• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jordan pilot hostage Moaz al-Kasasbeh 'burned alive'

Gonna be interesting to see what Jordan's response to this is.

I have a few thoughts on this:

First, my heart goes out to that brave Jordanian pilot and his family. I can’t imagine what it’s like to lose a son, brother, father or friend to such a barbaric and horrific murder and I can’t imagine myself acting as bravely as that pilot acted in his last moments, knowing what was coming. I consider him a hero and if I were Jordanian, I would be both proud and angry.

On the other hand, before the news of the pilot’s death broke, too many Jordanians were protesting their countries limited involvement in fighting ISIS because they don’t see this as their war. This, I think, is the biggest problem we face today because the West continues to tiptoe around and avoid the words “Islam” and “Muslim” while this sick form of Islam continues to grow in and even overthrow the governments of Muslim nations; yet this isn’t their war? Why isn’t it their war?

They probably don’t see it as their war because those on the left, who fear Christian conservatives more than terrorists for some reason, have suddenly become advocates of freedom of religion and no separation between church and state when it comes to these radical Islamists who want impose Sharia Law upon the entire world. I understand the fact that not all Muslims are like this but if they aren’t, this is their war, not mine.

Perhaps we will be forced to equate the religion of Islam to Nazism if we hope to avoid global catastrophe or global Sharia Law but that can only happen if Muslims like those in Jordan decide to do nothing rather than taking their “peaceful” religion back by stomping out ISIS and other detestable Islamic terrorists. Unfortunately there isn’t much hope of that because the leftists around the world are bent on open borders, government welfare in exchange for votes and refuse to expect assimilation of cultures.

God help us all if the Muslim nations don’t do what it takes to strike this disease of religion down now, If it isn’t a Muslim nations war, who will stop this sickness from spreading?
 
Global authorities that the US government conveniently refuses to recognise have correctly condemned civilian casualties by the US military and clandestine agencies. You can ignore it as it pleases you, but that doesn't change the fact.

You don't name these "global authorities," but what they think is irrelevant. If they're convinced they hold the moral high ground, let them try to do something about it. The government of the United States is responsible to our Constitution, and nothing else in the world. You can ignore that as it pleases you, but it won't change a damned thing.
 
We have a winner:

...To carry out this strategy, ISIL needs a serious injection of recruits to build upon its current fighting force of about 30,000 at most, which is significantly fewer fighters than each of its opponent forces: the Kurdish Peshmerga fighters, Iraqi and Syrian government forces and even potential Sunni tribal rivals. Simply put, ISIL is surrounded by enemies with greater fighting power, and needs to grow its military strength to create an Islamic—and Sunni—state inside Iraq and Syria.

So why the beheadings? In a word, publicity: They increase the group’s profile as the biggest challenger to the supposed greatest enemy of Islam. This allows ISIL to draw from a significantly larger pool of recruits, many with strong anti-American sentiment, which ISIL desperately needs to fight local battles as the group tries to carve out a de facto state. Yes, the beheadings are meant to challenge and intimidate the Western public, but that is only a secondary benefit for ISIL, whose focus remains on defeating enemies in immediate proximity.

Read more: Why ISIL Beheads Its Victims - Robert A. Pape and Michael Rowley and Sarah Morell - POLITICO Magazine



Like I have been saying, the media needs to carefully consider to what extent they report the details of these executions.

To the extent that you're correct in your analysis, you're by extension proving the point that, without exposure of IS brutality, opposition in the west will not be sufficient to present the military challenge needed to stop them. Not to be disrespectful, but most Americans are quite insular and far more interested in what affects them directly in their daily lives than in what is happening in a neighboring city let alone half way around the world. Unless they are hit with it directly, they don't believe it exists.

At this point in time, IS is winning the PR war and the Obama Administration could take some lessons from them on how to win an advertising campaign.
 
Do you think they would?

I think they might try :(. I think that attempts to say for certainty one way or the other are idiotic projections - the people who claim that Iranian leadership are really just rational westerners who are seeking their own self-interest are no better than those who claim that they're all full-Ahmadinejad. There is a strong case that they would consider it a religious imperative.

I am a lot more sure that they will use it as cover to become much more aggressive in the region, and spark a nuclear arms race with Saudi Arabia. Then you have two somewhat shaky, unrepresentative regimes periodically ruled by their extremists. Something I periodically have to re-post when this kind of subject comes up.


....Imagine a Mexican standoff, except that 3 of the 4 players are A) paranoid schizophrenics facing opponents they violently hate, B) convinced that death will be a net benefit for them, C) convinced that their souls are in peril if they don't shoot, and D) potentially armed with nukes (the 4th Player is the unfortunately-located Israel). I think everyone here can agree that that is not a "stable" situation, particularly when you add in E) these countries are not internally stable, but may feel forced into an external war in order to solidify internal support and F) at least two of the players (Iran and Saudi Arabia) are occasionally held hostage by their own extremists, who feel free to act without permission, are nearly impossible to stop, and are most desirous of the conflict. And I feel that A) deserves re-mentioning....
 
You don't name these "global authorities," but what they think is irrelevant. If they're convinced they hold the moral high ground, let them try to do something about it. The government of the United States is responsible to our Constitution, and nothing else in the world. You can ignore that as it pleases you, but it won't change a damned thing.

Yes, I'm well aware of a bad US habit of ignoring international law, and the ICC.
 
We have a winner:

...To carry out this strategy, ISIL needs a serious injection of recruits to build upon its current fighting force of about 30,000 at most, which is significantly fewer fighters than each of its opponent forces: the Kurdish Peshmerga fighters, Iraqi and Syrian government forces and even potential Sunni tribal rivals. Simply put, ISIL is surrounded by enemies with greater fighting power, and needs to grow its military strength to create an Islamic—and Sunni—state inside Iraq and Syria.

So why the beheadings? In a word, publicity: They increase the group’s profile as the biggest challenger to the supposed greatest enemy of Islam. This allows ISIL to draw from a significantly larger pool of recruits, many with strong anti-American sentiment, which ISIL desperately needs to fight local battles as the group tries to carve out a de facto state. Yes, the beheadings are meant to challenge and intimidate the Western public, but that is only a secondary benefit for ISIL, whose focus remains on defeating enemies in immediate proximity.

Read more: Why ISIL Beheads Its Victims - Robert A. Pape and Michael Rowley and Sarah Morell - POLITICO Magazine

Like I have been saying, the media needs to carefully consider to what extent they report the details of these executions.

Those who get recruited into ISIL don't generally get their news from Western Media, and they certainly don't get their Jihad Updates from there. Once the video was on twitter, it was already in the hands of everyone who could be operationalized by it.
 
The military knows damn well that the drone program is far more harmful to innocent civilians than the conventional method.

On the contrary. Having done targeting in the military for several years, I am pretty thoroughly aware of the opposite. The mitigated CER of a hellfire is pretty small - we've had instances where we've hit the back end of the car and the guy in the front gets out and runs away.

Drone strikes — billed by President Barack Obama as tactically surgical and less deadly to civilians than conventional air power — are 10 times more likely to cause innocent casualties than bombs or missiles unleashed from U.S. jets, according to a new study based on classified military documents.

:doh

platform changes. Because launching bigger bombs is the way to kill fewer people. Yeah :roll: that's a great idea.

What this guy isn't taking into account is the different usage - fast movers in Afghanistan are used in support of troops in a TIC. Give them the drone mission, and all you'd be doing is risking a pilot, reducing the loiter time that is actually quite important in limiting civilian casualties, and (possibly) dropping bigger bombs.
 
OMG. The horror. The evil. They must be stopped. But how?

One thing to do is to give poison pills to all military who enter the area, so they can kill themselves, rather than be tortured and killed like this.

You don't have to have a pill. I, for example, carried an extra grenade, separated from the rest of my munitions. If I'm going to the Great Duty Station in the Sky, I'm taking a couple of the bastards with me :).
 
On the contrary. Having done targeting in the military for several years, I am pretty thoroughly aware of the opposite. The mitigated CER of a hellfire is pretty small - we've had instances where we've hit the back end of the car and the guy in the front gets out and runs away.



:doh

platform changes. Because launching bigger bombs is the way to kill fewer people. Yeah :roll: that's a great idea.

What this guy isn't taking into account is the different usage - fast movers in Afghanistan are used in support of troops in a TIC. Give them the drone mission, and all you'd be doing is risking a pilot, reducing the loiter time that is actually quite important in limiting civilian casualties, and (possibly) dropping bigger bombs.

Mr. Will, or Mr. Lewis??????? I'll have to contemplate that one for a bit.

The report’s author, Lawrence Lewis, a researcher at the federally funded Center for Naval Analyses who possesses a top-security clearance, dissected secret data on U.S. air attacks in Afghanistan from mid-2010 to mid-2011 — the peak of unmanned drone use during the war, executed under the command of former Gen. David Petraeus.
 
The ICC is a global authority that has convicted and sentenced heads of state.

And yet, there is no global authority. Just because Obama bows to dictators and this nation's enemies does not mean the thugs and dictators have any authority over us. Countries must agree. Not all do. None should.
 
There are two lifelong friends. They each were high school football stars. Now they are each older, balding, overweight men. Similar as they are, one is a Republican and one is Democrat. The Republican looks in the mirror and sees the high school football player with cheerleaders on his arms. He smiles and says "What a stud I am". The Democrat looks in the mirror and sees a balding, overweight older man and says "I am fat. I need to get to the gym". Which one hates himself?

Nice story. Neither one. Now let's get back to the blame America crowd, nearly all of whom are authoritarian statists and ask the same question. You already know the answer. Authoritarian statists love control and power, not the people nor the country.
 
Those who get recruited into ISIL don't generally get their news from Western Media, and they certainly don't get their Jihad Updates from there. Once the video was on twitter, it was already in the hands of everyone who could be operationalized by it.

Twitter is a media outlet. Youtube is a media outlet. Facebook is a media outlet.
 
To the extent that you're correct in your analysis, you're by extension proving the point that, without exposure of IS brutality, opposition in the west will not be sufficient to present the military challenge needed to stop them. Not to be disrespectful, but most Americans are quite insular and far more interested in what affects them directly in their daily lives than in what is happening in a neighboring city let alone half way around the world. Unless they are hit with it directly, they don't believe it exists.

At this point in time, IS is winning the PR war and the Obama Administration could take some lessons from them on how to win an advertising campaign.

1) When was the last time Canada took the lead on anything involving a foreign nation ahead of token jumping on US coattails?

2) I do not support US military intervention in the Middle East until the Middle East countries themselves take the lead in this fight, and we simply supply/finance them in their fight.

3) The US has been at war with terror a few days longer than Canada regardless.
 
Twitter is a media outlet. Youtube is a media outlet. Facebook is a media outlet.

Sort of - they are social media outlets on which you can rapidly spread electronic media (such as videos).

The point was simply that "CNN shouldn't be focusing on this" is missing the point if the argument follows "because it helps them recruit".
 
1) When was the last time Canada took the lead on anything involving a foreign nation ahead of token jumping on US coattails?

2) I do not support US military intervention in the Middle East until the Middle East countries themselves take the lead in this fight, and we simply supply/finance them in their fight.

3) The US has been at war with terror a few days longer than Canada regardless.

He is correct. Americans do need to be continually reminded about why it's important to fight these people or they will lose interest. Think about how many times you've heard that the American people were "tired" of the war. Tired from what? Hearing about it on the news? The only people actually tired from the war were those engaged in it, but Americans ran around talking about how tired they were from it.
 
Mr. Will, or Mr. Lewis??????? I'll have to contemplate that one for a bit.

The report’s author, Lawrence Lewis, a researcher at the federally funded Center for Naval Analyses who possesses a top-security clearance, dissected secret data on U.S. air attacks in Afghanistan from mid-2010 to mid-2011 — the peak of unmanned drone use during the war, executed under the command of former Gen. David Petraeus.

:shrug: the guy had the same clearance I did at the time, and was studying what I did, which was targeting. Furthermore, he was doing so well outside of his area of expertise, given that he was a CNA employee. Which is probably why he made such a basic error in assuming that platforms made the difference instead of mission, munitions-load, and combined effects mitigation - because he's not an air guy. He's a boat guy.

Don't get me wrong, CNA is made up of some great professionals - when I was looking at breaking down the North Korean Kongbang threat, I made extensive use of their material. But in this case either this guy made some very basic errors, or (just as likely) the media reporting on him have.


Furthermore (and isn't this interesting) his material was incomplete at best, as much of it isn't stored on networks that he has access to. If he was CNA then he was up on regular JWICS.
 
1) When was the last time Canada took the lead on anything involving a foreign nation ahead of token jumping on US coattails?

2) I do not support US military intervention in the Middle East until the Middle East countries themselves take the lead in this fight, and we simply supply/finance them in their fight.

3) The US has been at war with terror a few days longer than Canada regardless.

Canada is currently in a lead role in the fight against IS - our soldiers are on the ground, on the front lines, training Iraqis, and taking and returning fire from IS forces directly.

I always love when a leftist in America criticizes Canada when Canada and Canadians instigate no problems in the world but are quick to defend those attacked and often are dragged into conflicts because of actions initiated by Americans. Canada does what's right not because it's in our own country's personal self-interest, but because it's right.

It's good that most people in the west, if not the world, look past the idiotic smugness and xenophobia of the American left and continue to support the general goodness of the American people at large. America still has a lot of friends in the world, Canada included, even thought the asinine comments of some, like yours, make us wonder why we bother some times.
 
You seem to think Obama is cool with it.
Faster reply. I see you are getting faster at licking the screen clear of spittle.

As in the thread where you posted this crap, you run away with denials.
Denial, and oh that was sarcasm, or some sort or BS reply is your foxhole to run to.
Tell ya the truth, you are not worth the effort.

And as was mentioned on another thread, I wonder if you really are a wannabe.

You have successfully proven my point. You've refused to acknowledge the fact that you blatantly lied, and then you once again, like any keyboard warrior question service. It's okay though. I too can take things you say and twist them into lies. But I choose not to because I'm not Canadian.
 
Canada is currently in a lead role in the fight against IS - our soldiers are on the ground, on the front lines, training Iraqis, and taking and returning fire from IS forces directly.

I always love when a leftist in America criticizes Canada when Canada and Canadians instigate no problems in the world but are quick to defend those attacked and often are dragged into conflicts because of actions initiated by Americans. Canada does what's right not because it's in our own country's personal self-interest, but because it's right.

It's good that most people in the west, if not the world, look past the idiotic smugness and xenophobia of the American left and continue to support the general goodness of the American people at large. America still has a lot of friends in the world, Canada included, even thought the asinine comments of some, like yours, make us wonder why we bother some times.

Well if you are in the lead, then there is no need for us to become involved because Canadians are world renowned for their superiority. In the meantime, if you are willing to sit at home while somebody else dies in your stead, then your smugness is well deserved. I prefer our soldiers not die on a fool's errand. You apparently do not as long as it is not you being sent.
 
Well if you are in the lead, then there is no need for us to become involved because Canadians are world renowned for their superiority. In the meantime, if you are willing to sit at home while somebody else dies in your stead, then your smugness is well deserved. I prefer our soldiers not die on a fool's errand. You apparently do not as long as it is not you being sent.

Yes, Canadian soldiers, both men and women, are renowned for their superior skills and training - just ask any American soldier who's served with them if you want an answer. And no, a 59 yr old man is not a good recruit for our armed services, although if the time came when my services were needed or accepted, those services would be gladly offered.

But hey, I'll bow to your advice on smugness since you seem to be an expert in the field.
 
Yes, Canadian soldiers, both men and women, are renowned for their superior skills and training - just ask any American soldier who's served with them if you want an answer. And no, a 59 yr old man is not a good recruit for our armed services, although if the time came when my services were needed or accepted, those services would be gladly offered.

But hey, I'll bow to your advice on smugness since you seem to be an expert in the field.

Yes these world renowned troops only engaged ISIS because they drove into an attack. Otherwise they hide in the wire.
 
Yes these world renowned troops only engaged ISIS because they drove into an attack. Otherwise they hide in the wire.
Simply slanderous. Canada is a staunch ally, and never has so much as a peep when it comes to standing with us. If this is the way you view friendships, you must be one lonely guy.
 
Back
Top Bottom