nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

ISIS are pure evil.

[Deleted User]

<mod snip>

WARNING GRAPHIC PHOTOS (RAW) - ISIS begins killing Christians in Mosul, CHILDREN BEHEADED

While the world focuses on Gaza , ISIS continue their genocide of anyone and everything.

They have now been reported to have captured a group of women and children, and are beheading them.

warning, very graphic

Mod: Do not post graphic images here.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

LordNorbury

kryogen wrote: »

The Japanese were not bombed into submission, they were nuked into it. That is the drastic measure that was required to get them to stop fighting, some still fought. Do you think nuking is the answer here?

Whether it be nuclear bombing or C4 in the form of a series of 500 pound bombs dropped for 48 hours to flatten Raqqa, I don't believe it makes any difference.

The "headquarter" town, Raqqa, of this organisation needs to be, in my opinion, distroyed.

ISIS are up there at the very top table with the Japanese and Nazi Germany in terms of the warped ideology that they believe in, so my view is let's stop pretending that they are the Christian brothers with machine guns.

Obama, as leader of the supposed free world, right now is an absolute thundering disgrace and I say that as an Irishman with no connections to the US. It's like throwing stones at Hitler.

Let's get real with what we are facing here, let's deal with this international disease, and the only way ISIS can be dealt with now in my view is to distroy the key cities that they hold. When I saw distroy I mean flatten, whether through nuclear bombing or carpet bombing, they need to be wiped out & we need to stop worrying about civilians who will probably be murdered by ISIS anyway over time.

187187

The bottom line is these cu*nts seem to be the most serious and dangerous terrorists to the west ever, bar none.

And yes i think they are evil, But hell they probably think we (the west) are evil.

But no matter what folks say about bombing raids or not what not (which are needed), These ISIS terrorist are a threat to everything that are not like them, and even got run out of Pakistan. IMO the ISIS are the most dangerous of all terrorist to the west ever.

Gringo180

Anybody advocating the use of nuclear bombs to sort this mess out is a complete and utter loon.

ivytwine

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

We find that it can not withstand the social revolution for it's clear in the bible that Fornication is an abomination yet after the 1960 sexual revolution it became accepted among the Christians them self similarly drinking wine & eating swine.

Neither of which were ever proscribed by Christianity, and "eating swine" is only forbidden in Judaism and Islam for food hygiene reasons.

The older I get the more I think religion is an absolute curse on people's lives and the world.

Anyway, don't nuke IS. Get more "boobs on the ground" :rolleyes: and have more female fighter pilots to bomb these neurotic, insecure, dangerous little boys to a heaven that doesn't exist.

kryogen

Saying things like, we need to forget about the civilians who will "probably" be murdered over time is forgetting what is supposed to separate you from the animals responsible for this mess isn't it.

DEFTLEFTHAND

kryogen wrote: »

Saying things like, we need to forget about the civilians who will "probably" be murdered over time is forgetting what is supposed to separate you from the animals responsible for this mess isn't it.

Eloquently put son.

smurgen

LordNorbury wrote: »

Disagree, the Japanese were bombed into submission in WW2, same can happen here and should happen here in my view.

Obama doesn't understand the nature of what is going on here, he's fiddling around with blowing up a tent here and a jeep there, a complete waste of time.

Era ya,you're well more informed than the president of the USA.sweet Jesus

smurgen

Gringo180 wrote: »

Anybody advocating the use of nuclear bombs to sort this mess out is a complete and utter loon.

I'd say more retarded than anything.drop a nuke where like? They're in the vast minority in every town they're in but yeah let's incinerate the place to be safe.

Larry Wildman

kryogen wrote: »

You have no issue with the wiping out of millions of innocents (potentially) and having a lasting negative affect on a region for decades to come because of a band of terrorists who can be dealt with using more conventional methods

You are also of the opinion that it would be the best thing long term, it would not cause the rest of the world to turn on the US big time and bring more people to the cause against them after such a grossly un proportionate response.

What do you think gives them the right to "unleash the power of the atom" on an entire region?

Edit: Sweet jesus I just saw the username, forget it, I dont even want you to respond, the status quo for the soccer forum applies here for me with you and I have no interest in interacting with you.

Your attitude is bizarre and petty.

And your arguments are typically "strawman".

Who mentioned killing millions of innocent people.

Defender OF Faith

ivytwine wrote: »

Neither of which were ever proscribed by Christianity, and "eating swine" is only forbidden in Judaism and Islam for food hygiene reasons.

The older I get the more I think religion is an absolute curse on people's lives and the world.

Anyway, don't nuke IS. Get more "boobs on the ground" :rolleyes: and have more female fighter pilots to bomb these neurotic, insecure, dangerous little boys to a heaven that doesn't exist.

I had to make it clear since you spoke with certainty that both of which were not mentioned in the bible the way you spoke about religion though indicate that your not a Christian so I cant blame you for your lack of knowledge.

Eating swine:
Deuteronomy 14:8/Leviticus 11:7-8
"The pig is also unclean; although it has a divided hoof, it does not chew the cud. You are not to eat their meat or touch their carcasses."
Ironically since you mentioned its forbidden in both Judaism and Islam for food hygiene reasons its also forbidden in Christianity as you see for the same reason.

Drinking Wine:
Leviticus 10:9
""You and your sons are not to drink wine or other fermented drink whenever you go into the tent of meeting, or you will die. This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come,"
A similar massage is repeated in
Ephesians 5:18
"Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit,"
Luke 1:15,Proverbs 20:1,Isaiah 28:

wretcheddomain

bnt wrote: »

Muslim leaders saying "ISIS are not truly Islamic" is like Christians saying the Crusades were not truly Christian. How do you think the Crusades would look under scrutiny from today's media? Depends on which media, doesn't it?

The people who say ISIS aren't truly Islamic are the same people who call them Islamic fanatics - they can't have it both ways.

Lucy and Harry

If we were to follow the Bible and Quaran and Judaism to the letter of the law we would all be acting like Isis.We need to evolve and embrace our new Pope of Atheism Richard Dawkins.

Gehad_JoyRider

its always the same chop of one snakes head a bigger and badder one will appear.

Two Tone from Limehouse

kryogen wrote: »

They do not hate us all. There are plenty of Muslims condemning the extremist actions.

Do you consider yourself to be a racist or a religious bigot? Or both?
Do you think you can claim any moral high ground or superiority by simply saying nuke em all? You think your stance of nuke the lot of them, men, women and even children who have done nothing wrong a just one to take?

Unfortunately there are lots of people with the same thought process as yourself and it has helped to get us to where we are today. Christians did wrong only in the past is a pretty strange opinion to hold.

There is no us against them West vs Islam, there is an us against them in terms of peace loving and co operative and terrorising and division. You do not fall on to the peaceful, co operative side of the equation though going from what you say, you actually have more in common with the intolerant animals that you would like to wipe out,( along with anybody else who happens to be that religion)

Read what I said. I didn't say all Muslims hate us. I said Islamists hate us. Islamism is not the same as Islam, as any Muslim will tell you.

I am not racist or a religious bigot. Just because I make a comment criticising something does not make me racist or bigoted. Oh, and for your information, Muslims are not a race.

Two Tone from Limehouse

smurgen wrote: »

I'm saying that I'm sure that the Iraqi and Syrian people in the region have been muslims for centuries and surely know how to live as Muslims.they don't need some little retarded cockney bastard from the east end telling them how to live in their own country.

Easy with the retarded cockney bastard quotes please!!!

Minjor

There was a good point made by Sam Harris recently in that liberals can shoulder some blame for being reluctant to criticize Islam and pandering to Islamic sensitivity.

Yes, many Muslims would denounce ISIS' acts of brutality but there are different schools of thought in Islam. There are conservative Muslims who while thinking what ISIS are doing is wrong still have some very shady beliefs on things like repression of women, homosexuals, honour killings, apostasy etc.

Certainly prejudices and such as these should be scrutinized and criticized as much as possible without holding back for fear of offending Muslims, as these opinions are objectively immoral.

Mark Tapley

Minjor wrote: »

There was a good point made by Sam Harris recently in that liberals can shoulder some blame for being reluctant to criticize Islam and pandering to Islamic sensitivity.

Yes, many Muslims would denounce ISIS' acts of brutality but there are different schools of thought in Islam. There are conservative Muslims who while thinking what ISIS are doing is wrong still have some very shady beliefs on things like repression of women, homosexuals, honour killings, apostasy etc.

Certainly prejudices and such as these should be scrutinized and criticized as much as possible without holding back for fear of offending Muslims, as these opinions are objectively immoral.

Has he got a degree in stating the bleedin obvious.

Minjor

Mark Tapley wrote: »

Has he got a degree in stating the bleedin obvious.

PhD in Cognitive Neuroscience apparently, so you could probably say that, hehe.

Nodin

Minjor wrote: »

There was a good point made by Sam Harris recently .............

I heard no thunderclap or announcement the end was nigh...?

DK man

It's illogical and dishonest of the leftie liberals who try to attach some sort of randomness to Islamic terror - we who are very critical of Islam are called racist and islamophobic. The random theory - the attempt to argue unconnected relationship with Islam and terror can no longer be presented by anyone with any common sense. We don't have the same random terrorist in Christianity / Judaism / budaism etc. but we do have many connected terrorist groups that are spawned and fed by Islamic thinking and the Koran - Islam is a dangerous ideology that has real potential to destroy the world we live in - we in the civilised world need to stop pandering to Islam and here in Ireland we are facilitating a monolithic mosque to feed more of this rancid pseudo religious / ideology

There was so much made about how Britons Islamic community and leaders reacted against the brutal murder of Alan henning - well this seems to imply that all the other brutality carried out by this evil Islamic group was/ is somehow maybe okay or neutral?

The Swiss have some foresight to ban mega mosques as they are not gagged by the Irish times or lefty liberals like labour et al - meanwhile here in Ireland we have just approved the building of Europe's largest mega mosque and centre for this dangerous ideology which will threaten our own very security and freedoms - well done paddy

Frank Grimes

DK man wrote: »

The Swiss have some foresight to ban mega mosques as they are not gagged by the Irish times or lefty liberals like labour et al - meanwhile here in Ireland we have just approved the building of Europe's largest mega mosque and centre for this dangerous ideology which will threaten our own very security and freedoms - well done paddy

The Swiss banned the building of minarets. The decisions made in relation to granting planning permission for the Clongriffin mosque are publically accessible and pandering to "lefty liberals" wasn't a deciding factor if you bother to read them.

Nodin

DK man wrote: »

It's illogical and dishonest of the leftie liberals who try to attach some sort of randomness to Islamic terror - we who are very critical of Islam are called racist and islamophobic. The random theory - the attempt to argue unconnected relationship with Islam and terror can no longer be presented by anyone with any common sense. We don't have the same random terrorist in Christianity / Judaism / budaism etc. but we do have many connected terrorist groups that are spawned and fed by Islamic thinking and the Koran - Islam is a dangerous ideology that has real potential to destroy the world we live in - we in the civilised world need to stop pandering to Islam and here in Ireland we are facilitating a monolithic mosque to feed more of this rancid pseudo religious / ideology

There was so much made about how Britons Islamic community and leaders reacted against the brutal murder of Alan henning - well this seems to imply that all the other brutality carried out by this evil Islamic group was/ is somehow maybe okay or neutral?

The Swiss have some foresight to ban mega mosques as they are not gagged by the Irish times or lefty liberals like labour et al - meanwhile here in Ireland we have just approved the building of Europe's largest mega mosque and centre for this dangerous ideology which will threaten our own very security and freedoms - well done paddy

Sectarian crap.

Skylinehead

Can't believe the people wanting to "nuke ISIS".

Why? They're persecuting, killing innocent people (true), so lets incinerate the people they're killing? Ok then.

Gatling

Skylinehead wrote: »

Can't believe the people wanting to "nuke ISIS".

Why? They're persecuting, killing innocent people (true), so lets incinerate the people they're killing? Ok then.

Not just nuke isis but a large part of Iraq and Syria Iran and Kuwait and anything with in blowing distance of desert winds .

Let's really attack potentially cause 100's of thousand victims who will probably want revenge at some stage too

LordNorbury

Every morning I wake up and see that there hasn't been a massive change of direction here, I genuinely have huge worries.

I used to worry that George W. Bush was a war mongerer who was being encouraged by Halibuton & other such vested interests who were pot committed to warfare in the Middle East.

Where we now need shock & awe, we have a pea balled leader of the free world, who is more interested in blowing out the odd window and blowing up the odd jeep, than he has with taking out an ISIS battalion or stopping them at brigade/battalion level.

Gatling

LordNorbury wrote: »

Where we now need shock & awe, we have a pea balled leader of the free world, who is more interested in blowing out the odd window and blowing up the odd jeep, than he has with taking out an ISIS battalion or stopping them at brigade/battalion level.

Gatling

LordNorbury wrote: »

Every morning I wake up and see that there hasn't been a massive change of direction here, I genuinely have huge worries.

I used to worry that George W. Bush was a war mongerer who was being encouraged by Halibuton & other such vested interests who were pot committed to warfare in the Middle East.

Where we now need shock & awe, we have a pea balled leader of the free world, who is more interested in blowing out the odd window and blowing up the odd jeep, than he has with taking out an ISIS battalion or stopping them at brigade/battalion level.

That's the problem there is no battalions or brigades to target ,

The majority of the fighters are mixed in with the local civilian populations ,
They have stopped travelling in large convoys and so on ,
You essentially have groups of less than 100 holding towns and villages hostage and in some case the population is happier with isis than with the previous Iraqi government's,

There is no massive isis standing army but there have well trained and experienced fighters ,

These guys dont fight like the Taliban's or various militias we've seen in libya
There is no screams Allah Akbar every time they shoot an ak47 or rpg,
they dont fire there weapons wildly at anthing that moves

They fight as cohesive units and uses modern tactics not usually seen with these type groups

BuilderPlumber

I can't understand why a psychological war is not waged on ISIS. Like all such groups, probably only 5% of them are truly evil, the other 95% are sheep, opportunists and are stuck in debilitating groupthink fear. 95% of them oppose the sadistic brutal beheadings and only tolerate them ... for fear if they say 'what you are doing is wrong' to the leadership that they would be next.

But if the US secret service infiltrated ISIS and got good ISIS people to stand up to the evil take the organisation down from inside, it would be great.

Also, when the likes of Baghdadi are caught, they should be taken alive. Then find out what he cares most about. His wife and family? His private collection of French wines? His big car? Saving his own skin? Whatever. And then threaten what he cares about most until he does a deal and delivers the heads of terrorist cells waiting to attack, the identity of brutal Jihad John, the toshers who finance him, the organised criminals he is linked in with, etc. Killing bin Laden was a huge mistake for similar reasons: these guys ultimately are cowards and very vulnerable when caught. They will shift the blame onto other guilty individuals and will give details of terrorist plans in return for their own lives.

We should also not consider these people religious. Baghdadi is an atheist, millionaire, alcohol-enjoying, fine food enjoying self styled king whose only use of 'Islam' is to solidify HIS earthly kingdom.

BuilderPlumber

Two Tone from Limehouse wrote: »

Read what I said. I didn't say all Muslims hate us. I said Islamists hate us. Islamism is not the same as Islam, as any Muslim will tell you.

I am not racist or a religious bigot. Just because I make a comment criticising something does not make me racist or bigoted. Oh, and for your information, Muslims are not a race.

True. I think 'Islamism' is in fact the opposite of Islam and is an atheist movement. 'Islamists' are atheist opportunists who actually note how religious their populance are and then can see that 'I can control these people with repressive laws and pass it off as gods law!'. That's what 'Islamism' is. It is used then as a stepping stone for gaining power.

Ayatollah Khomeini was credited as one of the first to create a state dictatorship based on 'Islam'. In fact, Khomeini had a depression condition and suffered a mental breakdown after his son's death in the 1970s and had long questioned his love for god. He was a qualified priest but had become disillusioned with that years ago and by 1979 was ready to front for the military junta that took over Iran and helped them out by spouting warped Islam as a means of them consolidating power. And ever since, we have seen much much worse forms of 'Islamism' take root: Taliban, al Qaeda, Boko Haram, al Shabaab, ISIS, etc.

BuilderPlumber

LordNorbury wrote: »

Every morning I wake up and see that there hasn't been a massive change of direction here, I genuinely have huge worries.

I used to worry that George W. Bush was a war mongerer who was being encouraged by Halibuton & other such vested interests who were pot committed to warfare in the Middle East.

Where we now need shock & awe, we have a pea balled leader of the free world, who is more interested in blowing out the odd window and blowing up the odd jeep, than he has with taking out an ISIS battalion or stopping them at brigade/battalion level.

True, the West's response here has been extremely poor. Bush or those behind him were war mongers who did not think things through and getting rid of Saddam was an obsession.

Saddam was no angel for sure. But was getting rid of him a solution? Things only got much worse for Iraq indeed the world since.

Now, the world is weary of war. The last thing any US president can sell to their people is another war involving Iraq. On the other side of the spectrum, it would be the same in Iran. Even 30 years on, the Iran-Iraq war remains a bitter memory for Iran, so they are not anxious to go in there either. So, it will be guns supplied to Peshmerga and Shia by US, EU, Iran, etc. and a few airstrikes and hope for the best. Where is a fullscaled US invasion when we need it!