Thread: What Will It Take To Get Rid Of ISIS?

Originally Posted by rickschoppers

ISIS thought to be fighting in the PI. Watch out Davis.

Lorenzana on Marawi crisis: 'We believe that this is ISIS' | ABS-CBN News

Who's next?

"Thought to be"?

Where have you been?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...e-philippines/

Yes, yes, I know. Maybe I should have said IS fighting in the Philippines, but then someone would say how do I know it is ISIS. You know how things go on this site. It was more of a lead in to see where ISIS will pop up next in the world to start some fire fights. Do they actually have a plan, or do they just go where they think they can best take over some real estate?

^
Makes sense.

Originally Posted by rickschoppers

Yes, yes, I know. Maybe I should have said IS fighting in the Philippines, but then someone would say how do I know it is ISIS. You know how things go on this site. It was more of a lead in to see where ISIS will pop up next in the world to start some fire fights. Do they actually have a plan, or do they just go where they think they can best take over some real estate?

Problem for the infidel is that the IS do have a plan, which is why clever money probably says it will be around far longer than western leaders would like, especially in the light of Trump's boast about bombing it into oblivion. Been through this before; westerners view the world with a western mindset which isn't designed to cope with polar realities; they make war against tactics like jihad which they call terrorism allowing it to be distanced from Islam, and they score great victories by dropping bombs on physical targets leaving the underlying ideology untouched if not reinforced.

Anyway, not knocking AQ's jihad which has caused quite a lot of distress as the west's bogey man; it did draw many infidel lives towards ObL's claim that Americans would be first to get fed up with body bags, and also a few trillion $$. But with no comprehensible endgame, little in the way of civil, executive, admin and legal infrastructure to serve a nation, and none of the trimmings of a viable caliphate, it was just marking time for someone to invent a better mousetrap.

The IS have all of these functions and more; the one thing they are not is a bunch of un-Islamic psychopaths that infidel western leaders knowing dangerously little about Islam would have their people believe.

The IS have carefully considered religious beliefs, reject compromise even if that might ensure its own survival, thrive on genocide, and believe its destiny is to participate if not trigger the apocalypse. They are pro PR, pro tech, pro social media, pro propaganda, and provide no end of encouraging jihad porn and messages for infidel and Muslim alike. And it is borderless, with its message buried deep into Fifth Columns throughout Europe and the US with a phenomenal following from 'ordinary' Muslims at every level of western society, from street to executive. It knows the west sees its weaknesses as strength, it understands the west's rules and limitations, and its main message to Muslims everywhere is not just to kill a few kafir, which helps to soften them up, but that their caliphate is back.

Originally Posted by tomcat

Originally Posted by jabir

its main message to Muslims everywhere is not just to kill a few kafir, which helps to soften them up, but that their caliphate is back.

...and literally on its back...far from softening "them" up, the lone wolf attacks have done much to make non-Muslim target societies aware of the dangers of complacency and increase the social will to conduct their lives as normally as possible and not cower in fear of such fifth columnist predation. IMO, ISIS will eventually be overcome by persistent efforts to wear them down, remove any physical sites, and monitor their online activities. ISIS may be underestimating the non-Muslim will to protect its various lifestyles and overestimating its own ability to do more than create sporadic headlines and occasional localized mayhem through random killing...

Lone wolf? Ah yes, that means they're acting alone and have nothing to do with each other or groups or mainstream Islam, because otherwise they couldn't be lone wolves, right?

I won't address the rest of your post, of course you are spot on, a true keyboard warrior, and everything will be just fine as soon as non-Muslims get angry enough to wipe out the IS.

Here's something to help your cause: CNN still looking for motive, and translates “This is for Allah” to mean “This has nothing to do with Islam.”

London terror attacks what we know - CNN.com

Originally Posted by jabir

that means they're acting alone and have nothing to do with each other or groups or mainstream Islam, because otherwise they couldn't be lone wolves, right?

Wrong. By lone wolf I assume the general understanding of a single attacker (possibly from a group of attackers-in-waiting) doing the work rather than a group.

Originally Posted by jabir

CNN still looking for motive, and translates “This is for Allah” to mean “This has nothing to do with Islam.”

link where this is explicitly stated or even implied pls...

I like your definition of lone wolf, everyone should make one up. So in a war situation every soldier in each unit becomes a lone wolf?

Originally Posted by jabir

So in a war situation every soldier in each unit becomes a lone wolf?

curious leap of imagination...entertaining, but it detracts from the thread...

Originally Posted by jabir

Originally Posted by tomcat

Originally Posted by jabir

its main message to Muslims everywhere is not just to kill a few kafir, which helps to soften them up, but that their caliphate is back.

...and literally on its back...far from softening "them" up, the lone wolf attacks have done much to make non-Muslim target societies aware of the dangers of complacency and increase the social will to conduct their lives as normally as possible and not cower in fear of such fifth columnist predation. IMO, ISIS will eventually be overcome by persistent efforts to wear them down, remove any physical sites, and monitor their online activities. ISIS may be underestimating the non-Muslim will to protect its various lifestyles and overestimating its own ability to do more than create sporadic headlines and occasional localized mayhem through random killing...

Lone wolf? Ah yes, that means they're acting alone and have nothing to do with each other or groups or mainstream Islam, because otherwise they couldn't be lone wolves, right?

I won't address the rest of your post, of course you are spot on, a true keyboard warrior, and everything will be just fine as soon as non-Muslims get angry enough to wipe out the IS.

Here's something to help your cause: CNN still looking for motive, and translates “This is for Allah” to mean “This has nothing to do with Islam.”

London terror attacks what we know - CNN.com

I suppose all the indignation explains why the torch and pitchfork mob are unable to discuss the issues rationally.

They actually do have a definition for Lone Wolf you know:

A lone wolf, lone-wolf terrorist or lone actor is someone who prepares and commits violent acts alone, outside of any command structure and without material assistance from any group.

So rather than you trying to invent your own definition, why don't we simply agree to use this one?

Originally Posted by jabir

its main message to Muslims everywhere is [...] that their caliphate is back.

Really..? What does that caliphate own? What does it produce.?

Originally Posted by Neo

Originally Posted by jabir

its main message to Muslims everywhere is [...] that their caliphate is back.

Really..? What does that caliphate own? What does it produce.?

1) 80,000 km2 of land, that's about the size of Scotland or Ireland.

2) Oil, drugs, slaves .

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by jabir

Originally Posted by tomcat

Originally Posted by jabir

its main message to Muslims everywhere is not just to kill a few kafir, which helps to soften them up, but that their caliphate is back.

...and literally on its back...far from softening "them" up, the lone wolf attacks have done much to make non-Muslim target societies aware of the dangers of complacency and increase the social will to conduct their lives as normally as possible and not cower in fear of such fifth columnist predation. IMO, ISIS will eventually be overcome by persistent efforts to wear them down, remove any physical sites, and monitor their online activities. ISIS may be underestimating the non-Muslim will to protect its various lifestyles and overestimating its own ability to do more than create sporadic headlines and occasional localized mayhem through random killing...

Lone wolf? Ah yes, that means they're acting alone and have nothing to do with each other or groups or mainstream Islam, because otherwise they couldn't be lone wolves, right?

I won't address the rest of your post, of course you are spot on, a true keyboard warrior, and everything will be just fine as soon as non-Muslims get angry enough to wipe out the IS.

Here's something to help your cause: CNN still looking for motive, and translates “This is for Allah” to mean “This has nothing to do with Islam.”

London terror attacks what we know - CNN.com

I suppose all the indignation explains why the torch and pitchfork mob are unable to discuss the issues rationally.

They actually do have a definition for Lone Wolf you know:

A lone wolf, lone-wolf terrorist or lone actor is someone who prepares and commits violent acts alone, outside of any command structure and without material assistance from any group.

So rather than you trying to invent your own definition, why don't we simply agree to use this one?

Not trying to invent anything, just didn't feel right to call virtually every member of a fighting force a lone wolf.

The definition you offered makes sense.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by Neo

Originally Posted by jabir

its main message to Muslims everywhere is [...] that their caliphate is back.

Really..? What does that caliphate own? What does it produce.?

1) 80,000 km2 of land, that's about the size of Scotland or Ireland.

2) Oil, drugs, slaves .

I guess as you say, mostly oil, dope, people. I wouldn't put the house on any mainstream source for land size occupied by the IS, since that varies according to political need, but most seem to agree it's the wealthiest of all jihad groups. I would guess it also exports jihad, though Europe's a bit slow on the uptake so might take a while longer to sink in while Trump bombs the ideology into oblivion.

To be fair, there is an argument that as infidel western leaders that know nothing about Islam have declared the IS to be unIslamic, the one thing it could never export is jihad. Gimme time, I need to work on this one.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

1) 80,000 km2 of land, that's about the size of Scotland or Ireland. 2) Oil, drugs, slaves .

Where is this land? Where are it's borders? Where is their capital? Where is their central bank?..........

Oil, they are drilling for oil or stealing others by the gun barrel?
Drugs, they are growing and manufacturing these where?
Slaves, pretty quick breeding/growth rates. Or are these the old comfort women, R&R quick time bar girls, cleaners cooks are required for all armies and have been for millennia. But of course only ISIS are condemned for it.

The R&R industry in Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Egypt, Sudan are all those 1,000's slaves or part of a free and fair market whose free workers willingly choose their roles or accept their lot?

https://news.usni.org/2017/06/18/nav...er-near-raqqah

U.S. Navy Super Hornet Shoots Down Syrian Jet Near ISIS Stronghold Raqqah

Syria said:
Pro-al Assad Syrian forces claim the Su-22 was on an anti-ISIS operation when it was shot down by the Super Hornet.

“Our aircraft was downed at lunch time today near the [Syrian] city of Raqqa, when it was fulfilling its mission against Daesh (ISIS),” the ministry said in a statement reported by Russian state-controlled media on Sunday.
The U.S.-led coalition’s “actions are aimed at halting the Syrian army and its allies in the fight against terrorism, whereas our army and allies make great progress.”

USA said:
“The demonstrated hostile intent and actions of pro-regime forces toward Coalition and partner forces in Syria conducting legitimate counter-ISIS operations will not be tolerated,” read the statement.
“The Coalition calls on all parties to focus their efforts on the defeat of ISIS, which is our common enemy and the greatest threat to regional and worldwide peace and security.”

So, who is fighting the ISIS, anyway?

Originally Posted by Klondyke

So, who is fighting the ISIS, anyway?

We're not really sure about that....

It's about time the US forces fucked off out of Syria. Back to Kansas, boys.

Allegedly the golden boy has handed military control, worldwide, to the generals. If so the golden boy seems to think his shit wont stink.

Probably his way of shirking responsibility for fuck-ups or unsavoury episodes.