As Predicted, ISIS Takes It To The Next Level

[EmmaPeel]

I wasn't trying to talk down to you. I'm not looking for a fight. I was bringing attention to a point that I genuinely believe to be valid. If ISIS were slaughtering millions of people (which I genuinely believe that they would do if they had the capability), the world would unite against them and demand immediate drastic action.

I certainly haven't forgotten about the Poles, the ~30 million that Stalin killed, or the >1 million that Pol Pot took from this world. History is littered with insane sociopaths.

Roger, understood, Carb. Thanks.

[EmmaPeel]

LTG Michael Flynn: The former Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency for the Pentagon had a pretty awesome interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News regarding ISIS and he is throwing up red flags big time in regards to our POTUS and his administration not doing a damn thing. The interview is the very first part of the show so just skip the first minute intro and you'll be right on it.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/747896

Miller, thanks for posting. It needs to be posted as much as possible.

[Meizele_15481]

Just a little good news.

http://nypost.com/2015/02/09/isis-he...-for-his-life/

Cowards. Here's to hoping they all disappear off the face of the earth.

[Carbonfiberfoot]

They aren't slaughtering millions only because they haven't achieved a body count over a million.....yet. And that last word is the key here. ISIS is certainly showing capability to reach such numbers. And they've certainly shown that they intend to expand beyond their current locations to who knows where.

Why must we sit on our hands in ignorance simply because their murder count hasn't reached seven figures yet? Are all those people who have been slaughtered already just expendable lives? And are those future innocent victims up to 1,000,000 simply of no value to anyone?

Considering all the grief that Neville Chamberlain has (rightfully) been given for failing to keep Hitler in check, the glossing over of the overt murderous intentions & actions of ISIS is ignorant & dangerous.

I'm not glossing over how real of a threat that ISIS poses. I'm all for their swift eradication. I'm fully aware that they would take every Christian\Jewish\Hindu\Buddhist\non-believer\'infidel'\etc. life on this planet with the push of a button if they could.

All I've done is state that other regimes have done equally deplorable things, and that the general populace won't take sufficient notice until the situation is even further out of control than it already is. How my statements are being misconstrued as something even resembling support for these animals is beyond me.

[Pogue Mahone]

If ISIS were slaughtering millions of people (which I genuinely believe that they would do if they had the capability), the world would unite against them and demand immediate drastic action.

They aren't slaughtering millions only because they haven't achieved a body count over a million.....yet. And that last word is the key here. ISIS is certainly showing capability to reach such numbers. And they've certainly shown that they intend to expand beyond their current locations to who knows where.

Why must we sit on our hands in ignorance simply because their murder count hasn't reached seven figures yet? Are all those people who have been slaughtered already just expendable lives? And are those future innocent victims up to 1,000,000 simply of no value to anyone?

Considering all the grief that Neville Chamberlain has (rightfully) been given for failing to keep Hitler in check, the glossing over of the overt murderous intentions & actions of ISIS is ignorant & dangerous.

[Carbonfiberfoot]

Now, now, Carbie cakes. No need to talk to me like I'm a naïve loony bin liberal 14 year old emotional girl. I assure you I'm not a loony liberal.

But what I am is someone that's been in almost every country of the Middle East. And if I wasn't actually living/visiting in the remaining countries, I've stood on the borders or stood on heightened land looking into or over the other few except for Saudi Arabia.

I've also been to Auschwitz, where my military-history-major ex-husband of German descent helped me as someone of Polish descent relive what the Jews and Poles went through in that camp as we toured it. Or did you forget that millions of Poles also died at the hands of Nazis as well?

So spare me the condescension.

You can disagree by posting with counter factual points, but don't f*cking talk to me like I'm 14 years old. Get it? Got it? Good.

I'm telling you that ISIS is worse and we can just agree to disagree because you're not offering up a damn thing to change my mind.

I wasn't trying to talk down to you. I'm not looking for a fight. I was bringing attention to a point that I genuinely believe to be valid. If ISIS were slaughtering millions of people (which I genuinely believe that they would do if they had the capability), the world would unite against them and demand immediate drastic action.

I certainly haven't forgotten about the Poles, the ~30 million that Stalin killed, or the >1 million that Pol Pot took from this world. History is littered with insane sociopaths.

[Meizele_15481]

But I just got through explaining in my last post that despite the beheadings that have been occurring since last year, Obama and our allies have been timid and doing half assed measures instead of showing resolve, so unfortunately your statement would be untrue up to last week when King Abdullah took action because of his pilot, not because of social media. IOW, I'm saying be careful in your analysis of exactly which way social media takes the cause.

Good point. Emma.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Miller11x]

LTG Michael Flynn: The former Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency for the Pentagon had a pretty awesome interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News regarding ISIS and he is throwing up red flags big time in regards to our POTUS and his administration not doing a damn thing. The interview is the very first part of the show so just skip the first minute intro and you'll be right on it.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/747896

[EmmaPeel]

Social media does enable them but it bites them when the world sees their barbarism. If only there would be more action in removing them off the face of the earth, king Abdullah is a start most certainly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But I just got through explaining in my last post that despite the beheadings that have been occurring since last year, Obama and our allies have been timid and doing half assed measures instead of showing resolve, so unfortunately your statement would be untrue up to last week when King Abdullah took action because of his pilot, not because of social media. IOW, I'm saying be careful in your analysis of exactly which way social media takes the cause.

[CCCSD]

Part of the issue is that some in the world, enjoy seeing all that on the 'net and embrace it. Similar to thugs in the US aping what they see and hear...

[Meizele_15481]

Social media does enable them but it bites them when the world sees their barbarism. If only there would be more action in removing them off the face of the earth, king Abdullah is a start most certainly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EmmaPeel]

Personally, I think they're both deplorable. If the internet/social media was around during the late 1930's, things would have been vastly different, and millions would definitely have been saved.

The big difference between then and now is that we can actually see what is going on in real time and our "leader" refuses to do what needs to be done. The most disgusting part is the amount of Americans that actually agree with him.

The other big difference between then and now is that our administration is a bunch of *******.

And of course politics come before people's lives. Let alone Americans lives. [emoji35]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think we still have to be careful looking through our "normal person" eyes at this when you talk about social media.

So far, social media has actually helped ISIS recruitment significantly. It has turned off many people too, but up till possibly this last week, it didn't transfer to any kind of tough action by the alliance. In fact, ISIS has been successful at making the alliance timid, such as the UAE stopping their sorties in December.

I'm saying that King Abdullah is changing that now, but that's not social media.....that's someone on our side showing tremendous courage and leadership.

In other words you can't assume social media automatically means the sickos will stop their sadism. So far, social media has been used to swell the ranks of psychos.

[Meizele_15481]

As Predicted, ISIS Takes It To The Next Level

The other big difference between then and now is that our administration is a bunch of *******.

And of course politics come before people's lives. Let alone Americans lives. [emoji35]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Aerohead]

Personally, I think they're both deplorable. If the internet/social media was around during the late 1930's, things would have been vastly different, and millions would definitely have been saved.

The big difference between then and now is that we can actually see what is going on in real time and our "leader" refuses to do what needs to be done. The most disgusting part is the amount of Americans that actually agree with him.

[EmmaPeel]

#1. I don't believe ISIS at all ...............doubt it happened that way

#2. For all intents and purposes she was dead the moment she was captured

#3 As someone who actually spent considerable time over a period of 30 years contemplating the chances of being taken hostage I KNOW that I would much rather be killed in the attempt to rescue me than wait around thinking about what the captors had in mind for me . Nearly every co-worker thought the same.

The insight from your #3 is exactly why this is my favorite site on the entire internet.