We have a "holier than thou" attitude when we engage an ever evolving enemy who has no rules and many faces

Do we need to change our rules of engagement?

Maqqa wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 11:45am:

We have a "holier than thou" attitude when we engage an ever evolving enemy who has no rules and many faces Do we need to change our rules of engagement?

Not to killing innocent people

Kytro wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 11:48am:

Maqqa wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:45am: We have a "holier than thou" attitude when we engage an ever evolving enemy who has no rules and many faces Do we need to change our rules of engagement? Not to killing innocent people

So if we can't tell who is innocent and who is not innocent - then what?!

And what level of innocence are we talking about?

Maqqa wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 12:55pm:

Kytro wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:48am: Maqqa wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:45am: We have a "holier than thou" attitude when we engage an ever evolving enemy who has no rules and many faces Do we need to change our rules of engagement? Not to killing innocent people So if we can't tell who is innocent and who is not innocent - then what?! And what level of innocence are we talking about?

We probably shouldn't be killing people we are not sure about, and we shouldn't be using deadly force against people who are unlikely to use it themselves.

I don't think traditional military can be used to destroy terrorist networks. you can use it against the ISIS in so far as in Syria to diminishing the capability they have of forming a state, but not against the terrorist components.

For that you need good local intelligence and small specialised teams. There will always be people willing to die for their cause, but those people that plan the attack and those that carry it out often differ. Reduce their ability to plan, and you reduce the risk of an attack.

Kytro wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 1:32pm:

Maqqa wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 12:55pm: Kytro wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:48am: Maqqa wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:45am: We have a "holier than thou" attitude when we engage an ever evolving enemy who has no rules and many faces Do we need to change our rules of engagement? Not to killing innocent people So if we can't tell who is innocent and who is not innocent - then what?! And what level of innocence are we talking about? We probably shouldn't be killing people we are not sure about, and we shouldn't be using deadly force against people who are unlikely to use it themselves. I don't think traditional military can be used to destroy terrorist networks. you can use it against the ISIS in so far as in Syria to diminishing the capability they have of forming a state, but not against the terrorist components. For that you need good local intelligence and small specialised teams. There will always be people willing to die for their cause, but those people that plan the attack and those that carry it out often differ. Reduce their ability to plan, and you reduce the risk of an attack.

Nice words, but a complete fantasy. It is in fact the recipe for never ever winning another war ever again. Wars are not clinical little events where only those with guns and pointed at you and over 18 and representing a threat get attacked. If you want to play like that you will get beaten everytime. The enemy just needs to make sure there are civilians around and voila! victory is assured.

The rules of engagement against ISIS need to be simply that if you are in ISIS territory you are a potential target.

It all depends on whether you want to win the war or not. The fact of civilian casualties is not in question. The only question is which side they come from.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 4:05pm:

The rules of engagement against ISIS need to be simply that if you are in ISIS territory you are a potential target.

Do you want even more refugees, because this is how you get more refugees.

Well, there was a thread somewhere about what we learned from Vietnam...

I will be honest, I did not bother going there because, well, the general way discussions here go, I was not optimistic of it being any value...Read into that what you will.

A couple of things I think we as a people learned though...

1) We (the public) should NEVER take our anger, angst and disproval of how our Government chooses to enforce our will by military use on individual soldiers - for the main part, they're ordinary people who do an extraordinary job, part of which is to (generally) follow their orders... Attacking our own military for doing what they are told is useless, hurtful and cowardly - take it up with Government...

2) We have (or perhaps had) some of the best counter insurgence practices on the planet, which, particularly in Vietnam probably saved more Australian soldiers lives than any other factor (well as well as being none too shabby as far as soldiering goes too apparently). Our practices to win hearts and minds made Australian forces very distinct from US forces.

Now, if you did not learn that lesson about our inappropriate escapades into Vietnam, then by all means you need to keep talking about "Rules of Engagment" because you clearly do not understand the hearts and minds concept. Fighting is just easier I suppose.

If you did learn the lesson then is there really more to debate?

Kytro wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 4:09pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 4:05pm: The rules of engagement against ISIS need to be simply that if you are in ISIS territory you are a potential target. Do you want even more refugees, because this is how you get more refugees.

Did the USA take all of Europe as refugees after WW2?  No. They fed them at home and got them re-established. You can do the same thing there minus IS and other crazy sods.

No, it is not simple or easy or cheap. But every other option is worse.

Indiscriminately mass murdering will just assist recruiting more people to shoot back.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35ZDvH_CA20

____ wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 5:04pm:

Indiscriminately mass murdering will just assist recruiting more people to shoot back. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35ZDvH_CA20

Not if you get them ALL!!!

mariacostel wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 4:42pm:

Kytro wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 4:09pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 4:05pm: The rules of engagement against ISIS need to be simply that if you are in ISIS territory you are a potential target. Do you want even more refugees, because this is how you get more refugees. Did the USA take all of Europe as refugees after WW2?  No. They fed them at home and got them re-established. You can do the same thing there minus IS and other crazy sods. No, it is not simple or easy or cheap. But every other option is worse.

My point was more that if you start shooting at everything, then significantly more people will flee which will of course lead to more refugees.

Regardless of what the long term plans may be, people are not going to sit there and wait to be killed. You will have massive number of people fleeing, probably including parts of ISIS, so how will you handle that. Regardless of how gung-ho you are, society will not put up with it's government killing innocent people wholesale.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 5:38pm:

____ wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 5:04pm: Indiscriminately mass murdering will just assist recruiting more people to shoot back. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35ZDvH_CA20 Not if you get them ALL!!!

You're not going to get the all though.

Maqqa wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 12:55pm:

Kytro wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:48am: Maqqa wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:45am: We have a "holier than thou" attitude when we engage an ever evolving enemy who has no rules and many faces Do we need to change our rules of engagement? Not to killing innocent people So if we can't tell who is innocent and who is not innocent - then what?! And what level of innocence are we talking about?

The failure of the invasion of Iraq shows that shock and awe tactics do not work. All we created was a power vaccuum for Isis to move into and the motivation that created a whole generation of terrorists.

The_Barnacle wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 9:17pm:

Maqqa wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 12:55pm: Kytro wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:48am: Maqqa wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:45am: We have a "holier than thou" attitude when we engage an ever evolving enemy who has no rules and many faces Do we need to change our rules of engagement? Not to killing innocent people So if we can't tell who is innocent and who is not innocent - then what?! And what level of innocence are we talking about? The failure of the invasion of Iraq shows that shock and awe tactics do not work. All we created was a power vaccuum for Isis to move into and the motivation that created a whole generation of terrorists.

Shock and awe tactics do work.  But they are not tools for an occupation.   For that you can blame silly decisions by Jay Garner in debbathication and Rumsfeld in not supporting the civil authorities, not considering it a military duty, a source of friction between him and Condaleeza Rice.   

Maqqa wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 11:45am:

We have a "holier than thou" attitude when we engage an ever evolving enemy who has no rules and many faces Do we need to change our rules of engagement?

I am not sure that “holier than thou,” is applicable anymore than “rules of engagement.”

We need to recognise that Islam declared war on the West at least as far back as the Iran Hostage Crisis.

We are at war, and to win a war you have to go for the jugular. Our military in the West cannot police foreign countries. That type of foreign policy is doomed to failure.

When the military is engaged by people in civilian clothes, their assailants must not be allowed to throw up their hands and claim protection under the Geneva Convention. Finish them off on the field.

War is nasty. You cannot win a war by being nice. Do not ask soldiers to beat your enemy, and then burden them with media coverage which is essentially anti-war.

Tactically we need to return to methods of Total War that brought the Axis Powers to their knees in WW2.

Growing Muslim populations in the West will fight ever increasing 3rd Column actions as we have seen. They need to be offered one final chance to accept Western Pluralism and reject religious fanatic doctrines, or be treated as Foreign Combatants out of uniform by sending them to the wall.

I have pointed out our philosophical deficiency concerning the winning of wars in another thread.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 4:42pm:

Kytro wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 4:09pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 4:05pm: The rules of engagement against ISIS need to be simply that if you are in ISIS territory you are a potential target. Do you want even more refugees, because this is how you get more refugees. Did the USA take all of Europe as refugees after WW2?  No. They fed them at home and got them re-established. You can do the same thing there minus IS and other crazy sods. No, it is not simple or easy or cheap. But every other option is worse.

Good thinking - the El Omar Sh'all Plan....

It took them 10 years to find and kill Osama

What if they had to bomb a heavily populate area such as school/hospital/hotel to kill him?

mothra wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 8:49pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 5:38pm: ____ wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 5:04pm: Indiscriminately mass murdering will just assist recruiting more people to shoot back. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35ZDvH_CA20 Not if you get them ALL!!! You're not going to get the all though.

Depends on what you use dipstick.

Bazza wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 11:30pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 8:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 5:38pm: ____ wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 5:04pm: Indiscriminately mass murdering will just assist recruiting more people to shoot back. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35ZDvH_CA20 Not if you get them ALL!!! You're not going to get the all though. Depends on what you use dipstick.

And what would you suggest, know-all?  (this'll be a long wait and a good laugh).....

And stop calling other users names..... last warning.

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 11:34pm:

Bazza wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:30pm: mothra wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 8:49pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 5:38pm: ____ wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 5:04pm: Indiscriminately mass murdering will just assist recruiting more people to shoot back. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35ZDvH_CA20 Not if you get them ALL!!! You're not going to get the all though. Depends on what you use dipstick. And what would you suggest, know-all?  (this'll be a long wait and a good laugh)..... And stop calling other users names..... last warning.

Why are you acting like a Diptick last warning or I am dobbing on you for acting like a dipstick.

What is a 'diptick'?  Is your English failing you again or are you becoming frustrated and losing it?

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 11:52pm:

What is a 'diptick'?  Is your English failing you again or are you becoming frustrated and losing it?

dipstick
ˈdɪpstɪk
noun
1.
a graduated rod for measuring the depth of a liquid, especially oil in a vehicle's engine.
2.
informal
a stupid or inept person.

----

It's pretty clear which one you are. ;D ;D ;D

You added an 's' there, you cheeky soul, you... so when pressed you can speak English?

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 12:11am:

You added an 's' there, you cheeky soul, you... so when pressed you can speak English?

2.
informal
a stupid or inept person.

I was right ;D

So - now you can't keep up with the argument and instead try to pile one inanity on top of another and think that will help your case?

Got any proof of one single thing you say?

You got that from google, didn't you... you cheeky devil....   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

How it comes 'round... and 'round......

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 12:15am:

So - now you can't keep up with the argument and instead try to pile one inanity on top of another and think that will help your case? Got any proof of one single thing you say?

I posted proof above the the number 2.

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 12:16am:

You got that from google, didn't you... you cheeky devil....   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Not sure why you are laughing at that you do realize what google is don't you.

It's what we call a search engine. You learn something new every day don't ya gramps.

Bazza wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 12:18am:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18th, 2015 at 12:16am: You got that from google, didn't you... you cheeky devil....   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Not sure why you are laughing at that you do realize what google is don't you. It's what we call a search engine. You learn something new every day don't ya gramps.

But any time I post a researched thing to support my side you call 'foul'!  I can do the same, thank you for asking...

But I won't give you access to clan sites that are Members Only.... eat it....

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 12:21am:

Bazza wrote on Nov 18th, 2015 at 12:18am: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18th, 2015 at 12:16am: You got that from google, didn't you... you cheeky devil....   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Not sure why you are laughing at that you do realize what google is don't you. It's what we call a search engine. You learn something new every day don't ya gramps. But any time I post a researched thing to support my side you call 'foul'!  I can do the same, thank you for asking... But I won't give you access to clan sites that are Members Only.... eat it....

There are no clan sites so I guess the dietary requirements for consuming bullshit is pretty lean and low on calories.

You're a legend in your own mind. That is the funniest post that I have read all year.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Got nothing, huh?    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
No clan sites?  How would you know?  You're just making it up, aren't you, cheeky....

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 12:34am:

Got nothing, huh?    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D No clan sites?  How would you know?  You're just making it up, aren't you, cheeky....

Got nothing, huh?    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
No clan sites?  You're just making it up, aren't you, cheeky....

Bazza wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 12:32am:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18th, 2015 at 12:21am: Bazza wrote on Nov 18th, 2015 at 12:18am: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18th, 2015 at 12:16am: You got that from google, didn't you... you cheeky devil....   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Not sure why you are laughing at that you do realize what google is don't you. It's what we call a search engine. You learn something new every day don't ya gramps. But any time I post a researched thing to support my side you call 'foul'!  I can do the same, thank you for asking... But I won't give you access to clan sites that are Members Only.... eat it.... There are no clan sites so I guess the dietary requirements for consuming bullshit is pretty lean and low on calories. You're a legend in your own mind. That is the funniest post that I have read all year. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

That's worth a recap. ;D ;D

PRICELESS
PURE GOLD

Bazza wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 12:39am:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18th, 2015 at 12:34am: Got nothing, huh?    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D No clan sites?  How would you know?  You're just making it up, aren't you, cheeky.... Got nothing, huh?    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D No clan sites?  You're just making it up, aren't you, cheeky....

Repetition!  The best form of flattery!!  I win again!!!

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 12:40am:

Bazza wrote on Nov 18th, 2015 at 12:39am: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18th, 2015 at 12:34am: Got nothing, huh?    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D No clan sites?  How would you know?  You're just making it up, aren't you, cheeky.... Got nothing, huh?    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D No clan sites?  You're just making it up, aren't you, cheeky.... Repetition!  The best form of flattery!!  I win again!!!

If you say so General Fantasy. :D

Ah - nothing to come  back with that's solid, eh?  Thanks for the white flag..... bet you missed it.... the blind are like that....

Damn - I was enjoying that......

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 12:43am:

Ah - nothing to come  back with that's solid, eh?  Thanks for the white flag..... bet you missed it.... the blind are like that.... Damn - I was enjoying that......

So was I , I was making something solid for you I was just trying to work out how to upload sh!t to a forum as an attachment for you.

Bazza wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 2:28am:

I was just trying to work out how to upload sh!t to a forum as an attachment for you.

No attachment needed, you have done fine so far just posting your thoughts.

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18^th, 2015 at 12:40am:

Bazza wrote on Nov 18th, 2015 at 12:39am: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 18th, 2015 at 12:34am: Got nothing, huh?    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D No clan sites?  How would you know?  You're just making it up, aren't you, cheeky.... Got nothing, huh?    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D No clan sites?  You're just making it up, aren't you, cheeky.... Repetition!  The best form of flattery!!  I win again!!!

grap dont you ever get bored with all this?????

I wont ask the other chap.. as he seems to have very little else to do.. :( :(

____ wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 5:04pm:

Indiscriminately mass murdering will just assist recruiting more people to shoot back. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35ZDvH_CA20

I couldnt agree more


SEND EM SHY... that will fix it once and for all.

issuevoter wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 9:51pm:

Maqqa wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:45am: We have a "holier than thou" attitude when we engage an ever evolving enemy who has no rules and many faces Do we need to change our rules of engagement? I am not sure that “holier than thou,” is applicable anymore than “rules of engagement.” We need to recognise that Islam declared war on the West at least as far back as the Iran Hostage Crisis. We are at war, and to win a war you have to go for the jugular. Our military in the West cannot police foreign countries. That type of foreign policy is doomed to failure. When the military is engaged by people in civilian clothes, their assailants must not be allowed to throw up their hands and claim protection under the Geneva Convention. Finish them off on the field. War is nasty. You cannot win a war by being nice. Do not ask soldiers to beat your enemy, and then burden them with media coverage which is essentially anti-war. Tactically we need to return to methods of Total War that brought the Axis Powers to their knees in WW2. Growing Muslim populations in the West will fight ever increasing 3rd Column actions as we have seen. They need to be offered one final chance to accept Western Pluralism and reject religious fanatic doctrines, or be treated as Foreign Combatants out of uniform by sending them to the wall. I have pointed out our philosophical deficiency concerning the winning of wars in another thread.

There is all but zero chance of this happening. It's completely politically infeasible, as I have mentioned before, and I doubt this strategy would work in any case you cannot use traditional military tactics against asymmetric warfare.

The US is now looking at changing its rules of engagement

Maqqa wrote on Nov 20^th, 2015 at 11:19am:

The US is now looking at changing its rules of engagement

Hopefully to stop rejecting targets because there are civilians there. You dont have to hold a gun to be an ISIS supporter. If you live there along with the rest of the monsters then you are a target.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 21^st, 2015 at 5:29pm:

Maqqa wrote on Nov 20th, 2015 at 11:19am: The US is now looking at changing its rules of engagement Hopefully to stop rejecting targets because there are civilians there. You dont have to hold a gun to be an ISIS supporter. If you live there along with the rest of the monsters then you are a target.

And if you flee you are a different kind of problem, right Maria?

mothra wrote on Nov 21^st, 2015 at 5:30pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:29pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 20th, 2015 at 11:19am: The US is now looking at changing its rules of engagement Hopefully to stop rejecting targets because there are civilians there. You dont have to hold a gun to be an ISIS supporter. If you live there along with the rest of the monsters then you are a target. And if you flee you are a different kind of problem, right Maria?

The world needs leaders willing to take the hard decisions. DEcisions like nuking Japan. Decisions that are harsh but win wars and save lives.

Crush ISIS and its supporters. End them. Make a statement.

Your attitudes couldnt win a card game nevermind a war.

Maqqa wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 10:45pm:

It took them 10 years to find and kill Osama What if they had to bomb a heavily populate area such as school/hospital/hotel to kill him?

In Pakistan, that fine US ally? Good question, Maqqa.

Maybe the US could blow up our schools/hospitals/hotels too. 

mariacostel wrote on Nov 21^st, 2015 at 5:35pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:30pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:29pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 20th, 2015 at 11:19am: The US is now looking at changing its rules of engagement Hopefully to stop rejecting targets because there are civilians there. You dont have to hold a gun to be an ISIS supporter. If you live there along with the rest of the monsters then you are a target. And if you flee you are a different kind of problem, right Maria? The world needs leaders willing to take the hard decisions. DEcisions like nuking Japan. Decisions that are harsh but win wars and save lives.

Yes, dear, I believe they're currently making the tough decision to work out what to do.

If they don't do this, they won't be winning any wars or saving any lives, now will they?

mariacostel wrote on Nov 21^st, 2015 at 5:35pm:

mothra wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:30pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:29pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 20th, 2015 at 11:19am: The US is now looking at changing its rules of engagement Hopefully to stop rejecting targets because there are civilians there. You dont have to hold a gun to be an ISIS supporter. If you live there along with the rest of the monsters then you are a target. And if you flee you are a different kind of problem, right Maria? The world needs leaders willing to take the hard decisions. DEcisions like nuking Japan. Decisions that are harsh but win wars and save lives.

Agreed its not like you are going to collaterally take out anything that won't grow up and bite you in the ass anyways.

Karnal wrote on Nov 21^st, 2015 at 5:41pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:35pm: mothra wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:30pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:29pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 20th, 2015 at 11:19am: The US is now looking at changing its rules of engagement Hopefully to stop rejecting targets because there are civilians there. You dont have to hold a gun to be an ISIS supporter. If you live there along with the rest of the monsters then you are a target. And if you flee you are a different kind of problem, right Maria? The world needs leaders willing to take the hard decisions. DEcisions like nuking Japan. Decisions that are harsh but win wars and save lives. Yes, dear, I believe they're currently making the tough decision to work out what to do. If they don't do this, they won't be winning any wars or saving any lives, now will they?

Are you capable of serious commentary, pakistani-troll?

mariacostel wrote on Nov 21^st, 2015 at 5:47pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:41pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:35pm: mothra wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:30pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:29pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 20th, 2015 at 11:19am: The US is now looking at changing its rules of engagement Hopefully to stop rejecting targets because there are civilians there. You dont have to hold a gun to be an ISIS supporter. If you live there along with the rest of the monsters then you are a target. And if you flee you are a different kind of problem, right Maria? The world needs leaders willing to take the hard decisions. DEcisions like nuking Japan. Decisions that are harsh but win wars and save lives. Yes, dear, I believe they're currently making the tough decision to work out what to do. If they don't do this, they won't be winning any wars or saving any lives, now will they? Are you capable of serious commentary, pakistani-troll?

I can answer that, NO.

Maqqa wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 11:45am:

We have a "holier than thou" attitude when we engage an ever evolving enemy who has no rules and many faces Do we need to change our rules of engagement?

We need our talking heads to outnumber their decapitators.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 21^st, 2015 at 5:47pm:

Karnal wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:41pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:35pm: mothra wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:30pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:29pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 20th, 2015 at 11:19am: The US is now looking at changing its rules of engagement Hopefully to stop rejecting targets because there are civilians there. You dont have to hold a gun to be an ISIS supporter. If you live there along with the rest of the monsters then you are a target. And if you flee you are a different kind of problem, right Maria? The world needs leaders willing to take the hard decisions. DEcisions like nuking Japan. Decisions that are harsh but win wars and save lives. Yes, dear, I believe they're currently making the tough decision to work out what to do. If they don't do this, they won't be winning any wars or saving any lives, now will they? Are you capable of serious commentary, pakistani-troll?

Let's see - a battle plan for securing Iraq and Syria, and downgrading the risk of terrorism everywhere else.

Are you capable of a serious response?

Karnal wrote on Nov 21^st, 2015 at 6:27pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:47pm: Karnal wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:41pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:35pm: mothra wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:30pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 21st, 2015 at 5:29pm: Maqqa wrote on Nov 20th, 2015 at 11:19am: The US is now looking at changing its rules of engagement Hopefully to stop rejecting targets because there are civilians there. You dont have to hold a gun to be an ISIS supporter. If you live there along with the rest of the monsters then you are a target. And if you flee you are a different kind of problem, right Maria? The world needs leaders willing to take the hard decisions. DEcisions like nuking Japan. Decisions that are harsh but win wars and save lives. Yes, dear, I believe they're currently making the tough decision to work out what to do. If they don't do this, they won't be winning any wars or saving any lives, now will they? Are you capable of serious commentary, pakistani-troll? Let's see - a battle plan for securing Iraq and Syria, and downgrading the risk of terrorism everywhere else. Are you capable of a serious response?

LOL that is funny coming from you, paki-troll.

Terrorism is a tool used by idealist

Idealists relates to belief.

2000 years of belief cannot be changed overnight


Battle plan to control terrorists

(1) Overseas - use governments of the terrorists' base to control them
(2) Domestically - re-engagement of local Mosques and their leaders. Form a coalition amongst all Imams to preach a new message
(3) Those Imams who don't agree - slap a tracker on them
(4) These trackers will lead you to their followers - assess the danger levels and make arrests
(5) Arrest the Imams as they commit crimes

This will not completely get rid off terrorists but it will make them more manageable until you have a new generation of Muslims who ACTIVELY believe in peace

Maqqa wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2015 at 10:25am:

Terrorism is a tool used by idealist Idealists relates to belief. 2000 years of belief cannot be changed overnight Battle plan to control terrorists (1) Overseas - use governments of the terrorists' base to control them (2) Domestically - re-engagement of local Mosques and their leaders. Form a coalition amongst all Imams to preach a new message (3) Those Imams who don't agree - slap a tracker on them (4) These trackers will lead you to their followers - assess the danger levels and make arrests (5) Arrest the Imams as they commit crimes This will not completely get rid off terrorists but it will make them more manageable until you have a new generation of Muslims who ACTIVELY believe in peace

You seem to be under the impression that all terrorists are Muslims.

How did you come to that conclusion?

Let me guess - you saw it on TV.

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2015 at 10:27am:

You seem to be under the impression that all terrorists are Muslims. How did you come to that conclusion? Let me guess - you saw it on TV.

You want to adopt the "all terrorists" line now?  ;D ;D

That's why lefties gets nothing done

Let me guess where you got this idea from - Bernie Sanders

So you believe ISIS is cause by Climate Change as well

Please, gentlemen - we are seeking to deal with the Muslim terrorist issue first and foremost... since it is the foremost issue at this time....

Besides - you can't fight in the War Room!