ISIS Executes Third Hostage, Issues Warning To Britain

[Webster]

USA Today: Reports: Islamic State releases new beheading video
Excerpt...

The Islamic State has released video that purports to show the beheading of a British hostage that appears to be intended as a threat to countries supporting military action in the Middle East, according to The Associated Press and other news reports.

The Islamic State video identifies the victim as aid worker David Haines.

The apparent beheading would be the third videotaped and posted in the past month by Islamic State. It has similar visual characteristics to videos showing the beheadings of two American journalists, James Foley and Steven Sotloff. In those videos, the insurgent group warned President Obama there would be consequences if the U.S. did not stop air strikes against it in Iraq.

The two-and-a-half-minute video includes what appears to be a threat directed at British Prime Minister David Cameron, news.com.au says. "For being a lapdog, Cameron, you will drag your people into another bloody and unwinnable war," the video warns.

Cameron responded to the video by tweeting: "The murder of David Haines is an act of pure evil. My heart goes out to his family who have shown extraordinary courage and fortitude. ... "We will do everything in our power to hunt down these murderers and ensure they face justice, no matter how long it takes."

 

[Dee]

We know exactly what they're trying to do, which is drag us into another "war against terror", which is bullshit because terrorism is all over the place and it will never be eradicated as long as human beings exist. I do think that something needs to be done about it, but not as ridiculous as what happened during the last administration... >_>

 

[DrLeftover]

We know exactly what they're trying to do, which is drag us into another "war against terror", which is bullshit because terrorism is all over the place and it will never be eradicated as long as human beings exist. I do think that something needs to be done about it, but not as ridiculous as what happened during the last administration... >_>

OK. Excellent idea. "Something needs to be done".

Such as ..... ?

 

[Dee]

We know exactly what they're trying to do, which is drag us into another "war against terror", which is bullshit because terrorism is all over the place and it will never be eradicated as long as human beings exist. I do think that something needs to be done about it, but not as ridiculous as what happened during the last administration... >_>

OK. Excellent idea. "Something needs to be done".

Such as ..... ?

I'm not claiming I know what needs to be done. I'm not a military adviser and I don't know which strategies work better than others. All I can see is from what I've witnessed and heard from personal accounts from friends and family who had to go over there and experience it themselves. I mean, I'd like to know what to do to solve this issue, but it is complex and therefore more difficult than just saying "Let's drop some bombs."

Wish I knew! T_T

 

[DrLeftover]

We know exactly what they're trying to do, which is drag us into another "war against terror", which is bullshit because terrorism is all over the place and it will never be eradicated as long as human beings exist. I do think that something needs to be done about it, but not as ridiculous as what happened during the last administration... >_>

OK. Excellent idea. "Something needs to be done".

Such as ..... ?

I'm not claiming I know what needs to be done. I'm not a military adviser and I don't know which strategies work better than others. All I can see is from what I've witnessed and heard from personal accounts from friends and family who had to go over there and experience it themselves. I mean, I'd like to know what to do to solve this issue, but it is complex and therefore more difficult than just saying "Let's drop some bombs."

Wish I knew! T_T

The reality of the situation is exactly as you stated it.

The West's options are very limited, and as long as their are those willing to either finance them or to join with the Islamic State to fight just about everybody else, the problem can not be solved.

Those who stand against them only have one real choice, to go in and kill them over there because they have demonstrated the will and the ability to travel and bring the fight to us and there is no doubt they are working out the logistics to do just that even now.

 

[Webster]

We know exactly what they're trying to do, which is drag us into another "war against terror", which is bullshit because terrorism is all over the place and it will never be eradicated as long as human beings exist. I do think that something needs to be done about it, but not as ridiculous as what happened during the last administration... >_>

OK. Excellent idea. "Something needs to be done".

Such as ..... ?

And therein lies the rub..everytime we go into that part of the world, guns a'blazin', we usually end up creating more enemies than we had to start. Problem there is, we know it and they know it. OTOH, we can't simply sit back and do nothing...which then takes us back to your question, Doc...

Update: I think you just answered my thought above, Doc...

 

[Mozzie]

We based our wars off lies we all know Bush lied to get the U.S and us and half the world in a war, we are not stupid, CIA are just a bad, and innocent people are being killed as a result, American media men, if this had been not so badly done i fear they may still be alive, OK tweo wrongs do not make a right , but when will governments stop bull shitting us to get us to go back to war to hide their own ignorance and how many more innocent people on both sides have to die.

I am sorry but the only criminals and invaders and murderers in this are us that started this from the 90s . i have see war i have seen death and what goes on behind the crap politics want to try to portray to us. We start they retaliate, we retaliate, no winners. My hope is one day, the kids i have will be able to turn away from this place and say, finally we see peace, but a joke at the moment

 

[DrLeftover]

It would seem our friend above that has no idea what to do, is in good company.

September 14, 2014
...

Obama dispatched Secretary of State John Kerry to the Middle East this week to drum up support for military action against the Islamic State, which he outlined in a prime time speech Wednesday. The response has been met with only slightly more than a shrug.

This is not necessarily because all the Sunni-led countries of the Middle East are ambivalent about the group that claims to have created a Muslim caliphate across wide swaths of Syria and Iraq, and which beheaded a British aid worker this weekend. But intersecting allegiances and strategic aims mean some Arab countries feel they must tread cautiously.

As a neighbor of both Syria and Iraq, for instance, Turkey would seem to have the greatest interest in stemming the influence of the Islamic State. But doing so might empower the Iraqi Kurds, who are one important line of defense against the Islamic State – and Kurds in Iraq and Turkey are angling for an independent state. Empowering the Kurds could endanger Turkish national unity, the thinking goes.

Meanwhile, in other Arab capitals, similar concerns weigh against strong support for the US: Defeating the Islamic State could give Iran more scope to exert its authority. The Islamic State emerged in part because Sunni Muslim populations in Syria and Iraq chafed under the leadership of non-Sunni governments backed by Iran, the region’s leading Shiite power. Sunni governments in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, for instance, oppose Iran.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2014/0914/Islamic-State-101-Why-are-Arab-countries-so-reluctant-to-help

 

[Webster]

And therein lies the rub..everytime we go into that part of the world, guns a'blazin', we usually end up creating more enemies than we had to start.

And the off chance that we'd make more enemies while eradicating these murderers should prevent us from trying......why, exactly? I'd think most of the world would be happy if we stepped in and were actually able to rid the planet of this filth. Not that we could possibly make it happen with the current "leadership" we have, but eventually he'll be gone and hopefully our next president will come complete, equipped with a set of balls and a spine. Unlike the idiot who sits in the big chair now.

I'm not saying we shouldn't go in, Smooth...but if we do, the absolute last thing we need to do is go guns blazin', shooting first & asking questions later as we did back in 2003 w/out a coherent post-invasion strategy for what should be done afterward. That was, in a nutshell, the mistake we made back in 2003: we went into Iraq at the time w/out a clear strategy for what should happen once we accomplished the initial objectives of OIF, which essentially was to eliminate Saddam Hussein and his autocratic regime.

*reads the critique of the current administration* Continuing my previous thought, Smooth...so, what'd we get for invading Iraq back then? A Sunni insurgency that morphed from the former Baathists' in Iraq into AQI (al-Qaeda in Iraq) which then morphed over time into what is now ISIS, for starters. We also essentially turned Iraq into, for all intents-and-purposes, a Shia' province of Iran, which given the sectarian divides in the Middle East, is a recipe for outright disaster. Just look at how Iraqi forces, Smooth, melted following ISIS attacks earlier in the year...you think they folded 'cause they support ISIS? No, they melted and ran 'cause most of them(who, according to reports, were mainly Sunni in nature) didn't want to fight for al-Maliki and the Shia' government in Baghdad, a government which the prior administration helped prop into power....

Say whatever you want about the current administration, but at least they've got a strategy for how to deal with the current situation.... *reads the last sentence about the big idiot in the chair* ....FWIW, that's about the best description of George W. Bush that I've ever heard; that man couldn't do anything w/out Darth Cheney having to spoonfeed him along every day. *adds deadpan* Come to think of it, that could also describe most every major potential GOP presidential candidate as well at present...

 

[+paradox]

We based our wars off lies we all know Bush lied to get the U.S and us and half the world in a war, we are not stupid, CIA are just a bad, and innocent people are being killed as a result, American media men, if this had been not so badly done i fear they may still be alive, OK tweo wrongs do not make a right , but when will governments stop bull shitting us to get us to go back to war to hide their own ignorance and how many more innocent people on both sides have to die.

I am sorry but the only criminals and invaders and murderers in this are us that started this from the 90s . i have see war i have seen death and what goes on behind the crap politics want to try to portray to us. We start they retaliate, we retaliate, no winners. My hope is one day, the kids i have will be able to turn away from this place and say, finally we see peace, but a joke at the moment

nice one... (;

 

[+paradox]

And therein lies the rub..everytime we go into that part of the world, guns a'blazin', we usually end up creating more enemies than we had to start.

And the off chance that we'd make more enemies while eradicating these murderers should prevent us from trying......why, exactly? I'd think most of the world would be happy if we stepped in and were actually able to rid the planet of this filth. Not that we could possibly make it happen with the current "leadership" we have, but eventually he'll be gone and hopefully our next president will come complete, equipped with a set of balls and a spine. Unlike the idiot who sits in the big chair now.

I'm not saying we shouldn't go in, Smooth...but if we do, the absolute last thing we need to do is go guns blazin', shooting first & asking questions later as we did back in 2003 w/out a coherent post-invasion strategy for what should be done afterward. That was, in a nutshell, the mistake we made back in 2003: we went into Iraq at the time w/out a clear strategy for what should happen once we accomplished the initial objectives of OIF, which essentially was to eliminate Saddam Hussein and his autocratic regime.

*reads the critique of the current administration* Continuing my previous thought, Smooth...so, what'd we get for invading Iraq back then? A Sunni insurgency that morphed from the former Baathists' in Iraq into AQI (al-Qaeda in Iraq) which then morphed over time into what is now ISIS, for starters. We also essentially turned Iraq into, for all intents-and-purposes, a Shia' province of Iran, which given the sectarian divides in the Middle East, is a recipe for outright disaster. Just look at how Iraqi forces, Smooth, melted following ISIS attacks earlier in the year...you think they folded 'cause they support ISIS? No, they melted and ran 'cause most of them(who, according to reports, were mainly Sunni in nature) didn't want to fight for al-Maliki and the Shia' government in Baghdad, a government which the prior administration helped prop into power....

Say whatever you want about the current administration, but at least they've got a strategy for how to deal with the current situation.... *reads the last sentence about the big idiot in the chair* ....FWIW, that's about the best description of George W. Bush that I've ever heard; that man couldn't do anything w/out Darth Cheney having to spoonfeed him along every day. *adds deadpan* Come to think of it, that could also describe most every major potential GOP presidential candidate as well at present...

very good laugh there but truth hurts people's feelings as well as their thoughts and emotions... and also people forget history and/or believe false history... and people really truly have no idea what's really going on around the planet...

 

[DrLeftover]

Of course it is Bush's fault. He should have let Saddam just move into Kuwait and set up shop, and while he was at it, he should have simply given Iran some spare nukes to save them the time and expense of building their own.

OK. Fine. I'm on board with that.

Whatever the reason and the history, the Islamic State is there now, and Mr. Obama has to deal with them.

Now what?

If we just stay home and watch the "singing idol" show, they will come to call. Guaranteed.

 

[+paradox]

Of course it is Bush's fault. He should have let Saddam just move into Kuwait and set up shop, and while he was at it, he should have simply given Iran some spare nukes to save them the time and expense of building their own.

OK. Fine. I'm on board with that.

Whatever the reason and the history, the Islamic State is there now, and Mr. Obama has to deal with them.

Now what?

If we just stay home and watch the "singing idol" show, they will come to call. Guaranteed.

so, people are not allowed to fight for their land? i'm pretty sure humans been doing that since forever ago... and the influences on that region with free food, weapons, equipment, money, etc. they received by the usa and other countries to make them fight each other, for an agenda or another... and the overthrowing/killings of governments, leaders, presidents and countries... new governments, leaders, presidents and countries appear... and it's their fault? they live there, not us... they need to sort their mess with themselves... or maybe the rest of the world needs to not keep messing shit up every time a third world country goes to war with another third world country?