The Jordanian pilot

anon(631531)

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2010
2,468
35
0
Visit site
Yes, I'm sure I would have a different viewpoint as an infantryman. How much different, I'm not sure. I re-read the story of the Christmas Truce in WWI on its 100 year anniversary a couple months ago and it shows that even enemy combatants have an interesting form of human compassion. That is another reason why the Vietnam experience is dramatically different from a terrorist situation. I don't think you will ever see a terrorist and a targeted civilian break out a holiday football game.


I've heard of the Christmas Truce, in WW1. I don't know about the German side, but weren't the Brits who participated in that "truce" later disciplined by their own officers?:p
 

Just_Me_D

Ambassador Team Leader, Senior Moderator
Moderator
Jan 8, 2012
59,707
632
113
Visit site
I don't know a single person who thinks that we should be nice to terrorists. What exactly do you mean by that? Are you talking about foreign military policy or are you talking about treatment of captured terrorists? Maybe you can elaborate your comment. What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?

I can't speak for Hank, but I sure as heck know of people who have flat told me that if we just show the terrorists that we understand their situation and sympathize with their plight, they will no longer hate us or want to attack us. Me being me, I just laughed and shook my head.
 

BobLobIaw

Active member
Sep 9, 2014
28
0
0
Visit site
I don't recall if anyone was disciplined but there were both Brits and Germans opposed to the truce, including a guy named Cpl. Adolf Hitler on the German side. Go figure!
 

anon(631531)

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2010
2,468
35
0
Visit site
Two billion Muslims and all but a tiny group (percentage-wise) would never entertain the thought of terrorism. I can't hold the rest accountable for the actions of the few, just like I don't hold your average Christian responsible for the nutjob that kills an abortion doctor.


I'm talking about the funding. There are Muslim countries who fund organizations like ISIS, Hezbollah, The Muslim Brotherhood, etc. Hundreds of millions of dollars are given to these terrorists from countries who "claim" to be our friends. Some of these countries are getting aid from us, in one form or another. Cut the aid, cut the b.s rhetoric. No matter what they say, they are NOT our friends. Carpet bomb every terrorist hideout, encampment, and training facility. Too flipping bad about the collateral damage. Get intel from any source you can, any way you can. When are people going to realize that we are at war.:sarcastic:
 

kilofoxtrot

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2011
1,204
36
0
Visit site
"What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?"

I can't speak for Hank, but I sure as heck know of people who have flat told me that if we just show the terrorists that we understand their situation and sympathize with their plight, they will no longer hate us or want to attack us. Me being me, I just laughed and shook my head.

I'd like you to answer Bob's question. So far you haven't.

We are bombing ISIS pretty much everyday.

Do you want us to send troops back to the theatre???
 

kilofoxtrot

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2011
1,204
36
0
Visit site
If everyone, including the U.S., would send in troops, this thing could be over fairly quick.

I am afraid that as soon as we leave... its back to square one again. Then repeat over and over.

Remember, many Iraqi units deserted and fled when ISIS came at them. I don't like the idea of our troops paying in blood for countries who won't do the same for themselves.
 

pappy53

Banned
Jun 14, 2011
1,099
4
0
Visit site
I am afraid that as soon as we leave... its back to square one again. Then repeat over and over.

Remember, many Iraqi units deserted and fled when ISIS came at them. I don't like the idea of our troops paying in blood for countries who won't do the same for themselves.

That is something to consider.
 

Just_Me_D

Ambassador Team Leader, Senior Moderator
Moderator
Jan 8, 2012
59,707
632
113
Visit site
"What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?"



I'd like you to answer Bob's question. So far you haven't.

We are bombing ISIS pretty much everyday.

Do you want us to send troops back to the theatre???

I'm assuming you mean " What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?" If so, I'll answer it this way. Weak leaders tend to act in a manner that gives the impression that something is being done. They blow up targets that have little to no impact on our enemy's logistics primarily for show purposes. The terrorists, are heavily outmanned and outgunned militarily, and they know it, so they adapt in ways that our leaders and political minded commanders are hesitant to deal with in regard to force. For example, hiding in plain sight among the civilian population, in mosques, in people's homes, hiding behind women and children, in schools, etcetera. They've been known to attack us from the aforementioned areas, and we're hesitant to retaliate. Now before you go out and claim that I'm all for killing innocent people, just know that I'm simply one of those people who puts the blame where it belongs - on the terrorists who intentionally put the innocents in harm's way.
 
Last edited:

kilofoxtrot

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2011
1,204
36
0
Visit site
I'm assuming you mean " What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?" If so, I'll answer it this way. Weak leaders tend to act in a manner that gives the impression that something is being done. They blow up targets that have little to no impact on our enemy's logistics for show purposes. These terrorists, are heavily outmanned and outgunned militarily, and they know it, so they adapt in ways that our leaders and political minded commanders are hesitant to deal with in regard to force. For example, hiding in plain sight among the civilian population, in mosques, in people's homes, hiding behind women and children, in schools, etcetera. They've been known to attack us from the aforementioned areas, and we're hesitant to retaliate. Now before you go out and claim that I'm all for killing innocent people, I'm just one of those people who puts the blame where it belongs - on the terrorists who intentionally put the innocents in harm's way.

In no way would I think that you are for killing innocent people.

However you still haven't answered Bob's question..... all you offered is criticism and blame.
 

Just_Me_D

Ambassador Team Leader, Senior Moderator
Moderator
Jan 8, 2012
59,707
632
113
Visit site
In no way would I think that you are for killing innocent people.

However you still haven't answered Bob's question..... all you offered is criticism and blame.

Bluntly put...Stop effin' around for show purposes and get serious about dealing with the threat we face. Period. I don't need to get into specifics, if that's what you're after, because that would take care of itself if BHO ever decide to get serious about dealing with our enemies.
 

kilofoxtrot

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2011
1,204
36
0
Visit site
Bluntly put...Stop effin' around for show purposes and get serious about dealing with the threat we face. Period. I don't need to get into specifics, if that's what you're after, because that would take care of itself if BHO ever decide to get serious about dealing with our enemies.

I think that you would have to kill the entire population of ISIS held territory if you wanted to take ISIS down from the air based on their tactics you mentioned earlier. But it would only be temporary IMO.

Boots hold ground, not aircraft.

And there is the problem.... many Iraqi units deserted and fled when ISIS invaded their country. Why should our men and women die for those who won't protect themselves?

Supposing we send our troops into Iraq, wipe out ISIS. What do you think will happen as soon as we leave? We know what happened the first time.

Fool me once shame on you... fool me twice shame on me.
 

Nathan Bael

Well-known member
Jun 3, 2013
144
0
0
Visit site
I see your point, Keith, but empathy isn't sympathy. In addition, Clinton certainly isn't saying anyone should be "nice" to terrorists. The context is in applying a negotiated peaceful settlement between enemies. The U.S. has a long-standing policy of not negotiating with terrorists, so her comments are not applicable to terrorists. She's just talking about Mediation 101 principles applied to foreign policy and seems to be suggesting that females have more empathy than men. I don't know for sure without hearing more of her address.

The problem with that is that she directly referenced the Islamic state in the Philippines, at least as I understood her speech.
 

Just_Me_D

Ambassador Team Leader, Senior Moderator
Moderator
Jan 8, 2012
59,707
632
113
Visit site
I think that you would have to kill the entire population of ISIS held territory if you wanted to take ISIS down from the air based on their tactics you mentioned earlier. But it would only be temporary IMO.

Boots hold ground, not aircraft.

And there is the problem.... many Iraqi units deserted and fled when ISIS invaded their country. Why should our men and women die for those who won't protect themselves?

Supposing we send our troops into Iraq, wipe out ISIS. What do you think will happen as soon as we leave? We know what happened the first time.

Fool me once shame on you... fool me twice shame on me.

I'm concerned about protecting us here in our homeland and doing it before they get here and cause havoc. These people are serious, and we can't treat their threats and intentions like a typical law enforcement matter. Anyway, it's time for me to log off, and as always, I appreciate you sharing your viewpoints. Take care and have a great night...;)
 

anon(631531)

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2010
2,468
35
0
Visit site
The U.A.E has joined the fight against ISIS. They are bombing their areas as of today. It's sad to say, but killing a Jordanian pilot in a gruesome way, is what it took to get a "good" Muslim country stirred up. Now, let all the countries get together, and bomb ISIS into the middle of next week. They hold innocent people as hostages, because they know that "civilized" countries wouldn't dare to drop bombs on them. I say....BOMBS AWAY!!! We will be called "killers" either way, so let's do it and catch them with their pants(or robes) down. There's always going to be collateral damage anyway, so let's do the unexpected.:yes:
 

Just_Me_D

Ambassador Team Leader, Senior Moderator
Moderator
Jan 8, 2012
59,707
632
113
Visit site
The U.A.E has joined the fight against ISIS. They are bombing their areas as of today. It's sad to say, but killing a Jordanian pilot in a gruesome way, is what it took to get a "good" Muslim country stirred up. Now, let all the countries get together, and bomb ISIS into the middle of next week. They hold innocent people as hostages, because they know that "civilized" countries wouldn't dare to drop bombs on them. I say....BOMBS AWAY!!! We will be called "killers" either way, so let's do it and catch them with their pants(or robes) down. There's always going to be collateral damage anyway, so let's do the unexpected.:yes:

The problem with the "civilized" is the fact that they've forgotten that it took uncivilized actions for them to live in a civilized manner. Our enemies do not want to peacefully co-exist. They've made it crystal clear that they want us dead! Yet, time and time again, we question "why" various horrible acts occur at the hands of terrorists? We ask what have "we" done to cause them to do these things? We swear up and down that we had to have done something to them first for them to do these things. We do everything except see what is in plain view: Their own videotaped intentions, their religious book, and their growing atrocities. #smh
 

BobLobIaw

Active member
Sep 9, 2014
28
0
0
Visit site
The problem with the "civilized" is the fact that they've forgotten that it took uncivilized actions for them to live in a civilized manner. Our enemies do not want to peacefully co-exist. They've made it crystal clear that they want us dead! Yet, time and time again, we question "why" various horrible acts occur at the hands of terrorists? We ask what have "we" done to cause them to do these things? We swear up and down that we had to have done something to them first for them to do these things. We do everything except see what is in plain view: Their own videotaped intentions, their religious book, and their growing atrocities. #smh

Sorry, you keep bringing up this point but I don't see anyone here portraying terrorists as victims. With all due respect, that seems very hyperbolic. Nevertheless, no one here is arguing that "we" caused the terrorists' actions so your point seems to be a distraction at best.

The efficacy of bombing is limited and you can't just bomb more indiscriminately without some indication that it will be successful. Kilofoxtrot has identified the reasons why it would not be successful, along with identifying the limits of another boots on the ground escalation. Have we such a short memory that we want to make the same mistakes we made only ten years ago? Rinse and repeat.

If the uncivilized actions of the terrorists are to be used as some justification that we should also become more uncivilized, you aren't going to get much traction with that viewpoint. It goes against all the principles our country stands for. You can frame the issue as "the world is uglier than you think" until the cows come home, but I'll always stand with the majority of our citizens that would never support indiscriminate killing of women and children halfway across the world in the name of "protecting" our country.
 

Just_Me_D

Ambassador Team Leader, Senior Moderator
Moderator
Jan 8, 2012
59,707
632
113
Visit site
Sorry, you keep bringing up this point but I don't see anyone here portraying terrorists as victims. With all due respect, that seems very hyperbolic. Nevertheless, no one here is arguing that "we" caused the terrorists' actions so your point seems to be a distraction at best.

The efficacy of bombing is limited and you can't just bomb more indiscriminately without some indication that it will be successful. Kilofoxtrot has identified the reasons why it would not be successful, along with identifying the limits of another boots on the ground escalation. Have we such a short memory that we want to make the same mistakes we made only ten years ago? Rinse and repeat.

If the uncivilized actions of the terrorists are to be used as some justification that we should also become more uncivilized, you aren't going to get much traction with that viewpoint. It goes against all the principles our country stands for. You can frame the issue as "the world is uglier than you think" until the cows come home, but I'll always stand with the majority of our citizens that would never support indiscriminate killing of women and children halfway across the world in the name of "protecting" our country.

Listen, I'm not a monster whose all for killing innocent people. I'm not a person to just go off to war for no reason. I am, however, a realist and I take seriously the threats of those who seek to destroy my fellow citizens and our way of life. Sitting on the sidelines weighing what's moral is not the same as it is in the trenches or face to face with a devoted enemy. A good deal of people don't have a problem saying , "I would do 'whatever it takes' to protect my family", while having a problem with people like me suggesting that our elected leaders and our military men and women do 'whatever it takes' to protect us all. Bullies prey on the weak, but respect those who stand up to them. Are we going to stand up and be respected or are we going to continue to be weak and watch the bullies continue to wreak havoc?
 

BobLobIaw

Active member
Sep 9, 2014
28
0
0
Visit site
Listen, I'm not a monster whose all for killing innocent people. I'm not a person to just go off to war for no reason. I am, however, a realist and I take seriously the threats of those who seek to destroy my fellow citizens and our way of life. Sitting on the sidelines weighing what's moral is not the same as it is in the trenches or face to face with a devoted enemy. A good deal of people don't have a problem saying , "I would do 'whatever it takes' to protect my family", while having a problem with people like me suggesting that our elected leaders and our military men and women do 'whatever it takes' to protect us all. Bullies prey on the weak, but respect those who stand up to them. Are we going to stand up and be respected or are we going to continue to be weak and watch the bullies continue to wreak havoc?

How on earth do you consider our military involvement in the middle east in the last twenty-five years to be weak?