Captagon - Our secret weapon against IS

a reply to: CrikeyMagnet

So, by your estimation, indiscriminately bombing targets despite the high number of civilian casualites is a better moral alternative then poisoning a batch of poison they are already taking?

We couldn't force them to take the pills, but we can supply them quietly.

Even though it is implied that addiction to the drug will not only be used to attract fighters (junkies) who might not otherwise join the IS but will result in the violent torture, rape and death of the rest of the population?

a reply to: DJW001

Unethical has always been a grey area when it comes to terrorists and the civilian drug addicts will only become tools of the IS.

Why unnecessary? The many nations that will fight the IS are spared billions of dollars and a mounting list of casualties. The truly innocent suffer the least and the IS is so crippled that its unable to recover.

a reply to: Thorneblood

Why unnecessary? The many nations that will fight the IS are spared billions of dollars and a mounting list of casualties. The truly innocent suffer the least and the IS is so crippled that its unable to recover.

Non-Muslim nations should not concern themselves with what is, in effect, Islam's Reformation. When the dust settles, the ummah will have decided whether it wants modern, federated, nation states, or an ancient theocratic empire that cannot interact constructively with the rest of the world. You would think that "the West" would have learned by now that any intervention in the Levant will de-legitimize any faction they support.

If IS is relying on crank to boost its morale, it will crash and burn soon enough.

a reply to: DJW001

And you should know that American politics is manipulated first by business and media, amd second by the people themselves.

This war is inevitable.

My way saves lives.

a reply to: Thorneblood

This war is inevitable.

Let Turkey handle it. We have too many concerns elsewhere.

My way saves lives.

Your way makes "the West" look even dirtier than it is. This is a war for "hearts and minds," not territory.

originally posted by: Thorneblood
a reply to: CrikeyMagnet

So, by your estimation, indiscriminately bombing targets despite the high number of civilian casualites is a better moral alternative then poisoning a batch of poison they are already taking?

We couldn't force them to take the pills, but we can supply them quietly.

Even though it is implied that addiction to the drug will not only be used to attract fighters (junkies) who might not otherwise join the IS but will result in the violent torture, rape and death of the rest of the population?

Uh, no. Bombing indiscriminately has the same problem. I did not specify because we weren't talking about bombing.

The key concept here is "indiscriminately". Would it be justified to fire a shotgun repeatedly into a crowd because you had evidence someone in there was a terrorist?