[Hirdmann]

This is pure 100% unadulterated propaganda. Where did they kidnap and rape children?

Danger: Nut alert!

Homosexuality is an invented identity. Islam considers sodomy a capital offence, regardless of who the participants are.

1: You're making the guy's point for him.
2: But apparently pedophilia is perfectly acceptable in islam. At least the merchant islam considers a prophet had sex with a 9-year old, and I have yet to see any muslim denounce that.

Is it worth the consequences?

What consequences? Impotent old men who take out their frustrations with how their goat spurned their advances, on innocent women and children?

Another 10-20 years of endless war and destruction costing an untold number of lives?

99% of which will be the lives of the psychopaths in ISIS and their like. In any kind of real war, those camelhumpers don't stand a chance. So far they've basically been up against peasants who got handed an assault rifle and told where to point it. If they go up against actual military forces (US, UK, Israel, even Iran, though Iran is only barely better than the aforementioned peasants), they'll get their asses handed to them faster than they can say "Allahu akhbar".
Was WW2 worth the fight? Darned straight it was.

The Muslims will establish an Islamic Caliphate one way or another, every single attack you commit against them only makes them more determined to do it.

If you think that ISIS represents anything more than a tiny fraction of muslims worldwide, you're lying to yourself. I think there are more muslims in the world's militaries, who will jump at the chance to exterminate the rats who abuse their religion, than there are supporters of ISIS.

[Drlee]

The Muslims will establish an Islamic Caliphate one way or another, every single attack you commit against them only makes the ones who remain alive more determined to do it.

There is a finite number of them. People, even deeply religious people, have a marvelous penchant for taking a path that allows them to stay alive. It is not the concept of the Caliphate that is objectionable. It is the barbaric behavior you and many others seem to believe is a necessary part of it.

This is an evolving world. You may wish to fight against it. Our own Amish do in the US. They eschew modern technology and plod along. But they have concluded that the rest of civilization is not going to stop and join them so the best course of action is to adapt. So have your Caliphate. But if you (et al) insist on oppressing women to the point of injury, killing homosexuals and executing others for holding differing religious views, understand that civilization will roll over you.

ISIS will be destroyed. It may morph somewhere else but it will be destroyed. Harbor no illusions about that.

[Hirdmann]

True and ISIS got lucky, it found a point of weak resistance and pushed but now that momentum has stalled and the Iraqi army is fighting back and inevitably making headway against the IS.

Let's not kid ourselves, though. The Iraqi army isn't worth jack shite. The Peshmerga and PKK are who we need to look to, to hold the line against the demons in ISIS. And, of course, the US, UK, and any other sensible nation who sees that ISIS needs to be exterminated. We should also try to get the Russians and Chinese involved (though I unfortunately don't think it's realistic)

[Stormsmith]

Apparently, a number of the people heading ISIS are former officers of the Iraqi army.

Those being murdered in droves are Muslims. Whether or not the west gets involved, the rest of the Middle East must get their hands dirty this time.

[park]

ISIS will be destroyed. It may morph somewhere else but it will be destroyed. Harbor no illusions about that.

Then it will rise again. The USA should get out of the Middle east and let the world do what it wants. Or there will always be terrorists against the USA and US soldiers killed in the Middle east.

[Stormsmith]

Thing is park, you're making it virtually impossible to do that. The world has seen too much brutality, and turned a blind eye too often to vicious ethnic cleansing. Sadly, far too often the UN withdraws rather than rallies forth, but this time park, these jackals slew an American in a barbaric fashion and televised it. That is about as close to declaring war on the US as you can get. But have this demonic assassination done by a Brit, a Brit who was taken into a country where his family could and did amount to something is every bit as egregious. Most of the Commonwealth fought in Afghanistan; most sat out Iraq because we didn't feel it was necessary, and supported other actions, ie, Blix and co., first. But this time, park, this time you through down your gauntlet and you can bet this will get ugly for the 40,000 troops. ISIS has a few good men at the top, but most of the troopers are just kids who need proper jobs that will give them a future that includes real, live, girls willing to marry them. They don't have a prayer against real armies, and heaven won't be making the number of virgins your boys will be expecting.

[OllytheBrit]

I am actually for the crushing of any extremist Islamic movements, regardless of where they might be.

As opposed to the Taliban and AQ, all of whom look like yer average Joe (or 'Muhammad'?), at least we can recognise IS by the salient factor of a uniform of sorts; they all wear black.

Having said that though, I guess they can always change into something more 'colourful' when we catch up with them - (yeah, then what?) Not wearing a uniform has definite advantages when it comes to melting away into the background.

[OllytheBrit]

Apparently, a number of the people heading ISIS are former officers of the Iraqi army.

Those being murdered in droves are Muslims. Whether or not the west gets involved, the rest of the Middle East must get their hands dirty this time.

Unless they all succumb rather than fight? I'll bet those 'former officers of the Iraqi army' were recruited by dire threats?

[Godstud]

Olly, it's the extremists we have to worry about, not secular Muslims.

[Stormsmith]

Unless they all succumb rather than fight?

I should have coffee before I come here...
Define they please. Do you mean ISIS leaders? ISIS grunts? Iraqis? Governments/Leaders of Jordan, Saudi, UAE?

I'll bet those 'former officers of the Iraqi army' were recruited by dire threats?

Is this rhetorical? It reads like a declarative statement, but you write it as a question.

[OllytheBrit]

Olly, it's the extremists we have to worry about, not secular Muslims.

It's the extremists (extreme Islam?) that I'm talking about mate.

I should have coffee before I come here...
Define they please. Do you mean ISIS leaders? ISIS grunts? Iraqis? Governments/Leaders of Jordan, Saudi, UAE?

Look, drop the smart-arse pedantry and semantics please - we're talking about Islamic State here aren't we? They're probably a coalescence of all those.

Is this rhetorical? It reads like a declarative statement, but you write it as a question.

Colloquially 'I'll bet' means 'I would speculate' Or 'I expect' in this country.

Now you can have your coffee!

[Stormsmith]

Look, drop the smart-arse pedantry and semantics please - we're talking about Islamic State here aren't we? They're probably a coalescence of all those.

Right, Duck, I've had my 3 cups of coffee, and I'm sorry if I upset or insulted you, but your original statement is ambiguous.

'I'll bet' means 'I would speculate' Or 'I expect' in this country.

I disagree. I think either it was the idea of the upper echelon of this ISIS seeking to regain power, or they are being paid handsomely by one or more government/monarchies, or both.


Now, you've written two posts in a row. This is a PoFo no-no. If you look in the upper right corner, you'll see an edit button. When you write a second post that will follow your first, hit the edit button, then write it. I'm not criticising you, I'm mentioning this because I spotted another instance of it in another thread earlier, and as a mod I'm obliged to ask you to keep an eye out for this sort of thing.

[OllytheBrit]

Right, Duck, I've had my 3 cups of coffee, and I'm sorry if I upset or insulted you, but your original statement is ambiguous.

Ambiguity happens on forums and messageboards. No biggie!

I disagree. I think either it was the idea of the upper echelon of this ISIS seeking to regain power, or they are being paid handsomely by one or more government/monarchies, or both.

Who really knows? This is the middle east we're discussing, and we westerners don't understand their mind-set.

Now, you've written two posts in a row. This is a PoFo no-no. If you look in the upper right corner, you'll see an edit button. When you write a second post that will follow your first, hit the edit button, then write it. I'm not criticising you, I'm mentioning this because I spotted another instance of it in another thread earlier, and as a mod I'm obliged to ask you to keep an eye out for this sort of thing.

So noted, and I don't want to break any rules; but when I need to read through a lot of posts since I last read through an active thread I find it confusing that having replied to one, then return to to the thread to carry on reading what might be another 10 posts and I want to reply to the 11th, I find it cumbersome to have to go back and find the previous one thence to edit it. Then I might have to do it yet again after another 10 posts?? But thanks for the info and I'll try it out next time I find adjacent posts to which I want to respond. Incidentally, on my previous board, which had an identical name to this one, it happened automatically. Any chance a tweak or two could make it do it on this one?

PS: 'Duck'?

[Stormsmith]

Who really knows? This is the middle east we're discussing, and we westerners don't understand their mind-set.:

True, true. I don't understand my own til I've had that all important 3rd, 4th or 5th cup of coffee...

So noted, and I don't want to break any rules; but when I need to read through a lot of posts since I last read through an active thread I find it confusing that having replied to one, then return to to the thread to carry on reading what might be another 10 posts and I want to reply to the 11th, I find it cumbersome to have to go back and find the previous one thence to edit it. Then I might have to do it yet again after another 10 posts?? But thanks for the info and I'll try it out next time I find adjacent posts to which I want to respond. Incidentally, on my previous board, which had an identical name to this one, it happened automatically. Any chance a tweak or two could make it do it on this one? :?:

I don't know if this will help you, but under similar circumstances, I find it easier to open two windows, one for the "post reply" and a second one of the same thread, so I don't have to scroll backwards. I'll ask about the modification, but it might be tricky.

PS: 'Duck'?

I try to keep it clean, as not long ago I referred to someone as a "lovely little sausage". Shortly thereafter, a third poster suggested I was obsessed with naughty bits . Clearly s/he wasn't a Black Adder fan. Anyway, now I stick to Duck or Dear or Sweetie.