It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


German Embed Reporter: ISIS Plans On Killing ‘HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS’ In ‘Religious Cleansing’

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 05:57 AM

originally posted by: FlyersFan
a reply to: Siddharta

from Siddharta's information

Without our wars, there would be no terrorism today.

Oh ... that is so NOT true!
Wow .. talk about turning a blind eye to history.
Wars over there may be making things worse.
But the terrorism would be there with or without them.

Kind of, but back in the day you had tyrants like Hussein, Ghaddafi, and Assad to keep these crazies in check with an iron fist. It's abundantly clear now that the power vacuum created after destabilization is far worse than the original governments in place. Every time, every single time, every every every single time that the west meddles it makes things worse.

*End reply to flyersfan and begin rant that's beginning to form:

AND every single time it's not the real enemy that is being sought out. It speaks volumes about how ignorant many are that we used 9/11 to go into Iraq, a country that had absolutely nothing to do with the attacks, and there is absolutely no outrage over the blatant use of military force for economic benefit. If this was a card game, Saudi Arabia and the US would be trading so many cards under the table it's sickening. It's all business, it never was anything else, and if you think it ever was or ever could be, you're kidding yourself.

All you have to do is look at it from a business perspective and you see why war is so beneficial for bankers, military contractors, politicians needing distractions from their own complete worthlessness and a nice dose of fear to keep the idiots glued to the propaganda box in the living room. I'm not saying every ISIS member has a CIA badge in their pocket, but I am saying that the most influential decision makers on the planet have absolutely no moral fortitude and would be in a very bad position if terrorism ever ceased to exist. I could go on about the varying degrees of separation between banking cartels and terrorist-funding entities but that would take some time. Everyone who hasn't read The Creature From Jekyll Island cannot really say they know what they're talking about regarding global economy, wars, and true government alliances. Everyone read that book!

End rant. Yay, beer time!

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 09:28 AM
a reply to: projectvxn

Thanks for that, looks like I am not the only one who had the question. What happens with our troops that are spread out if Russia, China and Saudi Arabia join forces and cut the USD in a joint effort to kill the dollar and gain alliances in the new currency or face the loss of all oil?

When do the troops come home and protect the homeland, or do they come home to quell the mass panic of a economic disater such as the fall of the USD and the system as we know it? Social security, welfare, foodstammps, IRAs, 401ks, stocks, bonds Tbills, pensions, and all cash in banks failed?

We face some very serious months ahead as the new world order takes its foothold in the currency markets and inflation hits American pocket books to the point of no denial. How does the US Military stand on such a humanitarian crisis?

Edit to say that I believe this post has everything to do with the OP and thread title. From what we have seen oin other countries this is how they take over a country, region, they dismantle from within, cause panic and starvation then when the bottom drops out they move in for the kill and the assimilation of the hungry and hopeless. Training and protection lest the survivors face the same wrath as so many they proceeded.

Sharia law is being put in place more so every day. I see Africa, once a Christian country now filled with Sharia rule enthusiasts lest they face the same atrocities as their brothers.

edit on am131amTue, 20 Jan 2015 09:40:12 -0600 by antar because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 09:55 AM
Terrorist attacks and deaths hit record high, report shows more than 8,500 terrorist attacks killed nearly 15,500 people, in 2013

The reality of the war against terrorism is that since 2001, the U.S. has weakened groups like Al-Qaeda, but "hasn't wiped any out" according to a recent Washington Post article. Retired Air Force General Charles F. Wald is quoted as saying, "We're not going to see an end to this in our lifetime...there isn't going to be any time where we all of a sudden can declare victory."

terrorist attacks killed nearly
17,891 in 2014

In 2013, a total of 9,707 terrorist attacks occurred worldwide, resulting in more than 17,800 deaths and more than 32,500 injuries. In addition, more than 2,990 people were kidnapped or taken hostage... The ten countries that experienced the most terrorist attacks in 2013 are the same as those that experienced the most terrorist attacks in 2012. The ranking in terms of total attacks increased for Iraq, the Philippines, and Syria, decreased for Pakistan, Nigeria, Yemen, and Somalia, and remained the same for Afghanistan, India, and Thailand.
In 2012, a total of 6,771 terrorist attacks occurred worldwide, resulting in more than 11,000 deaths and more than 21,600 injuries. In addition, more than 1,280 people were kidnapped or taken hostage.
Over 10,000 terrorist attacks occurred in 2011, affecting nearly 45,000 victims in 70 countries and resulting in over 12,500 deaths.
Over 11,500 terrorist attacks occurred in 72 countries in 2010, resulting in approximately 50,000 victims, including almost 13,200 deaths.
Approximately 11,000 terrorist attacks occurred in 83 countries during 2009, resulting in over 58,000 victims, including nearly 15,000 fatalities.

ISIS Committing Ethnic Cleansing on an Historic Scale

absolute there will be millions killed many millions before this ends, if ever, and how many more die that we never hear about.

edit on 093131p://bTuesday2015 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

edit on 093131p://bTuesday2015 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 10:00 AM
Your choice.

You can fight them there.

You can fight them here.

Make no mistake YOU will be fighting it.

Personally I am with Project.

No mercy.

No quarter.

No bullsnip politics.

Choose wisely.
edit on 20-1-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 11:38 AM
a reply to: neo96

Is that you dubbya!

Same old song and dance about aq.

Beat those war drums!
isis is so dead set on attacking us that they haven't even done it yet

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 11:45 AM

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: neo96

Is that you dubbya!

Same old song and dance about aq.

Beat those war drums!
isis is so dead set on attacking us that they haven't even done it yet

Guess someone choose poorly.

Fine example of the bull snip politics.

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 11:47 AM
a reply to: neo96

It's called learning from the past!

What you just said is the same line of thought that got us in Iraq in the first place!

Why would we go and do that again when it didn't accomplish a damn thing the first, well really second, time?!

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 11:55 AM
a reply to: Sremmos80

Seriously ?

Learn from the past eh ?

60 Terrorist Plots Since 9/11: Continued Lessons in Domestic Counterterrorism

List: Islamic Terror Attacks against USA before 9/11

Anyone who thinks this began with Iraq, and Afghanistan is not living in reality.

And is CLEARLY denying HISTORY.

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 12:03 PM

originally posted by: FlyersFan

ISIS Plans On Killing ‘HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS’ In ‘Religious Cleansing’

From what I'm reading, there are a lot of foreigners going to Syria and Iraq to mass murder and rape with ISIS. It's attracting all sorts of murderers and rapists who are just looking for a lawless place to do their evil. It's a honeypot for attracting the worst scum of the Earth. I have no doubt that the evil in them would love to rape and mass murder, and then control a much smaller population ... drag the world back to the bronze age where mass murder and rape under the guise of religion was the norm and accepted.

im reminded of other religious leaders who were bent on genocide...

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 01:18 PM
a reply to: neo96

You want to bring up the numbers of attacks of those that are not done in the name of Islam?

And maybe go further then the heritage foundation.
They have a couple horses is the race of going to war.
I am not denying history, we all see what going to war with an ideology has done, and yet people want to do it agian..

Destroyed our economy and cost americans lives, but who cares right?

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 01:37 PM
a reply to: neo96

Has the US ever actually directly attacked it's enemies? We went into Afghanistan knowing hatred had grown for the west in the form of the Taliban after we deserted them with their pants down 20 years ago...we would find a formidable resistance there, though 'former' CIA asset Bin Laden was never found there. Also this. We went into Iraq...why? Because Americans were pissed enough to back any military action whatsoever, that's why.

All the while Saudi Arabia goes untouched, unquestioned, unmentioned.

I respect that you have put your life on the line for your fellow countryman but what the heck are you doing on ATS under the notion that our leaders told us the truth? I'm sure you lost more than one friend in should be downright angry for being lied to.

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 01:38 PM
a reply to: neo96

Don't know how old you are but this is exactly what they told us in the run-up to the Vietnam War. They told us that if we didn't stop them in Vietnam we'd be fighting them on Main St. USA. Well, we lost that war and I've yet to see any Vietcong show up on my Main Street. That's the problem with crying wolf.

There is insufficient political backbone to combat this problem. Because we're complicit with some of the primary actors. If we REALLY wanted to end it we would only need to target all sources and conduits for funding. Start blowing up banks that launder/transit funds, start blowing up the property of donors and this whole thing would wither away. But who has those kinds of balls?

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 04:20 PM

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: IAMTAT

No it isn't a threat to us, and yes I would just like to leave it alone. Every time we interfere violently, we end up making the situation worse. Let ISIS wstablish a real country with real laws, real government, and real bureaucracy and see that running a country is a LOT harder than rampaging recklessly. Maybe then we could negotiate peacefully with them to change their ways.

All I've seen while alive witnessing the War on Terror (and participating in it while in the US Army) as well as my studying of history has shown me that all violence does is perpetuate the cycle of violence. It never stops, violence breeds more violence. The ISIS terrorists that we kill are someone's brother, someone's father, someone's son, etc. While we may view them as detestable, those people view them as family. We kill them, then we've just radicalized someone else (maybe more).

I'm sorry, but I must be missing something in what you said. Are you suggesting that we "leave it (them) alone" as in, allow them to continue their war against non-radicals in their and neighboring countries? Then...while I understand "violence breeds more violence", are you suggesting again that we just leave them alone but this time for the reason of we don't want to piss off their brothers? And finally...we should instead leave them alone to form a country with all the military, infrastructure etc. and then see if they would like to talk about peace?

That isn't a plan, in my opinion. These people, driven by their radical beliefs are a growing cancer affecting other cells and slowly killing off the body. You attack such an infection by eradicating it entirely and often with extreme measures until it is gone. And sometimes you damage a few surrounding cells in the process but the greater good of the whole, sometimes requires that. In my experience (non-military by the way), you can't allow a gang of violent murderers grow. You have to destroy them while they are smaller and BEFORE they can acquire larger weapons and establish a foothold. Because in the can never speak peace with people who hate everyone but themselves.

posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 04:29 PM
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Which was almost the exact thought process of AQ.
Which led us into 2 wars that did nothing but down the econ and cost american lives and did absolutely NOTHING to solve the 'problem' we have.

posted on Jan, 21 2015 @ 02:16 AM
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

The thing is that for every innocent family we accidentally blow to pieces in the effort to fight terrorism, a new terror cell is born. To think that all non-extremists want us involved over there is a huge fallacy as well.

posted on Jan, 21 2015 @ 06:47 AM
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Yea, how did that work out for us in Iraq and Afghanistan?

posted on Jan, 21 2015 @ 12:47 PM
a reply to: Krazysh0t

They just need a few nukes for that.

Speaking of Nukes, i know it sound really unthinkably stupid but... Lets just nuke the whole country while we can.
We try to negotiate once or twice, give them the ultimatum to behave or else. Then its time to go Nuclear..... or at least carpet bomb everything with bunker busters and MOABs.
edit on 12America/ChicagoWed, 21 Jan 2015 12:52:38 -0600000000pm2015-01-21T12:52:38-06:0031522015-01-21T12:52:38-06:00 by Heruactic because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 21 2015 @ 01:00 PM
a reply to: Heruactic

What? Are you insane?

First off, with all the flak that the government (Obama) gets for using drones, do you honestly think that there won't be a HUGE backlash for such a decision?
Second off, HOLY CRAP! Are you insane?

posted on Jan, 21 2015 @ 01:49 PM
a reply to: Heruactic

What so you think everyone over there deserves to die?!?

It's sad how many people would actually agree with it tho

posted on Jan, 21 2015 @ 02:00 PM
Why are you two OK with ISIS seriously and blatantly advocating Mass-murder, but you're both outraged at Heruactic for sarcastically doing so?
Doesn't make sense. Seems like a pro-ISIS double standard.

IMO BOTH ISIS and Heruactic are wrong, though, to the best of my knowledge, Heruactic doesn't regularly behead people.

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in