: MOMof3

Jihadists don't care about god. They only care about 72 virgins. Their clerics lied to them. Massacre non Muslims and they get 72 virgins in after life.

originally posted by: LockNLoad
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.

Actually, that has never worked unless you were willing to kill every single adherent and cleric of that religion...whether they were against you or were allies -- and that will have repercussions when the people who were sympathetic to the innocent (say family members who converted) become angry over killing innocent allies. That's part of what started this whole mess in the first place (that and economic disruption by drought which forced people to relocate.)

You kill ideologies and change ideologies and break their grip on society by offering them a more attractive alternative. The Christianity of today is not the same as the far more Jewish version of Christianity that existed during the first and second centuries AD. Slaughter of Christian groups by other Christians backfired and many of the things that the original group fought against Arianism would be horrified to see how much of that thought is incorporated into modern Christian sects.

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.

You don't seem to have a clear idea of who the enemy is. Are you advocating killing people like the Muslim barrista who works at our nearby Starbucks? She's pretty westernized (the only symbol of her faith is that she wears a headscarf.) What about the Muslim men and women on our college campus -- some of them wearing full traditional dress (I was surprised to see a woman in full black gown with head covering and veil - quite a contrast to the more usual attire of modern dress and a headscarf.) Or what about the Muslims who don't really wear religious based clothing?

Are we supposed to kill our fellow Americans as well as people in vaguely defined areas that you're talking about? DAESH does not control a country, only certain towns.

And by the way, DAESH fighters come from all over the world. Many are recruited when bombs or social conditions destroy the businesses and homes where these men live ... and DAESH comes in and offers them money to start fighting the very people who destroyed their property.

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???

Are you then proposing that we go throughout the world, identify anyone who's Muslim or suspected Muslim or who might even sympathize with Muslims and line them up and shoot every single one of them including babies and the elderly and the disabled as a "deterrent?"

Are you saying that we should obliterate towns like Tabqa - which had been taken captive by DAESH and was just taken back by the Syrian Democratic Forces (which are multiethnic rebel groups) thanks to the help of the US -- killing the very forces we helped regain their town and their homes? Killing them and their families?

Who, exactly do you intend to "bomb into obliteration"? Can you name some exact targets and places that you think could be effectively bombed that would totally wipe out DAESH?

originally posted by: Byrd

Actually, that has never worked unless you were willing to kill every single adherent and cleric of that religion...whether they were against you or were allies -- and that will have repercussions when the people who were sympathetic to the innocent (say family members who converted) become angry over killing innocent allies. That's part of what started this whole mess in the first place (that and economic disruption by drought which forced people to relocate.)

You kill ideologies and change ideologies and break their grip on society by offering them a more attractive alternative. The Christianity of today is not the same as the far more Jewish version of Christianity that existed during the first and second centuries AD. Slaughter of Christian groups by other Christians backfired and many of the things that the original group fought against Arianism would be horrified to see how much of that thought is incorporated into modern Christian sects.

I'm not talking about their religious ideology, I don't want to take way or destroy their religion, I want to take away their mind set that it's OK or even righteous to use violence/terror against the US or US personnel, and the only way I can see to do that it to make the consequences of adhering to that mind set horrific.

You say to change the ideologies we have to show them a better way or offer a more attractive alternative... how is that accomplished?

You don't seem to have a clear idea of who the enemy is. Are you advocating killing people like the Muslim barrista who works at our nearby Starbucks? She's pretty westernized (the only symbol of her faith is that she wears a headscarf.) What about the Muslim men and women on our college campus -- some of them wearing full traditional dress (I was surprised to see a woman in full black gown with head covering and veil - quite a contrast to the more usual attire of modern dress and a headscarf.) Or what about the Muslims who don't really wear religious based clothing?

Are we supposed to kill our fellow Americans as well as people in vaguely defined areas that you're talking about? DAESH does not control a country, only certain towns.

And by the way, DAESH fighters come from all over the world. Many are recruited when bombs or social conditions destroy the businesses and homes where these men live ... and DAESH comes in and offers them money to start fighting the very people who destroyed their property.

Are you then proposing that we go throughout the world, identify anyone who's Muslim or suspected Muslim or who might even sympathize with Muslims and line them up and shoot every single one of them including babies and the elderly and the disabled as a "deterrent?"

Are you saying that we should obliterate towns like Tabqa - which had been taken captive by DAESH and was just taken back by the Syrian Democratic Forces (which are multiethnic rebel groups) thanks to the help of the US -- killing the very forces we helped regain their town and their homes? Killing them and their families?

Who, exactly do you intend to "bomb into obliteration"? Can you name some exact targets and places that you think could be effectively bombed that would totally wipe out DAESH?

Really... Do really think I'm saying we should just start killing random Muslims, or are you just using hyperbole?

"bomb into obliteration"... more hyperbole?

I don't have the information that the military does to pick exact targets, and again I'm not talking about wiping out 'anybody', I'm saying we need to make the consequences of taking any hostile action against the US or US forces so horrible that the cost verses reward would not be worth it to them.

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: burgerbuddy

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

No, do you?

Of course not. It just sounded like that was what you were saying maybe. So I was asking.

originally posted by: LockNLoad
I'm not talking about their religious ideology, I don't want to take way or destroy their religion, I want to take away their mind set that it's OK or even righteous to use violence/terror against the US or US personnel, and the only way I can see to do that it to make the consequences of adhering to that mind set horrific.

Death isn't horrifying to them. You have to understand that when they go into this, they believe that they will eventually die as honorable combatants. It doesn't matter if you kill them with pork bullets or by dropping pigs on them or any other act that you think might be repugnant to them.

LIFE -- life under Western cultural practices is what's abhorrent to them.

You say to change the ideologies we have to show them a better way or offer a more attractive alternative... how is that accomplished?

I already told you - images, film, radio, tv, protection of people who live a more liberal lifestyle, rebuilt infrastructure, formerly wrecked areas with a strong economy. When those people desire that lifestyle strongly, no invasionary guerilla group can force them to change to their beliefs.

"bomb into obliteration"... more hyperbole?

No... I was echoing your words that you wanted them bombed off the face of the earth.

I don't have the information that the military does to pick exact targets, and again I'm not talking about wiping out 'anybody', I'm saying we need to make the consequences of taking any hostile action against the US or US forces so horrible that the cost verses reward would not be worth it to them.

Killing them isn't horrible. They're not frightened of death. Their lives and the world they see around them are what they consider living hells. Death brings release, the death of comrades is simply seen as martyrdom and heroism.

Defection of comrade soldiers is what shakes them up.

originally posted by: MOMof3
Maybe congress will fund it. I would like to see a volunteer Christian army go over to the middle east. Religious zealots can fight it out til the death and see which god wins.

It's been tried (the First, Second, Third... (etc) Crusades.) It didn't work out and it's what contributed to the problems in today's world.

a reply to: Byrd

This time it's different. This time the west has high tech weaponry and the Muslims still only have iron age weaponry.

originally posted by: Byrd

Death isn't horrifying to them. You have to understand that when they go into this, they believe that they will eventually die as honorable combatants. It doesn't matter if you kill them with pork bullets or by dropping pigs on them or any other act that you think might be repugnant to them.

LIFE -- life under Western cultural practices is what's abhorrent to them.

I disagree, sure there are some fanatics like any ideology will have, the point of my way is to make the non-fanatical leave and deny support to the fanatical. If the fanatics don't have any support or new membership (people are not born fanatics they are recruited) they will either die off or be left to the fringes to howl in the desert.

I already told you - images, film, radio, tv, protection of people who live a more liberal lifestyle, rebuilt infrastructure, formerly wrecked areas with a strong economy. When those people desire that lifestyle strongly, no invasionary guerilla group can force them to change to their beliefs.

Wow I didn't know that these towns and villages across the Middle East had so much access to outside information, and if they do have a large number of people able to have access to outside information, then they have already been exposed to information that lets them know there is a better way to live... and yet so many still think it's right to kill for their ideology.

And how do we protect these people that want to live a different lifestyle? Become an occupying force that can't or wouldn't dare be challenged (kind of like British Imperialism)???

I'm for helping them rebuild their infrastructure and economy... Just have get past all those pesky radicals that are running around.

No... I was echoing your words that you wanted them bombed off the face of the earth.

Not even close to what I've been saying.

Killing them isn't horrible. They're not frightened of death. Their lives and the world they see around them are what they consider living hells. Death brings release, the death of comrades is simply seen as martyrdom and heroism.

Defection of comrade soldiers is what shakes them up.

Again I disagree, not every single one of them are fanatics and I would hazard to say that not even the majority are.

You can't win the hearts and minds by showing them a better way when you have no means of delivering that message or if you are able to deliver the message and it get rejected.

I am personally in favor of pulling all our personnel out and letting the Middle Eastern countries handle their own problems, but it's not my decision to make.

a reply to: LockNLoad

They do not live in North Korea. Just because they don't sport $300 jordans, six generations of apple products and have a starbucks next to McDonalds does not mean they are clueless. In fact, many of them have tv's
I know right, what a shocker. I think you have a bit of a misunderstanding about the culture of many of these small townships and communities in isolated areas outside of ISIS control and before it all went to hell.

Other than the diet, language, and access to certain brand names, most of these communities are not much different than an isolated small town in the southwest US or Appalachian mountains. Work, raise a family, pray, and pay taxes.

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Byrd

This time it's different. This time the west has high tech weaponry and the Muslims still only have iron age weaponry.

Remember the Vietnam War?

Same thing.

And you might have forgotten that DAESH had been getting weapons from Russia and has been buying weapons on the Black Market. They're not firing arrows and shooting muskets.

a reply to: Byrd

They were also getting weapons from the USA. They did a good job of playing everybody with small non-aligned cells to try to get what they could from the big boys, and then simply funnel them back to their primary group. Once the jig was up, many of the smaller groups simply disappeared and reabsorbed into their parent company.

originally posted by: LockNLoad
I disagree, sure there are some fanatics like any ideology will have, the point of my way is to make the non-fanatical leave and deny support to the fanatical. If the fanatics don't have any support or new membership (people are not born fanatics they are recruited) they will either die off or be left to the fringes to howl in the desert.

(snip)

Wow I didn't know that these towns and villages across the Middle East had so much access to outside information, and if they do have a large number of people able to have access to outside information, then they have already been exposed to information that lets them know there is a better way to live... and yet so many still think it's right to kill for their ideology.

As Worldstarcountry said, you appear to have some misconceptions about the area. The towns were quite cosmopolitan (until various wars and bombs destroyed them) with tvs, good electric service, and so forth. Even now, cell phones are common (as is access to the Internet) -- unless you're in an area overrun by DAESH (think of them as an invading army) where they've destroyed power plants and anything that smacks of Western culture.

And the society was changing (and in some areas it is changing. Saudi Arabia is now permitting women to drive and is opening up other freedoms to women. This is not because someone bombed them or attacked them. It's because of the influence of Western culture (which has some clerics up in arms, but as women driving and working becomes normalized, the clerics lose their power.)

And how do we protect these people that want to live a different lifestyle? Become an occupying force that can't or wouldn't dare be challenged (kind of like British Imperialism)???

I think we both disagree on this one.

I'm for helping them rebuild their infrastructure and economy... Just have get past all those pesky radicals that are running around.

Pence's view of what should be done won't achieve that. He doesn't know who or where (they're not all hiding in tunnels) ... he "just knows" that if we kill them all that there's no possibility (ever) that someone will decide to take up the cause again and start the recruiting and fighting all over again. Or that some of the non-DAESH groups will step into the power vacuum.

Simplistic answers ("kill them" - as Pence proposes) simply don't work in a complex society and in a situation where there's a lot of background problems (such as other groups that are now fighting DAESH but who have similar ideas about society) that aren't addressed. It's like running up to a huge fire with a bucket of water and saying "I got this!" (if the fire is in a refinery, that bucket of water is going to cause a world of hurt instead of putting out the fire.)

I am personally in favor of pulling all our personnel out and letting the Middle Eastern countries handle their own problems, but it's not my decision to make.

We broadly agree on this.