Bombing is great, but ISIS gets bombed every weekend
Saved under Conflict & War, Iran, Syria, Terrorism
Tags: From Paris With Love, ISIS, Islamic State, jihadi extremist, Terrorism
Please follow & like us :)
ISIS is a savage group that needs to be stopped, but can we all take a step back and try to examine why this and other jihadi extremist groups have come into existence and found at least some popular support in the areas they occupy? Think about the civilian death toll that has been exacted upon the middle east over the past several decades. If hundreds of thousands of innocent European or American civilians had been killed, or your lands occupied, what would be your reaction? Would you not be desperate for retribution?
France has declared that the Paris attack was an “act of war”. Was France not already dropping bombs on the region before this act of war?
I’m by no means saying that ISIS should not be stopped, but by who? Why do countries so far away have a responsibility to stop a group that is in the backyard of other developed and armed countries? This is not your fight, and if you insist on making it your fight, you will need to admit to the terrible truth that your deeds are at least partially responsible for the extremism in that region!
How can you possibly end this cycle of retribution and warfare and come up with a working plan-of-action if you are not honest with yourselves?
I hate to say this, but it is true:
If you are going to go to war, you need to approach it with relentless aggression. If you have to carpet bomb cities to wipe out ISIS, with the danger of collateral losses, then it needs to be done.
In reality, it is the only way to decisively win a war and do it quickly. You end up losing MUCH fewer people in the long run.
A long, drawn-out war or campaign, fighting with one hand behind your back because of progressive policy is what slowly drains a country of it’s resources, and ultimately causes greater losses in the long run.
For example, if you were to fight ISIS, Taliban or Al Qaeda the way the U.S. is CAPABLE of fighting, the war would have been over within weeks.
But they do not fight wars like that any more. World War 2, they took the enemy head on during the Pacific and European fronts. They decisively ended the war with two massive bombs over Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Was there collateral damages? Yes. Was there civilian casualties? Yes. But the reality is, the largest WAR that man has ever experienced – a war with multiple superpower countries – was ended in just 4.5 years because of decisive action.
It is sad, but that is the risk that Japan took when they preemptively attacked another country that was not involved in the war at that time.
France and other westerners, you need to decisively handle this the way you are capable of handling it: Quickly, Harshly and Decisively.
It is the only real way to stop the threat and establish a time of peace. There is no other way, unfortunately. Until you put this into practice, you are going to continue to be the victim of the extremists.
Is this a popular opinion? No, and certainly not here. Sometimes there isn’t a good option. Sometimes there is only one option.
A modern ‘old fashioned’ war is likely the only real option.
But, the problem is, how do you deal with the radical elements within your borders?
Will the west have the stomach for that?
If the superpowers continue this trend, ISIS will become WASWAS.
We can drop bombs on Raqqa for the next year, but it doesn’t address the fundamental problem. Ultimately, all the money that enables Islamic fundamentalism comes from oil. If we really want to stop Islamic terrorism, we need to starve the beast: diminish Saudi’s oil revenue. We should transition our economies away from oil. Without the revenue that comes from oil, Saudis and their ilk will not have the resources to export violence and hate.
No one’s calling for mass genocide at all. More civilians will die if they don’t do anything. Get your head out of your ass. War is war, and it always will be. Civilians die. France and other countries that are combating IS, are not fucking targeting civilians; however, IS is specifically targeting innocent civilians. Going into fucking restaurants, theaters and streets shooting anyone.
Let’s put things in their context.
France has been bombing ISIS for quite a while. The aicraft carrier Charles de Gaulle was planned to go to the Gulf before the attacks in Paris occurred.
So, with a (very very very) little bit of luck, it allows the French government to say “see, we reacted immediately”.
As much as I hate to decry the killing of these terrible people, military interventionism is not a long term solution, it is a long term problem. These bombings may kill today’s terrorists, but they also create tomorrow’s.
We need to wage a war on ignorance, not a war on terror. We need to use different weapons, like education, global internet access, and sanctions to enforce civil equality for all humans. The solution is a long, grueling process of educating the global population.
We should take every precaution to defend ourselves along the way but we need to stop perpetuating the problem.
Serious question. What is the best way to wipe out ISIS? Sure you can contain them militarily but ISIS spreads a message, an ideology that is extreme and in sync with radical Islam. How do you stop the propaganda? You can try and kill them all and I’m all for it, but the other war that must be waged is against their toxic message and I still haven’t heard anyone give a concrete solution or even officially acknowledge solutions being put in place…
Even though I agree 100% that this is not our fight and and our actions have and WILL bring consequences, there is a grey line here… What about all the people that are being treated like dirt in these countries? Do we just turn a blind eye and pretend that everything is fine because this is not our fight?
Sorry about any grammar mistakes english is not my native language.
To be frank, yes. Those who are being treated like dirt have a responsibility to themselves to rise up and change their own fate. If the argument is that we would be bastards not to help the oppressed, then we had better pony up and be ready to liberate the larger half of this earth. The hard, shitty truth is if you want freedom you and your countrymen band together and fight for it, not a country several thousand miles away.
How does past Western military action in the Middle East make them throw gays off rooftops and force their women to wear full body ninja costumes in scorching best?
The trouble is that Islam has completely poisoned their minds. It’s not Western imperialism. It’s not Western aggression in the past (which, by the way, has not been a significant factor in the middle east sucking so much cock all the time). It’s the devotion to a savage creed.
“But the reality is, the largest WAR that man has ever experienced – a war with multiple superpower countries – was ended in just 4.5 years because of decisive action.”
Bear in mind that back then, news was heavily censored and certainly not instantaneous. And even, during the bombing campaigns conducted against Germany, there were some people in the US who were uncomfortable about bombing civilians. At that point, the US threw the Brits under the bus and said that the US was using precision bombing as opposed to what the Brits were doing (around this time, someone will bring up the uber accuracy of the Norden bomb sight – yes, it was accurate, at 18,000 feet…however, try flying at that altitude over wartime Germany and you would get killed by German flak, so you would need to fly higher and above cloud cover).
Vietnam was different because you got the beginning of news coverage that wasn’t as censored as it was in WWII and Korea. It’s even more free now. Plus, you’ve got troops being able to e-mail their relatives now. Back in WWII, they would have to use mail and the mail would have to go through censors so a lot of stuff got blotted out.
So – I’m not sure if it’s possible in this day and age without imposing some really stringent controls which many people may balk at.
Russia tried the “carpet bomb” method with the Chechens a group with a population of about 1 million total and thousands of rebels. It didn’t work. The only way Chechnya has peace now is because they literally bought of the most powerful warlord in the region. Carpet bombing it will only make more extremists.
Air power alone will never be able to destroy a reasonably determined and dug in foe of sufficient size. ISIS has enough forces and has had enough time to make preparations that airstrikes cannot defeat them, short of being far more indiscriminate with weapon selection and targeting, which is not going to happen. An invasion might be the order of the day to destroy existing ISIS forces and scatter them. But how can a global power destroy the ideology that gives rise to ISIS? That is a much more difficult question and one for which I have not heard a convincing answer.
This will definitely stop small scale attacks (which this was, despite how inarguable horrible it was) from loosely-if-at-all organized groups of pissed off maniacs with no uniforms, flag, or particular need for a specific base of operations.
If anything this will drive further recruiting. Have we not learned yet that this “solution” isn’t one?
“Bombings will continue until morale improves.”
From Paris with love
How does bombing them prevent attacks on European soil?
They have supporters on every continent (maybe except Antarctica) and do not require their Syrian/Iraq infrastructure (it might make things easier for them, sure) to plan attacks here. Some guys sitting in a basement somewhere in Asia or South America are certainly capable of producing propaganda to recruit new fighters in the US or Europe who can then carry out devastating attacks.
Wouldn’t it me more important to solve the “ghetto” problem in France, Belgium and parts of Germany (to make said propaganda find less recipients and to prevent lone wolf attacks which are even less predictable) and increase the security on outer schengen borders instead of mindlessly crying for blood and potentially making it worse in the process (isn’t that “us vs. them” one of the goals they want to achieve)?
200k civilians live in Raqqa most are innocent, if the death count exceeds 200+ (Might be a little more than the recent count in Paris) then isn’t that a worse travesty then it already is? if we want to assign the blame game it would go both ways. France has been doing air strikes on Isis for a whole (I’m not insinuating Isis aren’t terrible fucks who don’t deserve it however if you go shoot at someone expect them to shoot back), so it’s bound to have a back lash and this was it, now due to this grievance more civilians with a terrorist like mind set will rise. The best revenge is education, and guerrilla tactics like the Uk have been doing. I can’t celebrate death, do you.
huge difference:
we’re trying to kill as many ISIS people as possible and minimize the amount of innocent deaths.
they were trying to kill as many innocent people as possible. it’s the exact opposite.
it’s dangerous to fall into the trap of looking at the number of deaths without considering intentions.
it’s also important to remember that these people cannot be argued with, if they’re going to keep doing what they do (which is almost certainly the case) then they need to be wiped out, plain and simple. if we had homing missiles that targeted only bad guys, we’d use them.
Minimizing innocent death is great, killing as many Isis members should be held for discussion, rather than focus all your energies and resources on killing the symptoms why not target the disease itself? the mirage of radicalization is fueled by a lack of differing point of views and education on Islam and the rest of the world.
Maybe your intentions need to change if the death count exceeds an amount of a specific number, (Since it seems as retaliation for the Paris attack, let’s say 200+).
You can’t wipe out an ideology, there’s an infinite (7 billion) number of followers that don’t know they are followers yet, and it’s not just pooled into one country or ethnicity. Wiping them out should be in the form of a massive truth propaganda campaign which should be equally important as bombing them.