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

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Seems they didn't teach that course at the University of Wiscosin when K. Humbert attended...

Well that goes without saying because I attended there before any of these events occured. Did they teach predicting the future at Surfer U.?

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Clearly, that was not the thrust of my OP w/regard to said Ollie's involvement in securing the hostages release but, at this point, what does it matter?

Of course it was. Please slime out without dignity as usual.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Seems they didn't teach that course at the University of Wiscosin when K. Humbert attended...

Well that goes without saying because I attended there before any of these events occured. Did they teach predicting the future at Surfer U.?

Heh...well, they did an excellent job at Surfer U imbedding in my consciousness a un-appreciation for the fauex surfer chick!

Plus, avoidence of mobs roaming throughout the campus area burning down branches of the BofA

Yes, I agree. And it was well known refuge for the tennis bum set of So Cal to avoid getting drafted during the Viet Nam war.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Yes, I agree. And it was well known refuge for the tennis bum set of So Cal to avoid getting drafted during the Viet Nam war.

Nothing wrong with avoiding imperial wars....

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Oliver North told Greta Van Susteren tonight that the Egyptian government asked the US for information on ISIS targets in Libya yesterday after ISIS beheaded 21 Christians. But, the Obama Administration refused the request. The Obama administration also refused to give Jordan information on ISIS targets in Syria after their pilot was burned alive in a cage.

I can imagine legitimate reasons why location intel is sensitive to share with these semi-allies.

US gets in enough trouble over its own drone strikes when they go wrong and that is with live feedback from drone cameras on location updates.

Sharing enemy position info with semi-allies to support their air strikes when you are not sure exactly what they are going to do with it or when and will blame US intel when they fuck it up is a reason to be cautious.

Also the detailed position info is live from a drone camera and these drones are armed so would normally be doing the bombing themselves.

Also relaying drone info in real-time reveals the location of your drones and they don't fly very fast. If the info gets into the wrong hands (which is a risk with this sort of 'ally') you stand to lose assets and face.

Originally Posted by OhOh

The killing of the Muslim civilians in France and Denmark show conclusively that had the "suspects" been given a fair trial it would show the inadequacy of the said "intelligence.

Are you referring to the Kouachi brothers and Coulibaly who committed the terrorist atrocities in Paris and Omar el-Hussein who murdered an attendee at the Denmark meeting to discuss free speech and then murdered a synagogue guard later on?

Are you suggesting that they were unjustly dealt with by the anti-terrorist agents who shot them?

Originally Posted by OhOh

The western idea of civilised behaviour is to subject all accused persons, nobody is above the law, to "Trial by Jury" in a public court.

Not in a situation where the suspect is armed and shooting at security forces with no apparent intention of giving himself up when trapped. These guys are on self-engineered suicide missions as they well know.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Your post suggested, to me, that "intelligence" must form the key to actions. My reply suggested that FACTS are the key to correct decisions not "sexed up" reports/intelligence......... Subsequently shown to be totally false.

We were talking about the US unwillingness to share its intelligence with some muslim nations fighting IS. I was saying there are reasons not to share intelligence. What has that got to do with your poorly formulated attempt to distinguish between 'FACTS' and 'intelligence'? The digression is neither logical nor relevant.

Danish Muslim Swore Allegiance To ISIS Just Before Terror Attack On Mohammed Cartoonist.



If only Obama could have found him a job!

"The jihadi who murdered two civilians in Denmark swore allegiance to Islamic State just nine minutes before his first attack.

Omar Abdel Hamid El-Hussein declared his devotion to the terror group on his Facebook page and then gunned down a film director at a free speech debate in Copenhagen.

The 22-year-old fanatic later killed a volunteer security guard at a synagogue before police shot him dead.

Last night it emerged that Danish intelligence service PET was warned that El-Hussein had become radicalised while in prison.

A senior member of his former gang, called the Brothas, said El-Hussein had been released two weeks ago.

Abo Saddam added: ‘When he went inside he was a member of our gang. He lived his life with us. We would drive around, smoke hashish together, fight rival gangs. This is the Omar that I knew.

‘But when he came out he changed. He stopped keeping in touch with the Brothas.

‘Prison changed him. He became a much harder Muslim with more hardcore beliefs. He wanted to act on those beliefs as well, instead of just talking about them.’

The 24-year-old gangster added: ‘He went into prison a gang member like us and came out wanting to wage holy war.’

Omar Abdel Hamid El-Hussein swore allegiance to ISIS on Facebook moments before Copenhagen attacks | Daily Mail Online

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Omar Abdel Hamid El-Hussein declared his devotion to the terror group on his Facebook page

Thank god for Fukbook" it's a good job the "intelligence" services don't monitor/write the pages.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

A senior member of his former gang, called the Brothas, said El-Hussein had been released two weeks ago. Abo Saddam added: ‘When he went inside he was a member of our gang. He lived his life with us. We would drive around, smoke hashish together, fight rival gangs. This is the Omar that I knew.

These "gang members" will do owt for a joint. Even appear in court for the trial. Oh we won't be needing one as the suspect, what a quaint old fashioned word, has been murdered and blamed.

Originally Posted by OhOh

The decision possibly indicated that the US "intelligence" is thought, by the US Military, to be worthless "chatter"

I take it that is your speculation on the matter?

If it was worthless chatter why would they say they are refusing to share it. They would say it is worthless chatter and they don't have any useful intel to share.

The US will certainly have good intel on target locations with their high altitude surveillance tech. This will certainly be useful to muslim nations planning bombing raids on IS.

Originally Posted by Looper

The US will certainly have good intel on target locations with their high altitude surveillance tech. This will certainly be useful to muslim nations planning bombing raids on IS.

Unicorns are half price this week!

Originally Posted by Looper

I take it that is your speculation on the matter?

Yep, same as yours eh?

Originally Posted by OhOh

Unicorns are half price this week!

You disagree that the US has the best high altitude surveillance tech available or you think they do but they are not using it to monitor IS movements?

Originally Posted by OhOh

Yep, same as yours eh?

So you think the US was asked for comms intel and they did not have anything useful but instead of saying they don't have any they said we have good intel but we are not sharing it with you? Why would they do that?

Originally Posted by Looper

Originally Posted by OhOh

Unicorns are half price this week!

You disagree that the US has the best high altitude surveillance tech available or you think they do but they are not using it to monitor IS movements?

Originally Posted by OhOh

Yep, same as yours eh?

So you think the US was asked for comms intel and they did not have anything useful but instead of saying they don't have any they said we have good intel but we are not sharing it with you? Why would they do that?

I have my doubts than any single country claims to have the best. The USA shrills certainly tells everyone they have the best, but when asked to produce, lets say pictures of Russian Invasions in the Ukraine, they remain conspicuously quiet. But if you have any links to every county in the Worlds government leader agreeing with your statement please post it.

Possibly thr reason for not "sharing" duff chatter is to continue the illousion of supremacy. "The Emperor’s New Clothes" syndrom.

Originally Posted by Necron99

Maybe a crack squad of 50,000 Oklahoma Pharmacists......



(with reloads)

Don't need 50.000 . . . probably three or four will do . . . they are, after all, Merkins

Maybe an OckerRocket or two would do the trick.

A logical solution would be to finance and cultivate a secular military strongman, of the General Sisi-type, (or Saddam Hussein, before he got too big for his boots), and then turn a blind eye to his human rights abuses and self-enriching governance in return for the regional security he provides.

Originally Posted by The Ghost Of The Moog

A logical solution would be to finance and cultivate a secular military strongman, of the General Sisi-type, (or Saddam Hussein, before he got too big for his boots), and then turn a blind eye to his human rights abuses and self-enriching governance in return for the regional security he provides.

they had one in Libya who they got rid of, have another in Syria who they are trying to overthrow...
Can't unbreak an egg.

I suspect Moog's tongue was firmly in his cheek.

Mubarak, Gaddaffi, Hussein, Assad, Saleh, etc. Hardly much more democratic than IS.

Originally Posted by Neverna

I suspect Moog's tongue was firmly in his cheek.

Mubarak, Gaddaffi, Hussein, Assad, Saleh, etc. Hardly much more democratic than IS.

No more democratic, but having seen what democracy throws up in Egypt (Muslim Brotherhood), I suspect the West would pragmatically waive lipservice to democracy in that region if it meant less fundamentalism.

As we can see in Thailand, one of the world's least democratic countries, the West is not bent on sanctioning autocrats.

Originally Posted by Neverna

I suspect Moog's tongue was firmly in his cheek.

Mubarak, Gaddaffi, Hussein, Assad, Saleh, etc. Hardly much more democratic than IS.

The US has no issues dealing with non democratic countries, look at the tade with China and Vietnam.
And Saudi, their dearest friend, Jordan, Kuwait. Saudi in fact is exactly what IS would become if it wins.