Nobel Peace Prize Winner Doubles Troops in Iraq

[CatMommy]

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.

And that's exactly what pigs blood does.
As does the fighting Kurdish women who are presently killing ISIS fighters.
Even the Dutch are allowing biker gangs there to sign up and fight.

While ISIS is using an all woman brigade to install Sharia in regions it controls.

I believe you're on the wrong track with your pig blood theory.

For it to be a theory it would have to be an idea untried. It is not.
Pigs are anathema to Muslims.
And it is not a war crime to bury the dead in mass graves. Nor is it a war crime to fill those graves with pigs blood so that one member of the enemy left alive witnesses the fate of their comrades should they fall. And this so that one remaining Jihadi can report back to command the warning of what awaits.

This enemy loves cowards. It loves people who are afraid to get bloody because that is what they see as our weakness. And the reason we are less than and worthy of being under their yoke. Or dead.

Every time someone whines we can't hurt terrorist Muslims, they spit on, defile, the body and the memory of innocent people beheaded by ISIS. The little children that ISIS cuts in half!
Your children they would happily cut in half. They'd rape and sell your daughters into slavery. Oh, but we can't hurt them? Exploit their weaknesses so as to defeat them and save our children? How absurd.

Those who argue we can't use terror and the weakness of the enemy to defeat the enemy are dead already.
That enemy would spit on us and cut our head off. And if they knew what they could do to send us to Hell they'd do it.

The enemy thinks being killed by a woman sends them to Hell. They think pigs blood sends them to Hell.

Civilized people know that isn't true.But the uncivilized backwards cultist Jihadi doesn't.

In order to win a war against terrorists we must understand the terrorists. And when we know their weakness we must exploit it so as to survive and defeat their mission.

Our military know that. Sun Tzu is on the Marine Corps Commandant's Reading List. It's required reading in the CIA and all military intelligence units.

Do we want to defeat an enemy who has nothing to lose? Or do we want to lose our heads?

As for women, we use them in our military as we see fit, not to please or anger the enemy.

Funny, I thought soldiers were used to fight the enemy.

 

[Revmitchell]

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.

I don't agree with doing it but it does not reach the level of war crimes. I also do not care what they think about their eternal destination. Getting killed is like eating food that tastes good and some that don't, in the end it all goes down the same.

 

[CatMommy]

Have you ever been shot?

 

[Use of Time]

And that's exactly what pigs blood does.
As does the fighting Kurdish women who are presently killing ISIS fighters.
Even the Dutch are allowing biker gangs there to sign up and fight.

While ISIS is using an all woman brigade to install Sharia in regions it controls.




For it to be a theory it would have to be an idea untried. It is not.
Pigs are anathema to Muslims.
And it is not a war crime to bury the dead in mass graves. Nor is it a war crime to fill those graves with pigs blood so that one member of the enemy left alive witnesses the fate of their comrades should they fall. And this so that one remaining Jihadi can report back to command the warning of what awaits.

This enemy loves cowards. It loves people who are afraid to get bloody because that is what they see as our weakness. And the reason we are less than and worthy of being under their yoke. Or dead.

Every time someone whines we can't hurt terrorist Muslims, they spit on, defile, the body and the memory of innocent people beheaded by ISIS. The little children that ISIS cuts in half!
Your children they would happily cut in half. They'd rape and sell your daughters into slavery. Oh, but we can't hurt them? Exploit their weaknesses so as to defeat them and save our children? How absurd.

Those who argue we can't use terror and the weakness of the enemy to defeat the enemy are dead already.
That enemy would spit on us and cut our head off. And if they knew what they could do to send us to Hell they'd do it.

The enemy thinks being killed by a woman sends them to Hell. They think pigs blood sends them to Hell.

Civilized people know that isn't true.But the uncivilized backwards cultist Jihadi doesn't.

In order to win a war against terrorists we must understand the terrorists. And when we know their weakness we must exploit it so as to survive and defeat their mission.

Our military know that. Sun Tzu is on the Marine Corps Commandant's Reading List. It's required reading in the CIA and all military intelligence units.

Do we want to defeat an enemy who has nothing to lose? Or do we want to lose our heads?


Funny, I thought soldiers were used to fight the enemy.

You continue to ignore the fact that we would be insulting the very people we are standing beside and relying on to eventually take over. Also, no matter how much you and Rev. Mitch want to quibble over this, it would be a direct violation of the Geneva Conventions as well as the UCMJ. Had either of you deployed over there you would have gotten a nice lecture about all of this as well as ROE as part of your pre-deployment preparation briefings.

 

[Use of Time]

I don't agree with doing it but it does not reach the level of war crimes. I also do not care what they think about their eternal destination. Getting killed is like eating food that tastes good and some that don't, in the end it all goes down the same.

I swear those last two sentences almost sound like something an atheist would say.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

You continue to ignore the fact that we would be insulting the very people we are standing beside and relying on to eventually take over. Also, no matter how much you and Rev. Mitch want to quibble over this, it would be a direct violation of the Geneva Conventions as well as the UCMJ. Had either of you deployed over there you would have gotten a nice lecture about all of this as well as ROE as part of your pre-deployment preparation briefings.

Thank you.

 

[InTheLight]

It worked for General Blackjack Pershing in the Philippines in the early 20th century.

And considering our present strategies are failing miserably, what has worked in the past to quell terrorism is something to think about.

Black Jack Pershing vs. Muslim Terrorists

Analysis: In June 2003 I consulted Dr. Frank E. Vandiver, professor of history at Texas A&M University and author of Black Jack: The Life and Times of John J. Pershing, to ask if there's any truth to the above. He replied via email that in his opinion the story is apocryphal.

"I never found any indication that it was true in extensive research on his Moro experiences," Vandiver wrote. "This kind of thing would have run completely against his character."

Similarly, I've been unable to find any evidence corroborating the general claim that Muslims believe that "eating or touching a pig, its meat, its blood, etc., is to be instantly barred from paradise and doomed to hell." It is true that Islamic dietary restrictions, like those of Judaism, forbid the eating or handling of pork because pigs are considered unclean. But according to Raeed Tayeh of the American Muslim Association in North America, the notion that a Muslim would be denied entrance to heaven for touching a pig is "ridiculous." A statement from the Anti-Defamation League characterizes the claim as an "offensive caricature of Muslim beliefs."

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_black_jack_pershing.htm

http://myths.answers.com/government/the-muslim-pig-burial-myth-of-general-pershing

 

[CatMommy]

You continue to ignore the fact that we would be insulting the very people we are standing beside and relying on to eventually take over.

I have no idea who you're referring to there.

Also, no matter how much you and Rev. Mitch want to quibble over this, it would be a direct violation of the Geneva Conventions as well as the UCMJ. Had either of you deployed over there you would have gotten a nice lecture about all of this as well as ROE as part of your pre-deployment preparation briefings.

Well since none of us are in charge of military strategy and most of us know we're simply throwing our opinion into a thread that talks about the latest actions by the nations CIC, I don't think I'm obligated to know what lecture I'd have received before being deployed in order to proffer my opinion here.

And considering our present strategies are failing miserably, what has worked in the past to quell terrorism is something to think about.
While most people here know that's all it is. Talk and thoughts on the subject. Not anything that is actually going to be implemented by the U.S. military.

We're entitled to our opinion. Just as you're entitled not to like it.

 

[Rolfe]

Have you ever been shot?

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[Don]

The major--major--problem with this strategy is ignoring the fact that not all muslims are alike--just like not all Christians are alike.

Those muslims that don't ascribe to fighting the "outsiders," and actually enjoy the benefits of working with us, actually outnumber the ones who wage violence against us.

That would change in an instant if we employed these tactics.

Consider: if we were fighting alongside someone who suddenly burned an American flag, or made a ceremony of tearing up a Christian bible; what would our reaction be?

Why do we expect others to react differently, or be different from us?

 

[CatMommy]

What does that have to do with anything?

Well, when you make observations like this:
Getting killed is like eating food that tastes good and some that don't, in the end it all goes down the same.

It helps to know if you've ever been close to death so as to make an analogy like that.

Thank you for your candor.

 

[Use of Time]

I have no idea who you're referring to there.


Well since none of us are in charge of military strategy and most of us know we're simply throwing our opinion into a thread that talks about the latest actions by the nations CIC, I don't think I'm obligated to know what lecture I'd have received before being deployed in order to proffer my opinion here.

And considering our present strategies are failing miserably, what has worked in the past to quell terrorism is something to think about.
While most people here know that's all it is. Talk and thoughts on the subject. Not anything that is actually going to be implemented by the U.S. military.

We're entitled to our opinion. Just as you're entitled not to like it.

You seem to be under the impression that we are at war with Muslims as a whole. We are not. We are fighting terrorists. I think you are smart enough to understand that using ones religious practices as a means of desecrating dead bodies would not sit well with the same Afghani or Iraqi local Nationals that we rely on to provide interpretation services, intelligence or at the very least indifference to our presence in the area.

It's funny you bring up using historical lessons to change the way we are fighting. History shows us that in the middle east that whenever we have done such things as you suggest, it has resulted in nothing but outrage and dead Americans Soldiers. They do not cower in fear, they use it a recruiting tool and motivation to get vengeance. It is self defeating.

There are people on here who are offering more than an opinion as opposed to your casual arm chair war strategizing. There are those on here who actually have seen and know what strategies have worked for us historically. There are those that also know the social dynamics that are required to operate successfully in these countries.

 

[CatMommy]

The major--major--problem with this strategy is ignoring the fact that not all muslims are alike--just like not all Christians are alike.

Those muslims that don't ascribe to fighting the "outsiders," and actually enjoy the benefits of working with us, actually outnumber the ones who wage violence against us.

That would change in an instant if we employed these tactics.

Consider: if we were fighting alongside someone who suddenly burned an American flag, or made a ceremony of tearing up a Christian bible; what would our reaction be?

Why do we expect others to react differently, or be different from us?

You've accepted the myth that it's only a small percentage of Muslims that are terrorist inclined.
When there is a Muslim population in the world tallying at least 1 billion individuals, that's quite a large number of 'small percentage' to contend with.

While myth of minority numbers it is.
Video:Ben Shapiro: The Myth of the Tiny Radical Muslim Minority

 

[CatMommy]

You seem to be under the impression that we are at war with Muslims as a whole. We are not. We are fighting terrorists.

Have you ever read the Qur'an?

 

[Use of Time]

Have you ever read the Qur'an?

Have you ever patrolled through Mesopotamian soil?

 

[CatMommy]

I see. Then you have no idea what Muslims are about.

 

[Use of Time]

I see. Then you have no idea what Muslims are about.

Your arrogance is astounding. I lived amongst them for 15 straight months and had one for an interpreter. A devout Muslim who put his life on the line for me on a daily basis. Your experience with Muslims probably extends to how far your face is from your computer screen.

The fact that you didn't know what I was talking about when I said we would be offending those we stand beside speaks volumes about your ignorance of what is happening in Iraq/Afghanistan.

It is beyond insulting to imply that I have no idea what Muslims are all about.

 

[Rolfe]

I see. Then you have no idea what Muslims are about.

Perhaps you would be willing to explain your qualifications, since you apparently claim to understand them.

 

[CatMommy]

You can levy attacks all you wish. The fact is you have never read the Qur'an.

Had you held respect for that interpreter you allege served you, you would have not been afraid to learn what compels the enemy.

Your arrogance is astounding but it is overcome by your proud ignorance.
And you know nothing of what I know of Muslims or Islam.
You think you know Islam because you killed Muslims on orders?

How sad for you.

Your arrogance is astounding. I lived amongst them for 15 straight months and had one for an interpreter. A devout Muslim who put his life on the line for me on a daily basis. Your experience with Muslims probably extends to how far your face is from your computer screen.

The fact that you didn't know what I was talking about when I said we would be offending those we stand beside speaks volumes about your ignorance of what is happening in Iraq/Afghanistan.

It is beyond insulting to imply that I have no idea what Muslims are all about.

 

[Rolfe]

The fact that you didn't know what I was talking about when I said we would be offending those we stand beside speaks volumes about your ignorance of what is happening in Iraq/Afghanistan.

Appears that way...