When we nuked the Japanese in 1945, nobody labeled it "genocide". And we're talking about doing a lot less than that. It's how wars are won tenderheart.
If you dropped nukes on in Syria it would be considered genocidal. It would also result in the spread and rapid growth of extremism and give terrorists a new boundary to cross - to set off a dirty bomb or small nuke. What you and others are advocating is just stupid. ISIS wants war to help itself grow. It's a disease that feeds on hate from both sides. If you want to defeat ISIS, you must do it using the values and beliefs from which Western culture is founded.
Shouldn't this give you enough reason to just pause and think first? We already know they are egging us to go to war with them.
Yeah cause this is a war the west is "seeking". WHAT PART OF THEY WON'T STOP KILLING US NO MATTER WHAT DO YOU NOT GET?
You're having a lot of trouble here. An idea (fundamentalist Islamic extremism) isn't something you can kill your way to eliminating. The only way you vanquish an idea is by convincing people you have a better idea. You want to play a short game, kill them all, that will never work because you will never kill them all (I would think everyone would understand this after Iraq) and by trying to kill them all you will only create more enemies like some kind of whack a mole game. What's necessary here is a long game. A long game isn't appeasement or ignoring the problem, it's addressing the problem smartly.
I agree with the long game plan... too bad we have a commander in chief with no plan, no game and no clue. If he does have a plan it must be to allow as much death and destruction in the name of Allah as possible. A long game would have been to stay the course in Iraq and now we are seeing the fruits from our lack of vision.
Wow - are you really comparing the strategies and tactic of Hitler to ISIS??? They are not even close to the same situations. ISIS doesn't have large armies marching along fronts. Iraq is what created this situation. A long plan would have been not to F with stable gov'ts that keep extreme elements in check, and not to do business with them either. ISIS attacked France because they were ALREADY at war with France. It wasn't some random act of violence, in their eyes it was retaliation for French airstrikes. That doesn't mean we should not fight ISIS. But it also means we shouldn't blame leaving Iraq as the cause for terrorist attacks. Whether we stayed in Iraq and fought them there or in Syria or wherever - they are still going to appear. You act like ISIS popped-up as soon as the U.S. left Iraq.
Bless the folks who always want conventional war, drone war or even nuclear war on ISIS or terrorism. They so remind me of the drug warriors. So ineffective. We get it. Nobody is for terrorism or drug abuse. Talking tough and acting tough or talking about "war' or drastic activity to show how serious you are opposed to drug abuse or terrorism. Feels good to seem tough, but being smart is bette.. With respect to drugs: three strikes and you are out; incarcerating millions; spending millions on weapons and police ; forcing Mexico and other couintries to go to actual war against drugs etc. etc. Has not worked wrt to drugs. With respect to terrorism: fool people into the Iraq War; occupation of Aghanistan, not just going after Bin Laden; occupying Iraq leading to ISIS. Drones which even many of the participants claim kill more innocents and lead to more terrorists than we kill; record all communications of all Americans and the whole world; try to ban encryption; torture, secret detention centers for rendition; hire millions more security guards and airport screeners. Has not controlled terrorism.
They are still there and regaining power? The US wasted a trillion dollars and thousands of lives. Some Afghan politicians and military contractors got insanely rich.
Aside from the god-awfully stupid attempt making a parallel that makes no logical sense, This isn't what happened at all. Hitler (at least prior to entering a state of hyper-delusionism after the failure to take Moscow or force a quick capitulation of the UK) and his military apparatus wanted a series of fast wars to knock out his opponents sequentially like France, Poland, USSR (almost) etc - they did not want a sustained war against the US, USSR and UK which they knew they could not win in the long term, propaganda notwithstanding, which is what they had by 1942. Why are you so dumb at history too? Did they not teach you this at Texas Tech?
Invasions and occupations of radicalized populations aren't part of a long game. They're part of a stupid game. The genesys of ISIS comes from Abu Ghraib and the dissolution of the Iraqi army. We keep doing exactly what our enemy wants us to do. Bin Laden must have thrown a party when he heard we were invading Iraq much the same way ISIS must be ecstatic about our politicians rejecting refugees fleeing the most barbaric gang of killers on Earth.