The war on ISIS.

[McLaren]

@McLaren Yes, our coalition allies murdered 2 prisoners in retaliation for the one murdered Jordanian scion, perpetuating the cycle of vengeance. If you have a hat size larger than a 3, you are cordially invited to answer my question, "What breaks the cycle of revenge?"

That probably has to do with the fact that ISIS put the man in a cage, covered him in flammable liquid, lit him on fire, & filmed it. You don't treat prisoners of war that way, or at the most, you certainly don't film it to poke the sleeping bear with. And 1 of those prisoners was sentenced to death for her role in a 2005 bombing that killed dozens to begin with; ISIS merely sped up the process after 10 years.

But there is a difference in the 3 deaths. ISIS is the one who murdered the Jordanian by a slow, horrific death. Jordan executed Al-Rishawi & Karbouli by hanging them. That's the difference between us & them; even major Islam factions have said the way the pilot was killed was not acceptable by the their standards.

"Islam prohibits the taking of an innocent life," al-Tayeb said. By burning the pilot to death, he added, the militants violated Islam's prohibition on the immolation or mutilation of bodies — even during wartime.

In Saudi Arabia, prominent cleric Sheik Salman al-Oudah cited on Wednesday a saying attributed to the Prophet Muhammad, which reserves for God alone the right to punish by fire.

Iran, which has aided both Iraq and Syria against the IS, said the killing of the pilot was an "inhuman" act that violated the codes of Islam, according to Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Marziyeh Afkham.

http://abcnews.go.com/International...eligious-institution-enraged-killing-28710929

The only person who has backed up your statement that he was burned in retaliation for "burning" others is Hussein Bin Mahmoud who is, surprise, linked to the Islamic State.


But, if you feel everything is still being done in a "cycle of revenge", answer my question:

So, what's the "retaliation" for beheading 2 Japanese prisoners against?

What's that revenge for? The Japanese have been a very peaceful, almost neutralized nation since WWII.

 

[Dotini]

But, if you feel everything is still being done in a "cycle of revenge", answer my question:

What's that revenge for? The Japanese have been a very peaceful, almost neutralized nation since WWII.

Yes, ATM the Japanese do seem to be wisely avoiding new, direct confrontation with ISIS. Of course they also provide financial aid to the coalition, and did intervene in Iraq back in 2003. I assume Baghdadi has a grudge against all such foreigners. Supposedly Yukawa's Facebook described him as working for a private mercenary firm, and he was photoed posing with Iraqi military as well as the FSA, so ISIS undoubtedly regarded him as an enemy combatant.


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jul/26/iraq.japan
Under the new law, however, 1,000 personnel from the self-defence force - Japan's army - will be dispatched into a conflict. Instead of being neutral UN peacekeepers in a ceasefire, Japanese soldiers will join a US-led occupying army trying to quell a guerrilla war.

Mr Koizumi has insisted that they will only carry out non-combat activities in "safe areas", such as securing the perimeter of Baghdad airport.

 

[McLaren]

Yes, ATM the Japanese do seem to be wisely avoiding new, direct confrontation with ISIS. Of course they also provide financial aid to the coalition, and did intervene in Iraq back in 2003. I assume Baghdadi has a grudge against all such foreigners. Supposedly Yukawa's Facebook described him as working for a private mercenary firm, and he was photoed posing with Iraqi military as well as the FSA, so ISIS undoubtedly regarded him as an enemy combatant.


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jul/26/iraq.japan
Under the new law, however, 1,000 personnel from the self-defence force - Japan's army - will be dispatched into a conflict. Instead of being neutral UN peacekeepers in a ceasefire, Japanese soldiers will join a US-led occupying army trying to quell a guerrilla war.

Mr Koizumi has insisted that they will only carry out non-combat activities in "safe areas", such as securing the perimeter of Baghdad airport.

If that's his idea of justification for killing 2 people that have not been shown to be in direct combat against him, towards a country itself that also hasn't been on the front lines, then I personally don't find these as "acts of revenge" against the West. I believe these beheadings, much like the pilot, are nothing more than barbaric, inhumane messages that say, "It does not matter if you fight or not. If you are not with us, then you are against us".

When it gets to the point that Al Qaeda of all groups is condemning your practices, it's time to stop thinking rationally with ISIS; these people have no boundaries.

 

[Dotini]

"It does not matter if you fight or not. If you are not with us, then you are against us".

"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."[5]-G W Bush

Hillary Clinton: "Every nation has to either be with us, or against us. Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price."[4]

‘he that is not with me is against me’ -George Orwell

In the climax of the film Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, Darth Vader says to Obi-Wan Kenobi, "If you're not with me, then you're my enemy." Obi-Wan responds, "Only a Sith deals in absolutes."

 

[McLaren]

"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime."[5]-G W Bush

Hillary Clinton: "Every nation has to either be with us, or against us. Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price."[4]

Fixed to actually show the context instead of pulling exerts. It is not a literal claim that places such as Thailand or Niger are against us because they aren't fighting terrorism.

Now, try to pay attention to the fact that ISIS kills solely because someone does not adhere to their beliefs. The US doesn't go around bombing Russia & vice-versa because they don't share the same views. There is tolerance between the 2. ISIS doesn't believe in tolerating others; you either stand for radical Islam or you die.

 

[Dotini]

Fixed to actually show the context instead of pulling exerts. It is not a literal claim that places such as Thailand or Niger are against us because they aren't fighting terrorism.

Now, try to pay attention to the fact that ISIS kills solely because someone does not adhere to their beliefs. The US doesn't go around bombing Russia & vice-versa because they don't share the same views. There is tolerance between the 2. ISIS doesn't believe in tolerating others; you either stand for radical Islam or you die.

I certainly hope you are right about the US and Russia having tolerance for each others' beliefs. That is being sorely tested now in Ukraine. Oddly enough, they are fighting with us against Islamic terrorism around the world.

But its clear ISIS doesn't have such a tolerance. They will not break the cycle of vengeance. They will have revenge against those who have killed 6000 of them. Nor will most other Arab states. That is why everybody in the middle east hates everybody else. Vengeance is baked into the DNA of most all Arab tribal societies. So as long as the US and its coalition continues killing Arabs, the cycle of vengeance will remain unbroken. They kill us and call it vengeance. We kill them and call it justice. I don't see the end of it. And I guess you don't either.

 

[McLaren]

I certainly hope you are right about the US and Russia having tolerance for each others' beliefs. That is being sorely tested now in Ukraine. Oddly enough, they are fighting with us against Islamic terrorism around the world.

But its clear ISIS doesn't have such a tolerance. They will not break the cycle of vengeance. They will have revenge against those who have killed 6000 of them. Nor will most other Arab states. That is why everybody in the middle east hates everybody else. Vengeance is baked into the DNA of most all Arab tribal societies. So as long as the US and its coalition continues killing Arabs, the cycle of vengeance will remain unbroken. They kill us and call it vengeance. We kill them and call it justice. I don't see the end of it. And I guess you don't either.

Where on earth do you keep getting this notion that ISIS is doing anything in revenge? The only reason ISIS even keeps prisoners is for ransom money & then executes them when their demands aren't met. ISIS marching into Syria & Iraq wasn't an act of revenge against the Kurds or the Coalition; they did it because they want to spread their control over the Middle East & slay anyone who stands in the name of radical Islam.

These people do not kill in the name of fallen comrades. They kill in the name of Allah. Why do you think Baghdadi has declared himself, essentially, King of all Muslims? He wants his group to take over as much of the Middle East as possible because he believes himself to be the successor to the Prophet & thus, those who do not conform to him/his God can not co-exist.

 

[Dotini]

Where on earth do you keep getting this notion that ISIS is doing anything in revenge? The only reason ISIS even keeps prisoners is for ransom money & then executes them when their demands aren't met. ISIS marching into Syria & Iraq wasn't an act of revenge against the Kurds or the Coalition; they did it because they want to spread their control over the Middle East & slay anyone who stands in the name of radical Islam.

These people do not kill in the name of fallen comrades. They kill in the name of Allah. Why do you think Baghdadi has declared himself, essentially, King of all Muslims?

Okay, have it your way. ISIS never kills for revenge. But Jordan does!

I wonder why all those thousands of Europeans are streaming in to join ISIS? Could it be for revenge against the hatred and discrimination they face in Europe?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/04/isis-muadh-al-kasasbeh-death-jordan-revenge-mood
Jordanians turn their minds to revenge after Isis killing of pilot
Muadh al-Kasasbeh’s death galvanises Amman locals, as mood changes in favour of war against Isis

 

[McLaren]

Okay, have it your way. ISIS never kills for revenge. But Jordan does!
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/04/isis-muadh-al-kasasbeh-death-jordan-revenge-mood
Jordanians turn their minds to revenge after Isis killing of pilot
Muadh al-Kasasbeh’s death galvanises Amman locals, as mood changes in favour of war against Isis

I already told you:

That probably has to do with the fact that ISIS put the man in a cage, covered him in flammable liquid, lit him on fire, & filmed it.

They're pissed off & rightfully so because you don't do that to a prisoner of war. As quoted above, even the rest of the Muslim world & Al Qaeda condemn them for it.

 

[Dotini]

Since we are not making progress on breaking the cycle of vengeance, either in the world or in this thread, I must leave off here for the moment. Thanks for your valued perspective! I will continue to study the issues.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/isis-al-baghdadi-revenge-jihad/2014/07/05/id/580951/
ISIS Leader Baghdadi: 'We Will Take Revenge'
The leader of the al-Qaida offshoot that has taken control of parts of Iraq and Syria has urged Muslims around the world to fight to avenge wrongs committed against their religion.
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, head of the group that now calls itself the Islamic State, issued the call to jihad - holy war - in an audio message lasting nearly 20 minutes that was posted online on Tuesday.

It was his first purported message since the group — previously known as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria — proclaimed a 'caliphate' on the territory it has captured.

 

[Scaff]

That is why everybody in the middle east hates everybody else.

Really! My experience of working in the region, having friends in the region and travelling the region say that your making a gross exaggeration, to the degree that its not even remotely accurate.

Vengeance is baked into the DNA of most all Arab tribal societies.

Good job then that the "Arab tribal societies" reflect only a small proportion of the region and its population. That kind of nonsense is like trying to use the issues of ethnic violence in the Balkans in the '90s as a measure for the whole of Europe.

Your even now going as far as to conflate Arab with Muslim, a point that further undermines the point.

 

[Dotini]

Really! My experience of working in the region, having friends in the region and travelling the region say that your making a gross exaggeration, to the degree that its not even remotely accurate.



Good job then that the "Arab tribal societies" reflect only a small proportion of the region and its population. That kind of nonsense is like trying to use the issues of ethnic violence in the Balkans in the '90s as a measure for the whole of Europe.

Your even now going as far as to conflate Arab with Muslim, a point that further undermines the point.

I will defer to your direct experience, and now try to argue to your satisfaction the opposite point, i.e., that the middle east is, or was, the most peaceful and loving society on Earth.

I will further adduce evidence to your satisfaction that there are currently no tribal elements or influences of any importance in Arab culture.

 

[Scaff]

I will defer to your direct experience, and now try to argue to your satisfaction the opposite point, i.e., that the middle east is, or was, the most peaceful and loving society on Earth.

I will further adduce evidence to your satisfaction that there are currently no tribal elements or influences of any importance in Arab culture.

I can see that you back in a ridiculous mode of behavior in your posts for whatever reason and this has been raised with you before. If these cycles of behavior continue you will find that its incompatible with membership here at GT Planet.

I was not, nor have I been the one making generalization about an entire region of the planet, you were, don't attempt to try and then transfer that on to my post (which did not come close to making such a claim).

Not everyone in the Middle East hate each other, and pointing that out is not a claim that the opposite is true (ditto tribal influences), so please stop with the rather childish behavior.

 

[Dotini]

I can see that you back in a ridiculous mode of behavior in your posts for whatever reason and this has been raised with you before. If these cycles of behavior continue you will find that its incompatible with membership here at GT Planet.

I was not, nor have I been the one making generalization about an entire region of the planet, you were, don't attempt to try and then transfer that on to my post (which did not come close to making such a claim).

Not everyone in the Middle East hate each other, and pointing that out is not a claim that the opposite is true (ditto tribal influences), so please stop with the rather childish behavior.

What would you have me do?
Give me a specific task. I am able to research most questions and hopefully argue either side.

 

[Scaff]

What would you have me do?
Give me a specific task. I am able to research most questions and hopefully argue either side.

OK Were done. Take two days off.

 

[Furinkazen]

Whilst I am a little late to the party, I have experience of arab people (here in the UK) and I am yet to be threatened with being stoned, beaten, shot, kidnapped, or indeed threatened, so I can at first hand deduce that Dotini statement is false

 

[Johnnypenso]

Whilst I am a little late to the party, I have experience of arab people (here in the UK) and I am yet to be threatened with being stoned, beaten, shot, kidnapped, or indeed threatened, so I can at first hand deduce that Dotini statement is false

He's on holiday. You can remind him he's wrong when he returns.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The leader of the al-Qaida offshoot that has taken control of parts of Iraq and Syria has urged Muslims around the world to fight to avenge wrongs committed against their religion.

He seems like a thoroughly humourless individual; otherwise, he would appreciate the irony of this statement.

 

[McLaren]

Since we were shortly on the discussion of ISIS' executions, the group released another video (bad movie effects & all just like the Jordanian's) of a Syrian soldier being executed by a shotgun from about 3 feet away. It's not a slow death like the other, but it is far more gruesome, esp. since they felt the need to rewind & show it again in slow-motion.

No point in linking for obvious reasons, but curious as to how Syria will respond when/if it makes headline news.

 

[mister dog]

And as internet fora tradition dictates:

Since we were shortly on the discussion of ISIS' executions, the group released another video (bad movie effects & all just like the Jordanian's) of a Syrian soldier being executed by a shotgun from about 3 feet away. It's not a slow death like the other, but it is far more gruesome, esp. since they felt the need to rewind & show it again in slow-motion.

No point in linking for obvious reasons, but curious as to how Syria will respond when/if it makes headline news.

Looked up an article about this (dutch one) and they rightly made the point that these are typical signs of violence addiction, they have to get more and more extreme in their ways of sadistical killings just so they can get that kick... In other words, a bunch of psychopaths.

 

[Lizard]

I want to ask a question to everyone.

If you were a leader of a country that can do something like the US or UK or France etc or even one of the countries affected in the Middle East. How would you go about dealing with terrorism and how would you deal with things such as the filmed executions?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

What makes you think that such a simple question has an equally-simple answer?

The reality is that it does - it's just not the answer that you're looking for. The only option for a political leader is to choose a response that best represents the people. Ideally, that's what governments are supposed to do.

 

[Lizard]

What makes you think that such a simple question has an equally-simple answer?

The reality is that it does - it's just not the answer that you're looking for. The only option for a political leader is to choose a response that best represents the people. Ideally, that's what governments are supposed to do.

I never said it has a simple answer. And what represents the people? As in what the people want?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I never said it has a simple answer.

Then why are you phrasing it as a question that any bystander - such as ourselves - could answer without a second thought?

And what represents the people? As in what the people want?

Yes. That's what governments are supposed to do.

 

[squadops]

Well, Obama is going to ask for congressional authorization this week to do what we have been and more. Of course there are internal political reasons... but an AUMF will have the U.S. people's support and most likely commit us to boots on the ground.

Things might get serious enough for a long term ernest attempt, especially if in the process Obama saves international face.

his motive sucks but the results could turn out well.

 

[Liquid]

Then why are you phrasing it as a question that any bystander - such as ourselves - could answer without a second thought?

Give him a break, it's an innocent enough question; what would you do in this situation if you were in charge of a Western nation or an Arabian nation?

If it's a complex answer then it's a complex answer.

The only option for a political leader is to choose a response that best represents the people. Ideally, that's what governments are supposed to do.

Ideally. But using the United Kingdom as an example, our Prime Minister's party doesn't represent the majority of the people and he himself does not execute actions favoured by a majority of the people.

The better question here, assuming we're talking about Western nations, is whether not interfering with another country's sovereignty (unless formally requested of course) is more important than intervening to stop a group which transcends at least one border already and has no regard for human rights at all.

A majority of the people could want one thing even if it is wrong to do so.

 

[Lizard]

Yes. That's what governments are supposed to do.

Or not. The government represent us but that does not mean everything we want is done as sometimes public demands are not logical when you have information and experience that they don't.



I asked the question kind of hoping someone would say act strongly, increase security etc so I can go to my next point.


Terrorists are not self legitimising. They feed on our reaction for legitimacy. They bomb somewhere for example and we tighten security and arrest people who haven't committed a crime yet but there is strong evidence that they will. The terrorists then go to the people who they can court to and say look at the US, UK, France, wherever and say look we told you it is an awful country arresting people for doing nothing etc.

Unfortunately the same rules don't apply to us as a state is self legitimising. Actions carried out by the state make it lose legitimacy yet the actions of the terrorists don't lose them legitimacy. The view among the people they go to, to support them is mostly. The UK/US hate you and that must mean you are doing something right.

On the other hand they have fear as a weapon as well. If there is mass fear in a state then there is also the view that the government is failing to protect it's citizens.

ISIS don't behead people in the name of Islam and they certainly don't video it for that purpose. They film it to provoke a response so our actions can legitimise theirs.

Terrorists always want a lot of people watching what they do.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

So what do you suggest? That we do as Adam Hills suggested and rename them as the Coalition of United Northern Territories in Syria?

 

[Dennisch]

So what do you suggest? That we do as Adam Hills suggested and rename them as the Coalition of United Northern Territories in Syria?

North Syria is best Syria.

 

[Lizard]

So what do you suggest? That we do as Adam Hills suggested and rename them as the Coalition of United Northern Territories in Syria?

I will tell you next Monday when I have had a lecture on counter terrorism.

You can treat it as a criminal act for the act. That doesn't give them any legitimacy. Only going out to destroy them does that.
Also try dealing with the issues that make people join them such as bad education, poverty etc. That is the easiest way to solve it. Unfortunately western nations don't seem to like the idea of paying loads of money to fund these things.


An analogy.

You have 2 ways of dealing with malaria.
Fly spray, swat the mosquitoes, try and keep them out of your house
Drain the swamps where the mosquitoes live and thus protect all the houses.
option 1) is time consuming, never ending and doesn’t guarantee long lasting or wide spread protection
option 2) removes the disease (potentially) forever, from everyone