ISIS executed young man with a rocket launcher

[Tagora]

The only instance of that being a gun would be that it shoots autism.

Death by cringe.

[Nightmare798]

Death by cringe.

Okay, ill bite.

[Tagora]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


edit: there actually is a victoria ss that an isis twitter account published that showed their proposed borders.  I guess that just confirms the popularity of paradox titles.

[Molly]

Well, the bigger the land mass, the easier to hit them from above, amirite?

[SirCymro_Crusader]

Well, the bigger the land mass, the easier to hit them from above, amirite?

No.

The majority of those under ISIS 'rule' do not do so willingly. If you propose to 'bomb the shit' out of them as i've seen some people say, you are going to end up killing more civilians than actual insurgents. Plus there are too many religious differences/borders for ISIS to ever expand that far without there being a Middle Eastern War that incorporates all of the nations and insurgents in those areas. And if there is a Middle Eastern War you can sure as hell expect the Western World to get involved - possibly with Russia and America on opposing sides.

[Molly]

That is very doubtful.

[SirCymro_Crusader]

That is very doubtful.

What part?

[Molly]

The direct conflict between USA and Russia. Neither of those parties are that stupid to even come close to risking that kind of thing.

[SirCymro_Crusader]

The direct conflict between USA and Russia. Neither of those parties are that stupid to even come close to risking that kind of thing.

If it comes to control of the Middle East I wouldn't be entirely surprised. Just look at the tension between them on the UN council - Russia and the US have the power to veto as they stand on the security council, they will always pick opposing sides. Thus the US relies heavily on NATO for the majority of its 'legalised' military actions. Russia and most likely China will oppose the US for any military involvement in the Middle East through the UN, thus America has to turn to NATO, therefore meaning that Russia can back the opposing side without the UN taking direct action as no authorisation has been given by the UN thus leading them to being obsolete in the beginning. Obviously they would get involved but 3 of the 5 (US, UK, and France ) are part of NATO, and they all have the power to veto on the security council.

Big drama basically, and a conflict unfortunately waiting to happen.

[Teeth]

The majority of those under ISIS 'rule' do not do so willingly. If you propose to 'bomb the shit' out of them as i've seen some people say, you are going to end up killing more civilians than actual insurgents. Plus there are too many religious differences/borders for ISIS to ever expand that far without there being a Middle Eastern War that incorporates all of the nations and insurgents in those areas. And if there is a Middle Eastern War you can sure as hell expect the Western World to get involved - possibly with Russia and America on opposing sides.

Implying IS stands a chance against the national military of any country that is not in complete shambles. IS operates in a power vacuum, but won't get far outside of it. 

[SirCymro_Crusader]

No country canny put troops on the ground without being invited in by the insurgents host country, so at the moment that vacuum is helping them  until foreign aid is asked for

[Molly]

I was talking about direct military conflict. That, I do sincerly believe this, is very unlikely.
I doubt you'll see US soldiers shooting at Russian soldiers in the next 5 decades. And if this would happen, we all have bigger issues at hand than ISIS.

And like Teeth wrote, internal disagreements between the various religious and political sides allows the IS to have this kind of military success. Some Sunnits defending the town, having good success, not getting any material support from Shiits at power cuz "HURRDURR they aren't trustworthy cuz <insert silly 2 millenia old stereotype bullshit religious reason>" and suddenly the brave defenders are trying to stop armored Humvees and tank with 25 yrs old Kalashnikovs. No surprise they fall back and it sure ain't because they are cowards, Mr. US-Senator.
(I might have mixed up the Sunnit/Shiit-sides - I tend to forget who is who cuz they are all stupid imho.)

If the reasonable forces would all just get over themselves and their shitty religion, this conflict could have ended already months ago. Everyone combined down there have easily a shitload more soldiers and better equipment than the IS has and could just end the miserable lifes of those cunts in a few weeks time. No involvement from US/EU/Russia/China needed really. They just need to get their shit together.
/rant 

[Xant]

Kurds would be able to handle ISIS, but the problem is US policy. All the US aid goes to Baghdad, and Baghdad doesn't give it to Kurds. And the US tells Kurds that they will be represented by Baghdad in meetings etc, when those two hate each other. Kurds were also never officially trained by the coalition troops because of Baghdad's objections.

If US policy just shifted and supported the Kurds fully then ISIS would have their hands full.

[Molly]

Germany gave weapons to the Peshmerga and trained them.
Which were kinda the wrong Kurds cuz supposingly it wasn't the Peshmerga who freed like thousands of refugees but a different tree of Kurd military which are affiliated to the PKK which is a terrorist organization by German law.
So, instead of giving arms and training to those who actually fight, Germany gave modern arms and training to those who only do border security instead of actually fighting the IS...

Politicians...

[Admerius]

Good point, now I'll turn on my ceiling fan before I go ballistic.

(click to show/hide)

Part 1:

Part 2:

This one of the few times I actually felt "white/western/imperialism guilt" then I realized this is history and what we need is to own up to it and try to correct the mistakes our ancestors did. Of course their sins falls on their shoulders not on ours, but we need to acknowledge what harm has been done by our predecessors, and that's different from accepting their guilt as our own(original sin, biblical style messed up reasoning).

I believe that many countries in the middle-east and Africa needs to be abolished and new states formed according to the natural borders between different cultures/religious sects. Sadly that will be a "humanitarian disaster" as any such attempt at establishing proper countrys has been throughout history...