Identified American Fighting for ISIS killed.

[Deleted]

The leader of the ISIS is a Zionist Jew,should the USA invade Israel also? And use pig blood bullets on civilians like your so called bloodthirsty "hero" soldiers did in Iraq?
And whats the odds of Al Qaeda vanishing and ISIS poping up... oh right we bloodthirsty Muslims need to kill each other so the Western world could invade us and teach us how to be Modern...

I think I know where he is coming from. Since many muslims hate ISIS too, because they kill all Muslims who disagree or/and aren't Sunni he needs someone to blame for ISIS muslims killing other muslims.

Obviously - at least in his logic - jews must be responsible. Couldn't be possible muslims.

I have to add - US soldiers using pig blood bullets on civilians in Iraq. What? The last time I heard muslim extremist killing and blowing up civilians in Iraq on purpose. And lets talk about invasion - lets look at history books: Ever heard of islamic expansion? The thing ISIS tries to achieve - building a Caliphate like Mohammad did. Right now countries aren't invaded by the Western world to be modern.

Do you really think the West would care what islamic countries do as long as they don't kill people on a regular basis or they are funding terrorist groups? No one want's for example invade Turkey - you are paranoid.

[Kuntantee]

Eh, this is true. Just tired of the western world doing nothing while this legitimate threat to world security becomes larger, gains more weapons, more territory, all while butchering civilians.

Whose weapons I wonder

[Kalis]

I don't have to explain anything. I merely pointed out the problem with your plan. Which you've failed to address in 4 or so posts. Arming Saddam to commit genocide forces us to address that later on. History proves that. Your own posts prove that.

So, you prove yourself completely ignorant of the historical situation, then claim my idea would fail due to what happened historically

We had no intention of addressing Saddam's genocide at any point until he invaded Kuwait, and had he not invaded Kuwait we would still be quite content to this day to let him slaughter his own people whilst supplying the arms for him to do so. Kuwait held a lot of British and US business interests in it, and as I pointed out, we don't like people messing with our interests.

Had Kuwait been antagonistic towards the West, like say Iran, then we wouldn't have been bothered with him going there, but it wasn't, so we were. In fact we'd likely have encouraged him if they were like Iran, as we proved when we supported his attack on Iran, and we'd probably have sat back whilst he butchered Kuwaitis.

There was nothing inevitible about us interfering with his internal policy as you bizarrely seem to think there was.

However, even if you take the situation after the first Gulf War and prior to the second, he would have been in a position to contain the ISIS threat with the resources at his disposal, without any need to arm him or remove the No Fly Zones.

[ringpriest]

Did you just try to excuse ISIS and it's genocidal march towards a Sunni only caliphate on the basis that Saudi Arabia is a bunch of shitheads?

No, I'm not trying to say that the homicidal nutjobs in ISIS are "okay". I'm making two points.

One, any active intervention, even for "really good reasons" (like the aforementioned homicidal nutjobs) is going to end up being a long-term net negative.

Two, anyone who argues, "We can't possibly allow a bunch of sadistic, oppressive, medieval, terror-supporting, religious fanatics who are fond of decapitation to run a good chunk of the Middle East" is full of shit, because 'we' (being the US and allies) have already done exactly that for decades. (I.e. The popular reasons for getting rid of ISIS apply to the Saudi monarchy, too. Anyone who supports the one while opposing the other is not being honest, and likely has ulterior motives.)

[N-7]

Seems the high ground hasn't worked so far, have to use psychological warfare to dissuade them. The pig's blood crap isn't actually going to send them to hell, seems like a cheap way to freak them out.

They don't care about the pig blood crap or women killing them. Both are myths propagated by media and people who don't know shit.

[Jaxi]

You were doing okay until the pig's blood/beheading shit.

I don't know... I'm perfectly fine with shoving a pound of bacon up Baghdadi's ass.

[Easo]

The leader of the ISIS is a Zionist Jew,should the USA invade Israel also? And use pig blood bullets on civilians like your so called bloodthirsty "hero" soldiers did in Iraq?
And whats the odds of Al Qaeda vanishing and ISIS poping up... oh right we bloodthirsty Muslims need to kill each other so the Western world could invade us and teach us how to be Modern...

Wait wait, what?

[Merkava]

So, you prove yourself completely ignorant of the historical situation, then claim my idea would fail due to what happened historically

Exactly. I have precedent on my side, you have speculation on yours.The historical precedent for the United States supporting a genocidal regime and then being forced to change course is the Indonesian governments actions in East Timor. Read about it.

Your idea to think we can arm and support psychopathic, fascist, and already genocidal regimes to handle a virtually non existent threat, with absolutely no consequences after they use our weapons to wage fresh genocide, is, to borrow a phrase from Zbigniew Brzezinski, stunningly superficial.