Nobel Peace Prize Winner Doubles Troops in Iraq

[InTheLight]

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama has approved sending up to 1,500 more troops to Iraq, roughly doubling the number of U.S. forces on the ground to advise and retrain Iraqis in their battle against the militant group Islamic State, U.S. officials said on Friday.

Obama's decision greatly expands the scope of the U.S. campaign and the geographic distribution of American forces, some of whom will head into Iraq's fiercely contested western Anbar province for the first time to act as advisors.
-------------

In order for Obama to keep his promise to the American people it is being reported that troops in Iraq will be either barefoot or wearing sandals.

 

[CatMommy]

He needs to exploit the superstitions and fears that the Jihadist have. Recruiting more women in that troop count. And incorporating pig's blood into service. Announce that all bullets supplied to the resistance are baptized in swine blood.
Something that will install fear into the ISIS enemy since they believe swines blood, coming in contact with that, or blood and entrials, as in having a mass burial of the enemy in a pit containing such, insures they go to Jahannam. (Hell, or Gehinnom). As does a Jihadi being killed in battle by a woman.

Use the fear of the enemy to overcome the enemy.

 

[Sapper Woody]

Use the fear of the enemy to overcome the enemy.

That would make us terrorists. We should not sink to their level to beat them. We don't need to.

 

[CatMommy]

It worked for General Blackjack Pershing in the Philippines in the early 20th century. I disagree that fighting the enemy by exploiting their weakness is terrorism. It's prudent planning and artful defense to a blood thirsty almost indefatigable offense.

 

[Use of Time]

That would make us terrorists. We should not sink to their level to beat them. We don't need to.

Exactly, and it is needlessly inflammatory. People don't understand that this mindset is self defeating because you are also insulting the very people that you rely on to provide you intelligence and the motivation to be on your side. Kind of why that Soldier that put out the video where he was shooting the Quran got him in such hot water. They don't realize that they are putting their own brothers in harms way by providing "bulletin board" material to the opposition. We are the U.S. Army, that should be enough.

 

[Use of Time]

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama has approved sending up to 1,500 more troops to Iraq, roughly doubling the number of U.S. forces on the ground to advise and retrain Iraqis in their battle against the militant group Islamic State, U.S. officials said on Friday.

Obama's decision greatly expands the scope of the U.S. campaign and the geographic distribution of American forces, some of whom will head into Iraq's fiercely contested western Anbar province for the first time to act as advisors.
-------------

In order for Obama to keep his promise to the American people it is being reported that troops in Iraq will be either barefoot or wearing sandals.

:laugh: It does seems that the Nobel Peace Prize was something of a speculative prize as of late doesn't it.

 

[carpro]

He needs to exploit the superstitions and fears that the Jihadist have. Recruiting more women in that troop count. And incorporating pig's blood into service. Announce that all bullets supplied to the resistance are baptized in swine blood.
Something that will install fear into the ISIS enemy since they believe swines blood, coming in contact with that, or blood and entrials, as in having a mass burial of the enemy in a pit containing such, insures they go to Jahannam. (Hell, or Gehinnom). As does a Jihadi being killed in battle by a woman.

Use the fear of the enemy to overcome the enemy.

Psychological warfare has it's uses, but the weaknesses of the enemy you decide to exploit need to be exploited in such a way that it lowers their morale and doesn't inspire them.

I believe you're on the wrong track with your pig blood theory. As for women, we use them in our military as we see fit, not to please or anger the enemy.

 

[righteousdude2]

It's Viet Nam, all over again!

Johnson did the same thing with Viet Nam. He started out with military advisors and trainers and CIA. Then he sent over a smallish Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF). Then came the Army with their Hueys (the 7th Cav), and before we knew it, there were 500,000 boots running through the jungle!

If you think I am wrong, just wait! It may not be only Americans on the ground, in fact I heard that the Egypt, the Saudis, UAE and Kuwait were muling putting together a military force to fight ISIS in Iraq and Syria as well as terror groups in Africa!

SEE: http://guardianlv.com/2014/11/egypt-other-arab-states-mull-military-alliance-to-combat-extremists/

 

[righteousdude2]

That would make us terrorists. We should not sink to their level to beat them. We don't need to.

Sorry to disagree, I was in the Viet Nam era war, and remember our guys resorting to some macabre type of things. War is not referred to as hell lightly. It often brings out the bad in our side too!

In fact, Americans resorted to guerrilla warfare tactics during the colonial war. And it was this kind of warfare that through terror and fear into the rank and file British soldiers and even their leaders! "Although many of the engagements of the American Revolution were conventional, guerrilla warfare was used to a certain extent during this conflict from 1775-1783, which made a huge difference. Guerrilla tactics were first used at the Battles of Lexington and Concord by the Patriots at April 19, 1775. George Washington sometimes used some sort of unconventional methods to fight the British." SEE:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_guerrilla_warfare

However, to say we should not resort to terrorist tactics, I agree 100% with you.

However, I needed to share the above, because, even the best intentions of warfare by our guys have resulted in men and entire units turning to a similar darkness (utilized by the enemy) after seeing it day in and day out! Things like removing the head of Viet Cong, and placing it on poles (like they did with our guys) did take place in Nam! It was simple pay back for a fallen comrade! SEE:http://www.crimesofwar.org/a-z-guide/dead-and-wounded/

War is dark. War is hell. War can bring out an ugly side in mankind!

 

[Sapper Woody]

Sorry to disagree, I was in the Viet Nam era war, and remember our guys resorting to some macabre type of things. War is not referred to as hell lightly. It often brings out the bad in our side too!

In fact, Americans resorted to guerrilla warfare tactics during the colonial war. And it was this kind of warfare that through terror and fear into the rank and file British soldiers and even their leaders! "Although many of the engagements of the American Revolution were conventional, guerrilla warfare was used to a certain extent during this conflict from 1775-1783, which made a huge difference. Guerrilla tactics were first used at the Battles of Lexington and Concord by the Patriots at April 19, 1775. George Washington sometimes used some sort of unconventional methods to fight the British." SEE:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_guerrilla_warfare

However, to say we should not resort to terrorist tactics, I agree 100% with you.

However, I needed to share the above, because, even the best intentions of warfare by our guys have resulted in men and entire units turning to a similar darkness (utilized by the enemy) after seeing it day in and day out! Things like removing the head of Viet Cong, and placing it on poles (like they did with our guys) did take place in Nam! It was simple pay back for a fallen comrade! SEE:http://www.crimesofwar.org/a-z-guide/dead-and-wounded/

War is dark. War is hell. War can bring out an ugly side in mankind!

I feel as if I am perfectly qualified to speak on how war is h***. With that being said, I stand by my statement.

Guerilla warfare is not terrorism. It's a valid military strategy. Threatening to send someone to hell is terrorism. "Surrender or we will take your soul." That's terrorism.

Instilling fear through superior tactics and training isn't terrorism. Telling them we'll defile their bodies with pig's blood is. It's the moral equivalent of doing what you were talking about in your last paragraph.

 

[Sapper Woody]

It worked for General Blackjack Pershing in the Philippines in the early 20th century. I disagree that fighting the enemy by exploiting their weakness is terrorism. It's prudent planning and artful defense to a blood thirsty almost indefatigable offense.

Similar to my above post, what you are suggesting is NOT exploiting a weakness. It is an immoral, unethical, and frankly despicable means of instilling fear. Anyone who would use pig's blood in warfare should be tried for war crimes. It is, in my opinion, one of the most horrific things I've heard anyone say. "Let's make them think we'll condemn them to Hell."

 

[Revmitchell]

Similar to my above post, what you are suggesting is NOT exploiting a weakness. It is an immoral, unethical, and frankly despicable means of instilling fear. Anyone who would use pig's blood in warfare should be tried for war crimes. It is, in my opinion, one of the most horrific things I've heard anyone say. "Let's make them think we'll condemn them to Hell."

I don't know that the use of pigs blood is helpful but to try and take it to the level of war crimes is far more than just over the top. Quite the excessive idea.

 

[Sapper Woody]

I don't know that the use of pigs blood is helpful but to try and take it to the level of war crimes is far more than just over the top. Quite the excessive idea.

Defiling bodies of the dead is a war crime. This is worse. I don't expect many to agree with my opinion on this, but I feel strongly about it.

As Christians, we don't believe that someone else can do something to send us to Hell. But if we did, and they threatened to use that in war, how would you feel about it? It's appalling. In many ways it's worse than terrorism, because terrorism just threatens to torture or kill you or your family. This threatens to (in their eyes) not only kill you, but alter your eternal destination.

 

[JamesL]

This threatens to (in their eyes) not only kill you, but alter your eternal destination.

if they were rational beings, that would give cause to ponder. And weigh the cost.

But like my brother says, you're dealing with people who throw rocks at a tank.

 

[Sapper Woody]

But like my brother says, you're dealing with people who throw rocks at a tank.

And who are smart enough to alter a passive infrared system (the laser that makes stores' bells ring) to become a trigger system that only our counter RCIED triggers. In other words, they took a harmless piece of electronics, and made IEDs that only blow up on us, and they don't have to be anywhere near it.

 

[JamesL]

And who are smart enough to alter a passive infrared system (the laser that makes stores' bells ring) to become a trigger system that only our counter RCIED triggers. In other words, they took a harmless piece of electronics, and made IEDs that only blow up on us, and they don't have to be anywhere near it.

Smart and intelligent are not exactly the same thing.

 

[Sapper Woody]

Smart and intelligent are not exactly the same thing.

Smart = building the device.
Intelligent = not being around when we get blown up.

Don't underestimate their intelligence. And for the record, Al Qaeda / Taliban /ISIS aren't throwing rocks at tanks. Kids and adults who know we won't retaliate are.

Edited to add: if they're not intelligent, why aren't they gone yet?

 

[Rolfe]

I don't expect many to agree with my opinion on this, but I feel strongly about it.

I agree with you.

It is an immoral, unethical, and frankly despicable means of instilling fear. Anyone who would use pig's blood in warfare should be tried for war crimes. It is, in my opinion, one of the most horrific things I've heard anyone say. "Let's make them think we'll condemn them to Hell." -SapperWoody, post number 11.

Yes. We are not barbarians.

 

[Use of Time]

Defiling bodies of the dead is a war crime. This is worse. I don't expect many to agree with my opinion on this, but I feel strongly about it.

As Christians, we don't believe that someone else can do something to send us to Hell. But if we did, and they threatened to use that in war, how would you feel about it? It's appalling. In many ways it's worse than terrorism, because terrorism just threatens to torture or kill you or your family. This threatens to (in their eyes) not only kill you, but alter your eternal destination.

This x 1000. This isn't even debatable. The U.S. Army is strongly against any of these tactics and while they may seem cute and clever to the average American, you would be called to the carpet facing UCMJ charges if you were to try to do it in theatre.

We are fighting terrorists alongside these nation's host armies. I don't think people realize how dependent our operations are on the cooperation of the local public.

Remember how things turned out for the Soldiers that burned and shot the Quran as well as the Soldiers who photographed themselves urinating on the corpses of the Taliban. The first incident led to the shooting of two Soldiers at a protest in Afghanistan. Your actions have consequences that you might not even see.

 

[church mouse guy]

Notice that the President waited until a couple of days after the election to escalate the Obama War in Iraq.