Obliterating Islamic State (ISIS) - Page 5




 
--
Boots
 
October 29th, 2015  
JOC
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuan
Canada's new PM is right: Bombs won't beat ISIS
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/23/opinio...eau/index.html
I disagree bombing will take out ISIS's heavy weapons AFV and such, thus reducing there ability to wage offensive warfare. It may not win the war but they will only be able to fight with a smaller stick. Also weapons like the AC-130 and Apache can take out a lot of ISIS fighters when they are grouped together. I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of one of those.


November 5th, 2015  
lljadw
 
No :Trudeau is a deserter,he has even not the excuse that the ship is sinking:he is a member of the Muslim Lobby and refuses to fight aganst Muslims .He will never fight,even if Canada is attacked .

And history learns us what will happen to such people .The country of a PM who openly is saying that he will not fight,will be the next on the list of the terrorists .
November 6th, 2015  
Tuan
 
 
^^ Canadians voted for Trudeau to bring back the old Canada that Harper had ruined. As you know, traditionally Canada is known for promoting peace and compassion throughout the world. That's exactly what Trudeau has said he's going to do. I seriously doubt that there will be a single terrorist attack on Canadian soil during his time!
--
Boots
November 6th, 2015  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOC
I disagree bombing will take out ISIS's heavy weapons AFV and such, thus reducing there ability to wage offensive warfare. It may not win the war but they will only be able to fight with a smaller stick. Also weapons like the AC-130 and Apache can take out a lot of ISIS fighters when they are grouped together. I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of one of those.

AC130 Strike on ISIS Raqqa, Syria 9/23/14 - YouTube

Usa Army Apache vs Isis EI.Irak - YouTube
The argument is somewhat like the capital punishment argument, the death penalty does not stop capital crime but it does stop reoffending.

ISIS only understand violence it is what they are about which is why negotiating with them is pointless because what they want is everything and they want to get it through conquest so you are right bombs will solve the problem preferably followed by a lot of bullets however this has to be backed by programs to reduce the radicalisation of those susceptible to their message.

However according to the video comments both of those are not ISIS targets but earlier Taliban strikes from Afghanistan.
November 7th, 2015  
Tuan
 
 
As I said here many times, you can eliminate some extremists, some leaders and some groups by military might which is the application of hard power, as for short term goals, but you will never destroy an intergenerational idea, such as Qutbism/Salafism/Wahhabism or Jihadism because an ideology has to be countered with another ideology, not by bombs and guns as it would exacerbate the situation. To counter an ideology by another you need to apply soft power!
November 8th, 2015  
lljadw
 
You said this many times,but you are wrong :nazism(= an ideology) was not crushed by an other ideology,but by brute force .

Why would it not be possible to crush ISIS by using a nuclear weapon ?
November 8th, 2015  
JOC
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lljadw
You said this many times,but you are wrong :nazism(= an ideology) was not crushed by an other ideology,but by brute force .

Why would it not be possible to crush ISIS by using a nuclear weapon ?
Because it would be impossible to separate the rebel alliance and other innocents from the foes i.e.: ISIS.

Currently the US pinpoints the ISIS targets, although the attacks are to few to tip the balance if the balance can be tipped from the air.
November 8th, 2015  
I3BrigPvSk
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lljadw
You said this many times,but you are wrong :nazism(= an ideology) was not crushed by an other ideology,but by brute force .

Why would it not be possible to crush ISIS by using a nuclear weapon ?
So the way to make you change your mind about things is to use force.

What do you think the consequences would be if the US or anybody else used a nuke in Syria/Iraq or anywhere else in the world?
November 8th, 2015  
JOC
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lljadw
You said this many times,but you are wrong :nazism(= an ideology) was not crushed by an other ideology,but by brute force .

Why would it not be possible to crush ISIS by using a nuclear weapon ?
The Nazi's were out to conquer all of Europe and possibly other areas as well. They were a world treat and it took the combined forces of the USSR, USA and British Common Wealth to defeat them. They were one of the biggest treats civilized man has ever faced.

How can you compare a few 10 of thousands of radicals that are loosely knit and are only achieving victories because they are fighting weak foes to Nazi Germany who had an extremely powerful military.
November 8th, 2015  
lljadw
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk
So the way to make you change your mind about things is to use force.

What do you think the consequences would be if the US or anybody else used a nuke in Syria/Iraq or anywhere else in the world?
What were the consequences when the US used 2 nukes against Japan ?

The only difference between a nuke and a conventional weapon is that the nuke CAN kill more people .there are small nukes that can kill only a few thousand people .
 


Similar Topics
Syrian Kurds battle Islamic State in northeast
U.S. fears Islamic State is making serious inroads in Libya
Islamic State says it's holding 'Israeli spy' in Syria
Iranian Phantom jet strikes the Islamic State in Iraq - IHS Jane's 360
Islamic State says executes second Lebanese soldier