Islamic State Doxes US Soldiers, Airmen, Calls On Supporters To Kill Them

An anonymous reader writes in with this story about the latest weapon used by ISIS: doxing. "Middle East terrorist organization Islamic State (ISIS) has called on its followers take the fight to 100 members of the United States military residing in the US. A group calling itself the 'Islamic State Hacking Division' has posted names, addresses, and photographs of soldiers, sailors, and airmen online, asking its 'brothers residing in America' to murder them, according to Reuters. Although the posting purports to come from the 'Hacking Division,' US Department of Defense officials say that none of their systems appear to have been breached by the group. Instead, the personal data was almost certainly culled from publicly available sources, a DoD official told the New York Times on the condition of anonymity."

Comments

Needs a honeypot

[russotto]

The military needs to post a few names and addresses themselves. They'll look like regular houses but they'll actually be guard posts. If anyone shows up and starts shooting, they end up dead.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[X0563511]

That sounds like the kind of work the CIA is supposed to do.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[ShanghaiBill]

The military needs to post a few names and addresses themselves.

Maybe they just did, and this is a false flag operation to lure ISIS supporters into the open.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[ScentCone]

It has to be better than that, though. The would-be killers need to be shot down, and then the MPs need to pose the very dead Obi Wannabe Jihaddi next to a 12 year old girl holding a shotgun and smiling. The real damage to these guys and their social circle is found in humiliation and refutation of the way they characterize, among other things, girls and women. Another winning aftermath shot would involve the failed jihaddi's remains half-eaten by hogs.

I really liked the coverage, the other day, of a bunch of these macho warriors for allah being caught trying to flee their increasingly losing position in Tikrit while wearing women's clothes. That was delightful.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

If Chuck Norris appears on this list, you definitely know its a false flag.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[BarbaraHudson]

The CIA would do it right - the "guard posts" would be across the street, with clear sight-lines.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[PvtVoid]

It has to be better than that, though. The would-be killers need to be shot down, and then the MPs need to pose the very dead Obi Wannabe Jihaddi next to a 12 year old girl holding a shotgun and smiling.

Even better, how about a video of Obi being beheaded with a knife? Nobody's thought of that one before.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[jedidiah]

This is stupid. Nobody needs to dox anyone. These kinds of people that ISIS wants to target are self identifying. There are any number of obvious symbols that "terrorists" could latch onto if they wanted to lash out at servicemen and their families.

There's simply no need for cloak and dagger or "hacking".

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone actually have a link to the list?

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Applehu Akbar]

Great idea! But if anybody actually acts on the ISIS information with domestic attacks on personnel, their religion is finished in this country for all time to come. I'm the first to agree that wouldn't be fair, but in this time of war that is what will happen.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, reinforce their position that the west, and all their enemies, are barbarians.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Sarten-X]

That's not the point.

Terrorism isn't about making the statement "We can hurt easy targets". It's about the statement "we can hurt any target."

The World Trade Center was a giant building. With control of a plane, it would have been easy to hit. The terrorist aspect is that the hijackers interrupted a regular normal daily routine to commit their chosen atrocity. Now, it's doxing. ISIS is claiming that they have supporters in the US who are willing to kill anyone with a name and an address.

Sure, they've picked a few soldiers now, but the subtext is that their targets could be anyone. A few articles later on the front page, there's discussion of video gamers calling in SWAT raids. 4Chan makes a point of identifying anyone for any reason for the fun of it. Anyone paying enough attention to understand what ISIS is threatening today knows that they could end up a target next week, and it's probably too late to scrub their records from public systems. There is no defense against the doxing, and if ISIS really does have a hidden network of bogeymen in the United States, there's nowhere to hide.

That's the real message ISIS is saying here: You could be next if you piss us off. Bow in fear, praise our particular flavor of deity, surrender all of your free will to our self-interested leader, and so on and so forth.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing about this that is most frightening to military leadership is that soldiers will be demanding the right to arm themselves. And when the chain of command inevitably denies them the basic right of self defense, the soldiers will simply take that right into their own hands and take up arms. And when the chain of command inevitably focuses their wrath on the soldiers who dare to defend themselves rather than the enemy, soldiers will begin looking over their shoulders and wondering who poses the greater threat to their lives and liberties, the enemy in front or the enemy behind. And the thing that truly frightens military and civilian "leadership" is that soldiers at the point of the spear may get that funny look in their eye that says "which enemy should I give the first shot to, the one in front or the one in back ?"

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Jack Griffin]

You might have heard of an event commonly known as 9-11. If that didn't finish it, nothing will

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

The military needs to post a few names and addresses themselves. They'll look like regular houses but they'll actually be guard posts. If anyone shows up and starts shooting, they end up dead.

Actually, my thought was to find out who is reading these messages then doing a bit of counter-doxxing.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Applehu Akbar]

Even at that time, we still had hope that a silent Muslim majority would arise, and proclaim "That's not us!" After Charlie Hebdo and that fiery cage, not so much.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

Or, y'know, maybe the US could stop carpet bombing oil producing countries... might that be worth investigating and spending a few billion quid on? Maybe redirect some of that enormous bombs-for-children budget to education instead? Why 'Murricans can't see the blindingly obvious is a big fucking mystery to us unless the continual global cockups and catastrophes initiated by Obama are actually deliberate. Anyway, get a grip and think about the children. Love, the World.

Re: Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you claiming that soldiers aren't allowed to own guns? Because that's incredibly stupid.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

That seems like a really low-percentage play. You're better off making some things about the fake profile that are easy to pick out in traffic. Then, trace traffic that discusses that profile. With any luck, you can drone the planners before they even leave their country of origin.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[dave420]

The Muslim community has been doing that time and time again, and is completely ignored, time and time again. The fault doesn't lie with the US Muslims on this one.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

The military needs to post a few names and addresses themselves. They'll look like regular houses but they'll actually be guard posts. If anyone shows up and starts shooting, they end up dead.

Indeed; bring the rat to the cheese....

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Jack Griffin]

Just because it's not headlining the mainstream media doesn't mean it isn't happening.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Applehu Akbar]

The Detroit colony, which dates to long before the radical era, has spoken up, but the problem is worldwide. The Saudi king may claim to be our ally against radicals, but his royal family is riddled with princes whose money enables terror to go international. If the King were sincere, he would repudiate the Wahhabism that started Islam on its radical turn just as the rest of the world was industrializing and reach back to, say, the Abbasid tradition to define a non-radical version of the faith.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

they better buy out the neighborhood at the same time. can you say "reckless endangerment"?

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

Great idea! But if anybody actually acts on the ISIS information with domestic attacks on personnel, their religion is finished in this country for all time to come.

That's exactly what ISIS wants.

They are doing the same thing that the neo-nazis in the US are trying to do: incite a "race war."

These types of folks (ISIS/Stormfront/Tea Party) are all about dragging people into the fight. They do that by trying to get other folks to attack and isolate them.

It's all about making more war, no matter who is fighting.

cacptcha: "calmness"

Re:Needs a honeypot

[phorm]

Terrorists would probably just end up sending a decoy to check it out first...

I'm just the pizza guy! I'm just the pizza guy! That's a large pepperoni for 123 - 5th St I've got in the box, honestly. For the love of god please don't shoot me [wets pants]

Re:Needs a honeypot

[Anonymous Coward]

LGBTt

I give up. What comes after "t"?

Re:Needs a honeypot

[duck_rifted]

While doing that, we might, I don't know, actually allow people some measure of privacy online. daesh is only giving crazy people a new way to be crazy, and having our information made public by corporations and government offices who apparently don't care if they can get people killed only serves to help crazy be crazy. Where veterans and service members are concerned, this is even further simple insane irresponsibility in the name of being able to target an add for inconsequential widgets.

As much as I'd normally step up to defend Obama, I don't think this would ever be a priority under his administration. They're all about selling the idea of how our information can be spread around to everybody. And this is why I say that the GOP is technologically illiterate. If they weren't, they'd have used this vector of rhetorical attack for years now.

Re:Needs a honeypot

[BarbaraHudson]

u, then v, w, x, y, and z :-)

Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

Targeting those with the ability to shoot back seems like a less than cunning plan.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

From a group that made its name slaughtering helpless civilians, I wouldn't expect a whole lot of guile.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[ScentCone]

The only people who are going to check their favorite blog, see this sort of stuff, and then go try to act on it are ... pretty damn dim/broken in the first place. Cunning isn't really a big part of the equation, not at the ISIS grunt level, and certainly not at the lone-wolf-"inspired-by" level. We've seen several examples of those inspired-by types in the last couple of months, and those guys were plain old nuts.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

They obviously don't care if a person succeeds or not. They only want their name in the media. They share the PR school of Miley Cyrus. They want articles saying that they are attacking people on the mainland US. That will help them win or loss. They want to project international power.

They don't care about the past (destroying ancient Assyrian artifacts) and they obviously don't care about the future (declaring war on the world, killing huge chunks of the population in their area). They only live in the now. The question isn't if they will succeed in their goal. The question is, how long will they be around to annoy / terrorize / kill us all.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[blue trane]

They are ultimate, perfect libertarians. Rand Paul eat your heart out!

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only that they will be GLAD to do it. They will become an overnight celebrity.

This does not seem to be a very well thought out plan. As the military idea of a dox is a 150lb bomb shot from 3 miles away and everyone in your immediate vicinity is killed.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[hey!]

You don't get to shoot back if you're dead.

Put yourself in the place of someone who wants to murder an identified US serviceman. Could the victim do anything to stop you if you were determined and patient enough, and willing to die?

Our system protects people by instilling fear of consequences. That works very well for most crimes and criminals, but not if the criminal believes he has the skills to avoid being caught (the beltway sniper) or is intent on committing blue suicide (Adam Lanza).

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

Incorrect. If it were just the would-be jihadis, then we wouldn't be seeing the press make front page articles about some ISIS member farting.

ISIS's propaganda is working, just because the press swallows it up. Even though they are little more than rednecks with AKs, we see articles on them all the time. Imagine if the same amount of press was done with some far right-wing militia group in the US. We would end up with front page news of Tacti-Cool Ted pulling out a hog and shooting a rendition of the Arabic infidel symbol on it with his homebrew AR.

ISIS's propaganda is working so well that even Europe has all but recognized them as a sovereign state.

Want to know how to stop ISIS? Do exactly what the NFL does when a guy is streaking... and not cover it whatsoever. If ISIS loses the ability to show some atrocity or chop off another head and have it televised worldwide, they will be all but finished, since recruits and resources would dry up. The press lapping anything ISIS does is just furthering their cause... and in a way, when the press covers their stuff, it is giving aid and comfort to the enemy... which is not a free speech provision in any nation.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

ISIS, the world's ultimate trolls..

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't seem to be dumb. Army guys are one thing, however, if they decided to target Marines, it would be a completely different story.

The fact that they have survived this long with most Europe virtually recognizing them as a sovereign state... is showing their propaganda tactics are working.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone who enjoys, or has enjoyed the subtle delights of internet trolling has to reserve some respect for ISIS's accomplishments of managing to piss so many people off so thoroughly. It's almost like that was their secret goal, and the creation of a modern day caliphate thing was just the cover story. If so, then hats off to you, Ahmed. You win the Internet.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[RogueWarrior65]

There's only one problem with an otherwise perfect hypothesis: Most soldiers on base don't walk around armed. Hell, even Marines guarding embassies overseas aren't often armed. Look at stock photos and you can see that while they may be walking around with M16s, there are no magazines in the gun.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[knightghost]

It's ironic that ISIL is anti west capitalism, yet it's the corporate misinfotainment industry that gives them so much power.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[ScentCone]

Even though they are little more than rednecks with AKs, we see articles on them all the time

Because where they are located as a group (not to be confused with the "lone wolf" types that the communication in question is trying to egg on), they've brutally killed thousands of people, and are armed with pretty nice toys, left behind by the courageous Iraqi regulars who went running for the hills when ISIS showed up.

Imagine if the same amount of press was done with some far right-wing militia group in the US.

If some group in the US did anything LIKE what ISIS is doing in across huge swaths of land in the Middle East, and did so with tens of thousands of people gleefully participating, then you'd see far MORE press about it that we're seeing about ISIS. But because there are no such huge groups of prisoner-burning, foreigner-decapitating militarized crazies occupying the equivalent of large portions of multiple states in the US, there's nothing to talk about.

ISIS's propaganda is working so well that even Europe has all but recognized them as a sovereign state.

Well, they control land, have a standing army, control and sell oil resources, and have people from around the world traveling to submit to their regime. That's about as (or more) put together as, say, Yemen is right now - a country that the EU recognizes.

If ISIS loses the ability to show some atrocity or chop off another head

So you're proposing control over the internet as a solution, here?

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[myowntrueself]

From a group that made its name slaughtering helpless civilians, I wouldn't expect a whole lot of guile.

I'm confused and not properly following this thread. Are you saying ISIS or the US military have made their names slaughtering helpless civilians?

Or both?

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[AmiMoJo]

Can you imagine how bad a SWATing could go? Armed and trained military personnel who are already paranoid that guys might be coming to get them. Clueless gun-ho cops with itchy trigger fingers on a power trip.

Even just ordering them a few pizzas could easily go south.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[fustakrakich]

In case you wonder how ISIS is receiving US support.. How long must the charade go on, sir? They are keeping the Russians out. That is what is important, no?

Re: Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

"Buy and sell oil"

You have to wonder why Turkey isn't facing sanctions for buying oil off them and, in the process, making these bastards the best-financed terror group in history.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[ScentCone]

In case you wonder how ISIS is receiving US support

So if you give your neighbor some used garden tools including a good brush clearing machete, and then your neighbor is run out of their house by MS13 so they can set up a meth lab, and they happen to use the machete to kill a rival drug dealer ... are you supporting MS13?

Get a grip.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Grishnakh]

The fact that they have survived this long with most Europe virtually recognizing them as a sovereign state

They *are* a sovereign state, by all rights. They control territory with military force, they tax citizens, they provide services, they buy and sell oil resources, they make and enforce laws, they have a standing army; how do they not meet the definition of a sovereign state or legitimate government? Yeah, they suck, they're brutal, etc., but so is North Korea.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

libertarian

        n.

        One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.

what?

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[fustakrakich]

That's not the way it happened. The deal was made after the trouble started and is ongoing.. ISIS an asset, and the big plus is that they take on all the bad press. If you really believe it wasn't intentional, then you too, can be the next owner of this fine piece of architecture. Get a grip and look at the numbers yourself. You are wagging the dog.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[gtall]

Rand Paul has no heart, he's a libertarian.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[ScentCone]

The deal was made after the trouble started and is ongoing

Non-spun, non-insane, credible citation required.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[fustakrakich]

Sorry, classified, all things publicly available are considered circumstantial in court, but ISIS, like contras before them in Central America (along with other death squads in El Salvador, etc), works for the US. These are simple turf wars by proxy amongst empires. Your mass media propaganda is no less 'insane' and is also just repeating unsupported, unverified government press releases. Your trust in them is grossly misplaced, but quite understandable. Life is good, inside the garden.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[fustakrakich]

That is why things like this happen occasionally. Lives sacrificed for propaganda and public relations. Nobody is checking who our 'allies' really are.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

Their caliphate crosses established borders artificially drawn by the British in the 1920s. Thus they have a political right to establish a secular, ethnic or religious state, possibly as a Sunni majority. That's ok on a simplistic level if their aims were regional, but they are not. They seek a world caliphate which all secular nations are denying them, rightly so.
In my opinion, this is the end game for the philosophy of creating a truly religious state where the purity of religious belief is above race and nationalism for the want of a better word. The better word btw is Caliphate, which many do not understand fully. With it comes Sharia Law and Mohammadan-ism, where the abject purity of Islam is tainted with all the bad characteristics of radicalism.
So they've dropped 'ethnicity' in favour of religion. The true Jew for example, is ethnically a Jew. A Sunni can be any ethnicity although there is certainly stratification (classes) within Islam itself.
So as religion slowly loses foothold in our increasingly secular world, the Caliphate cannot achieve their objective. In the end, if they partially succeed, there will be a new radical Muslim state in the Middle East but I can't see any of the nation states giving land to them. Caliphatic Islam cannot be secular, cannot operate within the economic global framework and won't draw anyone into a religious war as 1400 year old tribal radicalism is non compos mentis.
(moderating, so posting as AC)

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[dog77]

The Islamic state is the antithesis of libertarianism. The Islamic state wants extreme control over an indivduals behavior, which directly conflicts with the libertarian philosophy of maximizing individual freedom.

I think what you are trying to say is that a society without laws and strong government (a perfect libertarian society?) allows for extreme groups to rise and take over. So maybe you should have said "What happens in a perfect libertarian society. Rand Paul eat your heart out!". However that would be very misleading, because Rand Paul is a strong believer in the constitution and does not beleive in a lawless society.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Grishnakh]

So as religion slowly loses foothold in our increasingly secular world, the Caliphate cannot achieve their objective. In the end, if they partially succeed, there will be a new radical Muslim state in the Middle East but I can't see any of the nation states giving land to them.

True, the idea of them establishing a new world-wide caliphate with all other nations submitting to them is simply ridiculous. However they can be successful in establishing a new nation-state in the middle east, and are already partly there. They just don't have firmly drawn borders yet, nor recognition from other nations as a viable nation-state. But there's lots of other places in the world where borders are not firm and are contested (like between China and India, and India and Pakistan), and you don't really need recognition from others to be a nation-state. As for giving land, they don't need that, they can just take it by force, which they have. That's how lots of nations get their land. Russia certainly didn't get Ukraine to willingly give them Crimea, they simply took it (though through some underhanded means). China basically just seized Tibet decades ago.

cannot operate within the economic global framework

North Korea doesn't really operate within the global economic framework either. And ISIS, last I heard, does sell oil on the international market somehow (along with other valuable archaeological artifacts), and uses that money to buy things.

Re: Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't tell him to look at the numbers himself, then refuse to provide said information. It really makes you look like you're pushing an agenda more than a viewpoint.

Re: Careful, they might shoot back

[fustakrakich]

I showed them some. And there is more than 60 years of precedence on record for everybody to find their own damn selves. The only thing to speculate in the present situation about is the method transference of said goods. These 'raids' and Yemen, Benghazi, Iraq (something like, what? 3 billion and change?), etc are actually drop off points for the contraband. To give the government any benefit of the doubt is ludicrous. The oppressor plays the victim card.*We are under attack!* This is all age old stuff. It's how empires motivate their populations. I don't understand the controversy. My friend here is only taking offense at the thought of serving just another player. In other words, crying innocence.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

If the press shows every enemy action and shows their propaganda, which helps ruin morale and boosts ISIS's morale, this isn't protected speech. This is aiding and abetting.

No nation in a state of war would allow an enemy nation free and unbridled, if not guarenteed access to their press. Why should ISIS enjoy this right as they do in Europe?

Also, why should a violent, brutal militia be recognized as a sovereign state? This only encourages the most violent to do greater atrocities. Hasn't Europe learned the lesson of Chamberlain and appeasement?

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

You have some good points, though:
Sharia Law does not allow any form of interest rate on borrowings. That's fine if you are +GDP always and not dependent on international finances. You can deal with your citizenry with a modified form of lending where the interest rate is 0% or the interest rate is calculated over the period of the loan, incorporated into the loan as a monthly capital repayment with no mention of interest. That's been tried by a major bank for some Muslim only enclaves borrowing money for homes here in the west.
As for the Caliphate taking land... well there is a war going on and it's not over yet, with the US trying to make a deal with Iran, with Iran fighting ISL as well as others bordering on the old Iraq. Too me, it is still early. Western media is suggesting that ISL is losing ground and only the US Gov and maybe the UK Gov actually knows what is going on. Maybe they are turning a blind eye on oil sales dealing with Iraqi bureaucracy - even though it may be infiltrated by ISL. I mean who really knows?

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

Carry shotguns with jerked pork laced cartridges. Make it public.. If certain servicepersons (a reasonable individual knows what I am communicating) don't like it, dishonorable discharge. The military is a special society as as a point of necessity, the First Amendment cannot plenarily apply.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Bite The Pillow]

Are you sure they are against news organizations? Because that's who gives them power, not capitalism.

Capitalism is not the "the corporate misinfotainment industry". "[T]he corporate misinfotainment industry" is a very small part of capitalism. Or are you one of those people who believes that capitalists have enough money to buy a featured spot in every right-wing, left-wing, Libertarian, independent, and other news feed? Because if capitalists bought stories like people think they do, they would be able to afford first world countries by now.

I could use smaller words, I guess, but I don't know that you are ready to think for yourself. Please ask for help before posting again.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Applehu Akbar]

The article you linked refers to military gear we gave Yemen to hold off jihadists and which has now is presumably in ISIS hands. It is well established that the same thing happened to the arms we gave the new Iraqi Army, the one which fled at the first sign of fire.

Why exactly would we want to keep the Russians out? My impression of the best outcome in the Middle East is for the Russians or the Chinese to take over the region and grind it under a generation or two of the sort of iron-fisted colonial rule that Europe or the US would not contemplate. Let them have its oil in return - we are well on the way to producing our own needs, and this would spur the eventual replacement of oil by nonfossil energy sources.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

left behind by the courageous Iraqi regulars who went running for the hills when ISIS showed up.

I can't help but notice how brave you are on the internet. Sign up with the US army. Get deployed to the area. We'll see how brave you are when someone's shooting at you.

Probably not very.

Re: Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

"most Europe virtually recognizing them as a sovereign state"

That's the second time I've seen that claim in this thread. Any evidence for it?

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

And they illustrate perfectly the impotence of international law to reign in such a thoroughly disgusting state. We ought to be destroying all of the remaining infrastructure in Syria to smoke these people out into the open. Half of them would probably be dead of starvation and thirst in a matter of weeks if the attacks were well coordinated. We need to cut their supply lines and put the logistical hurt on these people to bring them to heel. Why aren't we doing that?

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Grishnakh]

Last I heard, ISIS wasn't just a bunch of wackos out in the desert like when the US was attacking AQ in their caves in Afghanistan, they have control of a bunch of sizable cities in both Syria and Iraq. If you cut their supply lines, you'll be starving all the civilians in those cities. As for "smoking them out into the open", they *are* in the open. They are the effective government in the cities they control. The problem is you can't just bomb them without killing all the civilians they're governing.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Jack Griffin]

Depends on whose plan it is. If it's coming from Langley, designed to lure the loonies out of hiding towards easily defendable targets, then it may be a little more cunning than you think. It's only 100 names, is it too much of a stretch to suppose these could be members of a special unit on a special mission?

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[amiga3D]

The US targets militants and might take out civilians in the process. ISIS targets civilians and takes out civilians in the process. When real the real soldiers show up and start killing ISIS members then said ISIS members leave and go home often throwing away their weapons and blending into the population.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Jack Griffin]

It might sound cruel, but one possible solution is to Nuke the lot of them. Yeah yeah I know it sounds bad, but on one hand we are in for decades of this murder, rape and torture, and a huge drain on resources and moral, on the other we could just kill everyone and start fresh tomorrow. Both options are bad, but which is less bad? At least the Nuke option sends also serves as a warning to all future threats that we still posses the power, and will use it if required.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Grishnakh]

Um, genocide really isn't considered acceptable these days. Besides, the people they're murdering are mainly the people in the areas they control, who would be nuked in your scenario, so that seems a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The obvious solution to me seems to be containment. Keep them contained within a certain area and don't let them expand their territory any more. The people under their control will suffer (but hey, at least they won't be irradiated to death), but oh well.

One thing I do wonder, however, is if having ISIS isn't necessarily such a bad thing for western nations. How many thousands of radical Muslims have willingly left western nations and traveled to Syria/Iraq to join ISIS? Last I heard, around 6000 ISIS fighters have already been KIA. Well, that's 6000 that we westerners don't have to live with, plus tens of thousands more that are still living over there and getting killed daily (of course, not all came from western nations, lots are Syrian or Iraqi).

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

There's only one problem with an otherwise perfect hypothesis: Most soldiers on base don't walk around armed. Hell, even Marines guarding embassies overseas aren't often armed. Look at stock photos and you can see that while they may be walking around with M16s, there are no magazines in the gun.

"The primary mission of the Marine Security Guard (MSG) is to provide internal security at designated U.S. diplomatic and consular facilities in order to prevent the compromise of classified material vital to the national security of the United States."

They are not really guarding the embassies from external threats, they are protecting the stuff inside, hopefully you can figure out the difference. Host countries are supposed to protect embassies.
I don't think you are looking at pictures of the INSIDES of foreign embassies.

MSG Marines are very serious, there's a lot of prestige to it. You wouldn't want to get between one of them and what they're protecting, even when you are wearing the same uniform.

That all said, what you are saying about troops in garrison is generally true, but being armed doesn't prevent you from being surprised. So MPs are armed and military bases can be locked down in ways that make what the police did in Boston look like children playing hide-n-go-seek.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

That is why things like this happen occasionally. Lives sacrificed for propaganda and public relations. Nobody is checking who our 'allies' really are.

The real problem was no barrier to stop a vehicle from getting too close.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[fustakrakich]

Magnified by soldiers with unloaded guns while on post. How much more absurd can it be?

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Jack Griffin]

It's not a zero sum game, the bigger they grow, the faster they recruit. My solution wouldn't be genocide, you first request immediate surrender of key leaders of the movement, then nuke their capital (this is a 'state' after all). When they refuse you hit the next town. You'll be surprised how much the dynamics change when facing a very real threat of nuclear strike. After half a dozen strikes it's hard to believe there'll be any real resistance left.
We've been in numerous types of this style of conflict in the last 70 years. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and not really won a single thing. Enough of namby pamby style of war, if we're serious about victory we've got to go old school annihilation and occupation.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[x0]

Armed and trained military personnel who are already paranoid that guys might be coming to get them.

You really don't know any military members, do you?

m

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Cederic]

Going nuclear is frankly overkill though. A squadron of B52s dropping thermobaric bombs would be perfectly adequate without long term downsides of radiation.

The problem is that either approach requires callous disregard for civilian deaths, and the international consequences of them. The US are joyfully not willing to do that.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[jafiwam]

They obviously don't care if a person succeeds or not. They only want their name in the media. They share the PR school of Miley Cyrus. They want articles saying that they are attacking people on the mainland US. That will help them win or loss. They want to project international power.

They don't care about the past (destroying ancient Assyrian artifacts) and they obviously don't care about the future (declaring war on the world, killing huge chunks of the population in their area). They only live in the now. The question isn't if they will succeed in their goal. The question is, how long will they be around to annoy / terrorize / kill us all.

They quite literally think they are bringing on the end of days as is in their literature.

Why worry about a few petty details if your goal is "end of the world"?

Re: Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course not. Typical anti Europe slur pulled out of the ass.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Anonymous Coward]

I do, and some (a minority, for sure, but still) of them have quite severe PTSD and duck for cover if a car backfires. I don't know how they'd react to a SWAT raid, and I don't want to find out.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Grishnakh]

The thing is, why do we need to be "serious about victory"? Why is this cause so important that we should murder millions of civilians, over an ideology?

It was exactly the same with Vietnam. What did we accomplish there? Nothing, except killing millions. How is Vietnam today? It's actually doing just fine, despite us losing there. Why do we care about how people on the other side of the planet live their lives? If they want to live under Sharia Law, who cares? If the people there are willing to allow them to govern them, and are unwilling to stand up against them, why should we? (The Sunni Muslims who live in the cities ISIS controls actually seem to support them; that's why ISIS is so strong there.) Now obviously, not everyone there likes them: the Kurds especially hate them. But that's fine, we can just equip and train the Kurds and let them keep ISIS contained.

You simply haven't made any kind of case why we should become mass murderers and draw the condemnation of the world for this cause. They are not any kind of serious threat to western nations, and in fact, the way I see it, they're a help: they're drawing away lots of angry Muslims who were born here to Muslim immigrants. Instead of staying here and causing problems (and us being unable to deport them because they're citizens), they're willingly going over there and getting killed by drone bombs or Kurdish or Iraqi militaries. Good riddance. It's kinda like a honeypot.

Finally, what would happen in your scenario anyway? You sound like you've thought it through about as well as Bush thought through his plans for eliminating Saddam in Iraq. What are you going to do after you eliminate ISIS and achieve military victory? We already won militarily in Iraq: there was no "namby pamby" war there, we won completely and decisively, and then look what happened: we got ISIS. This is what happens when you create a power vacuum in a culture you don't understand and try to set up a lame puppet government. Wiping out a city and eliminating ISIS is going to do the same thing.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Jack Griffin]

The problem is that either approach requires callous disregard for civilian deaths, and the international consequences of them. The US are joyfully not willing to do that.

This is where we need to get real. You get civilian deaths no matter what. Better that those lives aren't given in vain, and we to get an outcome that is favourable to us. It's been 40 years and the situation is still as bad if not worse than day one. How many more decades do we endure this?

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Jack Griffin]

The difference with Iraq is we tired to impose 21st century democracy on people with the mental attitude of cavemen, and this is the end result. firstly we should've never gone into Iraq. It was quite clear that Saddam for all his ills was actually keeping the locals under control. Once the decision was made to go in, you have to commit to full time colonial occupation. No democracy, no voting, an enforced dictatorship to bring them up to 21st century values. This takes at least 3 generations to breed out the dissent.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Cederic]

If you really want to go down stupid unrealistic option routes then there's a better choice: You wont have to endure any longer at all if you nuke every major metropolis in America. It also wouldn't cause you all of the additional problems of nuking the middle east.

What, you think American civilians should be protected but not those in Syria or Iraq? Really?

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Jack Griffin]

If you really want to go down stupid unrealistic option routes then there's a better choice

It isn't unrealistic, It has already been done once under similar circumstances to great effect.

: You wont have to endure any longer at all if you nuke every major metropolis in America.

How would that change anything in the Middle East?

It also wouldn't cause you all of the additional problems of nuking the middle east.

What? It doesn't even address the problem at all.

What, you think American civilians should be protected but not those in Syria or Iraq? Really?

No-one is protected. You have the the choice of putting Middle Eastern civilians through decades more war, persecution and terrorism, or you can cut the cancer out in one fell swoop, and give the survivors a chance at a prosperous life. Just like it did in Japan.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Cederic]

No-one is protected. You have the the choice of putting Middle Eastern civilians through decades more war, persecution and terrorism, or you can

..just kill them now.

No. Get a fucking grip on reality, please.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[davydagger]

They also seemed good enough to accept US aid durring the syrian civil war.

Cold hard reality is we support groups like this just as often as we oppose them.

The reason we have a problem with religious nuts is we allow it. Truth is, we tollerate religeious nuts far more than we tollerate secular nuts to the point all would be dissent knows that religeon is the only real path.

Its time to stop treating religeon as special from any other form of ideaology or philosophical creed.

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[Jack Griffin]

No, you are...

Re:Careful, they might shoot back

[RockDoctor]

Our system protects people by instilling fear of consequences. That works very well for most crimes and criminals, but not if the criminal believes he has the skills to avoid being caught (the beltway sniper) or is intent on committing blue suicide (Adam Lanza).

Agreed on the fear of consequences. But I think you're looking at the wrong set of consequences. The most likely way this data would be used would be for the doxxed target to be observed, and when he (or she - there may be female soldiers on the list, I don't have a reliable enough connection to bother looking) goes off to the daily grind in civvy street ... a while later Mr Wil'I'am Jihaddy turns up with a Pizza Hut uniform and box and shoots the soldier's family and children dead. An then probably gets away because no-one noticed.

The fear is of having your family killed as a consequence of signing up for the military. And yes, it is intended to inflict terror on the target population (anyone in the military, or who is family to anyone in the military).

Hate them or fear them, but you've got to admit that Al Quaeda and ISIS have got some pretty effective (note : that word does not imply "nice", or anything like it) tactical planners.

Gee whiz

[Anonymous Coward]

Way to keep the moral high ground, guys...

Re:Gee whiz

[Anonymous Coward]

ISIS isn't about the moral high ground. "Actually, it's about ethics in religious fanaticism" is just a convenient cover story for a territory/power grab and angry young men running around causing violent chaos in general.

Re:Gee whiz

[hey!]

Once someone loses his capacity to feel remorse for the consequences of his actions, horrors that would deter an ordinary person from doing something only feed his sense of self-importance and self-righteousness. This is true across the board no matter what your religion or ideology; the only thing that stops any of us from becoming monsters is our awareness of impending remorse.

Take the US drone strike programs in the Middle East. For the most part I feel these are a less destructive than the other military options open to us, and I think the technologies and practices used have become more accurate and precise over the years. But still there are mistakes in intelligence, human and technical errors, and plain bad luck which means despite our best efforts innocent people are being killed. And I feel remorse, even shame over that. Nobody likes feeling those things, but it's important for us to preserve our ability to feel them. Without them we would no longer weigh the negative consequences of our actions, and any rational restraint on our actions would be gone.

If you want a portrait of what that looks like, look at ISIS. They are fighting a brutal but futile campaign; even without the west Muslims themselves would refuse to be united under them. But the irrational futility of their actions only feeds their fanaticism.

Re:Gee whiz

[Anonymous Coward]

And the right thought Occupy was the biggest threat to civilization possible.

Re:Gee whiz

[myowntrueself]

If your enemy is in an unassailable position you have two choices; infiltrate and kill them in their sleep or attack something outside their fortress which they must come out to defend. Though I would think that the most obvious targets for the infiltration would be the drone 'pilots' families, people they do business with, people who make them burgers, people they owe money to, people who owe them money.

Re:Gee whiz

[Grishnakh]

look at ISIS. They are fighting a brutal but futile campaign; even without the west Muslims themselves would refuse to be united under them. But the irrational futility of their actions only feeds their fanaticism.

How is their campaign "futile"? If it weren't for the west's (mainly US's) military support, both direct (drone-bombing) and indirect (helping the Iraqi army and other forces with arms and training), they'd be a lot more successful than they are now. As it stands, they control a huge amount of territory, they have tens of thousands of armed soldiers, they enforce laws, they collect taxes and provide services to people living under their control; how is this "futile"? They don't need to unite all Muslims; no one's done that since Mohammed died. They just need to successfully erect their government and control territory and have popular support from the people under their control, and they've done that. Yeah, it's a horrible government, but so are the governments of North Korea and Myanmar.

Re:Gee whiz

[hey!]

If your enemy is in an unassailable position you have two choices; infiltrate and kill them in their sleep or attack something outside their fortress which they must come out to defend. Though I would think that the most obvious targets for the infiltration would be the drone 'pilots' families, people they do business with, people who make them burgers, people they owe money to, people who owe them money.

True. But the "obvious" targets illustrate my point about the depraved mind not being able to comprehend unintended consequences. These targets only work if the enemy reacts to attacking them exactly the way you hope he will. If he instead acts the opposite way, if he becomes more aggressive and indiscriminate in his drone attacks, that will only make you to double-down on your impotent strategy.

You can see this in Japan's strategy in WW2. In retrospect most of Japan's strategic aims in WW2 seem irrational. Their attempts to secure oil militarily only resulted in oil which would otherwise have been sold to them as a neutral or friendly power being cut off. And it was entirely predictable. In fact Japan itself predicted this, so they attacked Pearl Harbor in part on the assumption that a devastating attack would destroy the American public's support for a war to deny Indonesian oil to the empire -- a notion that could only be entertained by someone who was seriously self-deluded. It was a classic case of deranged men mistaking ruthlessness for realism.

Re:Gee whiz

[drnb]

And the right thought Occupy was the biggest threat to civilization possible.

Actually the right thought Occupy was a gift. It discredited the calls for strong reform and heavy punishment, giving such calls a wacko fringe taint.

Re:Gee whiz

[HiThere]

When was ISIS ever about maintaining the moral high ground? (OTOH, the US doesn't have any grounds for complaint, as it has been at least equally vile.)

Re:Gee whiz

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm surprised that nobody's shot a fuel tank at a gas station with an incendiary round. Unless I'm much mistaken - and I could well be - those things are insanely explosive.

Yeah right. ISIS.

[Anonymous Coward]

ISIS = Emmanuel Goldstein.

Enough said.

I declare a Fatwah!

[ScentCone]

... against any future use of the term "doxes" in this or any other context. Happily, my last fatwah, condemning all who say things like, "I spent the last couple of hours updating all my Linux boxen" has proven very successful.

Re:I declare a Fatwah!

[oodaloop]

Geez, don't get your doxen in a box.

Re:I declare a Fatwah!

[Anonymous Coward]

"boxen" is my personalized license plate.

Re:I declare a Fatwah!

[Anonymous Coward]

You are absolutely haram.

Why announce an attack to the world?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you have the means to kill a bunch of american soldiers in America, you don't telegraph that's what you're going to do before you do it. You attack unannounced, and then claim credit.

Does ISIS really expect us to believe that they have sleeper cells in America waiting for orders to do this stuff?

This is trolling. Their only real chance of anything happening is an American crazy person decides to carry it out because the voices told them to.

Boko Haram said they were going to rape and pillage America with their insurgents too. They've accomplished nothing.

Re:Why announce an attack to the world?

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't even have the most basic grasp of the written word, do you?

List culled from public sources, and here it is:

[wonkey_monkey]

the personal data was almost certainly culled from publicly available sources

IS has called for the deaths of:

Sgt Bilko
Captain John Carter
Colonel Jack O'Neil
Colonel Jack O'Neill
Major Dad
General Hospital

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

Also:

Private Affairs
Private Benjamin
Corporal Punishment
Captain Caveman
Captain Falcon

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[chthon]

And General Protection Fault was also rumoured

Fine by us...

[Anonymous Coward]

...asking its 'brothers residing in America' to murder them, according to Reuters...

Let's make it easy and convenient. Name a date, and a battleground. We'll be there....

Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

As the supreme court would be happy to tell you [and has already told you], having your name and address and photo published on the web along with inflammatory rhetoric and in an inflammatory context "is not punishment". Just normal government ops. It is perfectly ok. So this is just ISIS acting exactly like the USA. It is worth pointing out that the majority of you were perfectly ok with this, too; there was no public outcry over it at all. So there is nothing to see here. Move along now. Back to your own pitchfork and torch collections.

Re:Your government at work

[BarbaraHudson]

Don't be silly - incitement to murder is still illegal. Your link about a public pedophile registry case has NOTHING to do with this.

Re:Your government at work

[duck_rifted]

So, something has to be punishment to be a bad idea? It can't just be stupid and irresponsible? Yeah, that sounds like the kind of technicality baiting our government operates under. But that's where your correctness ends, down to the letter. I'll just say that outright.

Re:Your government at work

[myowntrueself]

Don't be silly - incitement to murder is still illegal. Your link about a public pedophile registry case has NOTHING to do with this.

Many governments, the USA included, incite to murder ALL THE TIME. Is it really illegal?

Re:Your government at work

[sumdumass]

Governments create their own laws and rules on enforcing those laws. of course it can be illegal with them doing it specifically.

Try it on your own though, go to a bar and try to talk the people with short haircuts into killing someone for you. I will wait the several years it will likely take for you to tell me how it worked out.

Re:Your government at work

[circletimessquare]

you really hold an organization like ISIS and the US Govt on the same moral equivalency?

i don't care how much you hate the USA, you fail the ability of coherent thought if you think the USA and ISIS are morally the same

Re:Your government at work

[myowntrueself]

you really hold an organization like ISIS and the US Govt on the same moral equivalency?

i don't care how much you hate the USA, you fail the ability of coherent thought if you think the USA and ISIS are morally the same

I wasn't claiming moral equivalence, just behavioral equivalence. The USA is run by a completely amoral group of people for whom human life has little value. I'll say the same about ISIS. Since I'm talking about amoral people its hardly a matter of 'moral equivalence'. Its not like I'm giving it a number and saying they are both at the same level of morality. They don't even have NO morality. They see themselves as operating at a meta-level above morality.

Re:Your government at work

[gstoddart]

i don't care how much you hate the USA, you fail the ability of coherent thought if you think the USA and ISIS are morally the same

You know, taken to the extreme, that becomes a difficult position to defend.

A group of people who want to force their beliefs on the world, and who are willing to cause civilian deaths if it achieves their ends, who don't care about the rights of anybody not in their number ... and then there's ISIS.

ISIS pretty much act like barbarians. Then again, killing civilians indiscriminately with drone strikes as "collateral damage" is pretty barbaric as well.

America are no angels here, and their security apparatus is undermining the rights and liberties of everyone on the planet.

I find it hard to accept the notion that there is no moral equivalency for the worst behavior.

I think ISIS are ideological crazy bastards. And then I look a the American right, and see equally crazy bastards who want the world to reflect their religion and are more than willing to force their beliefs on power through force.

And then I'm forced to conclude they're really both crazy and delusional, and view their own cause as somehow being different.

Re: Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

Your argument is based on a lie. Show me any evidence that the US is killing civilians "indiscriminately" much less deliberately.

Re:Your government at work

[circletimessquare]

you don't have to like the USA, but if you look at the leadership of the USA, and you look at the leadership of ISIS, and you see the same kind of people, you aren't announcing an understanding of the world, you are merely announcing that you have a horribly stunted social defect, and no grasp on moral reasoning

the usa has done horrible horrible things in the world. but to examine their motivations, actions, targets, etc., and see the same as ISIS on those measures, you're a moron on this topic. there's no other nicer way to say it. and it's not a baseless insult to call you that. it's an objective appraisal of the quality of the words you have written and the topic at hand. you're a socially stunted individual who should stop talking about a topic you lack the social abilities to understand

Re:Your government at work

[DRMShill]

Yeah, well call me when John Boehner starts burning people alive and posting it to Youtube.

Re:Your government at work

[aliquis]

Try it on your own though, go to a bar and try to talk the people with short haircuts into killing someone for you. I will wait the several years it will likely take for you to tell me how it worked out.

Do it in a mosque to people with long beards and it would possibly be covered up and you'd be apologized for.

Re:Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

incitement to murder is still illegal? They ARE enemy combatants - Having said that I am against it because the polticians go otu of their way to ensure it never happens to themselves.

Re:Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

US soliders on the orders of their commanders certainly have done that.

Re:Your government at work

[fustakrakich]

Bleh, ISIS is the 'contras' of the middle east, keeping out the commies. They receive their weapons (billions of dollars worth, 500 mil was just declared "unaccounted for") at drop off points in Libya, Yemen, Iraq, etc. And then the lapdog press dutifully reports that they have been 'raided'. Why would anybody believe there is anything 'moral' in this business from either side? It's a business! And business is damn good right now. Don't be so deluded into believing the US is any more innocent than anybody.

Re:Your government at work

[anagama]

The difference between ISIS and the USA, is that when the USA tortures or murders innocent people, it forces news organizations to sue under the FOIA for pictographic or video evidence. When ISIS does that stuff, it posts the evidence to youtube. Either way, the actions are despicable, ISIS is just less media savvy (the US having learned from Viet Nam the importance of limiting what gets published).

Re:Your government at work

[Noah Haders]

This is most certainly NOTprotected speech. It is a specific and immediate threat to harm someone. If Isis had posted something like 'death to soldiers' this might be protected because while it is a threat it is not specific or immediate.

Re:Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

... It is perfectly ok.

When a woman started publishing a registry of policemen's addresses, the police argued their safety was threatened by such doxxing.

I can't find a relevant article although some articles do report protest organisations using doxxing of the police as a protest tactic.

Re:Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

Submit the evidence to the US District Court in the jurisdiction where the information release occurred and ask them "Does this rise to the level legitimate attention where Brandenburg v. Ohio is concerned".

This message is brought to you by Karl Martell. EDUCATE YOURSELF.

Re:Your government at work

[Bite The Pillow]

I think ISIS are ideological crazy bastards. And then I look a the American right, and see equally crazy bastards who want the world to reflect their religion and are more than willing to force their beliefs on power through force.

And then I'm forced to conclude they're really both crazy and delusional, and view their own cause as somehow being different.

Most of the USA does not agree with the American religious right, which is what you are referencing. Most of ISIS does not disagree with ISIS.

What the religious right wants, they don't necessarily get. And that's because there are more opinions than assholes in USA.

You pointed out less than 50 million people, as if they represent the rest of the 400 million population, said yeah that's basically the same. So you didn't even come close to making even a semi-coherent point.

Re:Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, you certainly are! Thanks for confirming!

And what 'conspiracy' are you talking about? Is normal everyday business a conspiracy to you? You're weird, man!

Re:Your government at work

[PixetaledPikachu]

Most of the USA does not agree with the American religious right, which is what you are referencing. Most of ISIS does not disagree with ISIS.

At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter, as most of the USA has apparently failed to prevent their government from ruining and invading other poeple's countries. So yeah, that's basically the same

Re:Your government at work

[circletimessquare]

but rape is anonymous and cowardly, dear anonymous coward

Re:Your government at work

[pete6677]

"Then again, killing civilians indiscriminately with drone strikes as "collateral damage" is pretty barbaric as well."

You are an idiot. The entire purpose of drone strikes is to carry out very targeted killings. If we didn't care about collateral damage and didn't mind indiscriminately killing people, expensive drones would not be necessary. All we'd need is some far cheaper cluster bombs. Maybe some napalm.

Re:Your government at work

[gstoddart]

Right, so you only kill 25 people in addition to who you're looking for ... as opposed to 200 more. But you still don't care if it's innocent people.

That totally makes it civilized. Sure.

Re:Your government at work

[Gavagai80]

Most of the USA does not agree with the American religious right, which is what you are referencing. Most of ISIS does not disagree with ISIS.

Actually most of ISIS disagrees with ISIS much more strongly, since most of them are coerced into joining at gunpoint.

Re:Your government at work

[Gavagai80]

Trying to minimize civilian casualties when attacking your target is much more civilized than trying to maximize them, yes. Neither is good except in the most desperate circumstances, but that doesn't mean there isn't a huge huge difference.

Re:Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

ISIS is just less media savvy

ISIS has been called many things, but that's the first time I've heard anyone call them less media savvy. On the contrary, many intelligence agencies and media organizations have specifically noted their adroit use of social media tools as a distinguishing characteristic as compared to other Jihadist groups that either lack those capabilities or are much less successful in spreading their ideology online.

Re: Your government at work

[amiga3D]

If the US were deliberately targeting civilians the dead would not number in the hundreds or even thousands but in the millions. A lot of the reason for the slow progress against ISIS is that ISIS has gotten so good at hiding among civilian populations and as a result the US and it's allies have to sift through and try to surgically remove them. Mistakes are made and innocents die but if not for the attempt at pinpoint strikes an incredible body count would arise. I disagree with what the US is doing as I've basically become an isolationist in the last couple of decades. The aim is to be proactive so as to prevent a bad situation from becoming a nightmare down the road. Militant Islam is a much bigger threat to Europe than the US and I'd like to see how it plays out against the moral snobbery of the European hypocrisy. I think I'd enjoy watching as the crazies finally force France and other enlightened nations to make hard choices about how to handle an insurgent assault against their freedom. Yes, I'd love to see all those hypocrites respond to charlie hebdo style attacks on a weekly basis. I wonder if they'd still have their outrage against collateral damage.

Re:Your government at work

[amiga3D]

He's just going to sue them.

Re:Your government at work

[amiga3D]

He missed it entirely. The religious right mostly wants to end abortion and defend prayer in schools. A hideous agenda to the liberals but hardly the same as cutting off the heads of all the atheists. The bat shit crazy motherfuckers in ISIS want to kill everyone who doesn't believe like they do. Even Al Qaeda thinks they're fucking nuts.

Re:Your government at work

[amiga3D]

As much as I'd like my government to stop pissing away Trillions of dollars playing world police, if you feel they're basically the same I'd love it if ISIS moved into your neighborhood and you got your ignorant throat slit. Although I figure a pussy like you would convert quick and join the caliphate.

Re:Your government at work

[amiga3D]

Join or die. But what about all the idiots that travel there to join? Are they just bored?

Re:Your government at work

[Jack Griffin]

And then I'm forced to conclude they're really both crazy and delusional, and view their own cause as somehow being different.

One big differentiator that you seemed to have overlooked is that under the American system you are allowed to say what you said. You also get to live a life of relative peace and prosperity unlike many other in human civilisation. So yeah America is far from perfect, but comparing it to ISIS is a little bit of a stretch.

Re:Your government at work

[amiga3D]

It's a war. Getting caught up in a war is bad and usually terminal. Look at all those cities we firebombed in Germany in WWII. Millions of innocent German citizens died just so we could off Hitler. Not to mention what happened to Japan. My own state, Georgia, was on the losing side in the US civil war and had a Union army rape, pillage and burn a swath over 200 miles long that left a scar that lasted generations. General Sherman, the man in command of that army stated "War is hell." This war against ISIS is so tame by comparison that it's ridiculous to compare them. In more recent history the "ethnic cleansing" in the former Yugoslavia makes an interesting comparison. Yes, as bad as it is it could be much, much worse.

Re:Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

ISIS pretty much act like barbarians. Then again, killing civilians indiscriminately with drone strikes as "collateral damage" is pretty barbaric as well.

Let me guess: you are a twenty-something year old, right? You obviously lack a bit of historical perspective. Please let me explain. In the dark ages circa 1970s to 1990s, when we wanted to kill a high-value target we would typically have to flatten an entire city block. There were at least a couple of reasons for that. First, our munitions weren't nearly as accurate as they are today. Second, they had to be flown in by a human pilot who had to make a quick decision and get the hell out while taking enemy fire. Even if the pilot managed to hit the correct building, sometimes intelligence was faulty and the high value target was nowhere near the site. Was there collateral damage back then? You betcha! Often dozens of people, sometimes more, just to get that one high-value target. Now, though, with drones we can patiently wait for just the right time to strike. While that does not completely eliminate collateral damage it is nowhere near as high as it used to be just a few decades back. Yeah, it sucks when a wedding party is attacked and a child "bride" dies as collateral damage, but the alternative is to go back to the days when entire city blocks were flattened to get that one high-value target.

Perspective, man! Get some!

Re:Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

Or conspire with the rest of the politicians and pieces of shit who vote to starve people to death, but that isn't violence right? Eat a nuclear, cancerous ebola cocktail mix, fascists!

Re:Your government at work

[dave420]

I really want to agree with you, but the School of the Americas shows that the US has actively attempted to do some seriously sketchy, fucked-up shit to as many people it didn't like as possible. Really fucked-up shit. Horrific stuff. And that's just one thing. The list of democracies overthrown, peoples punished, and sloppy assassinations is overwhelming.

Re:Your government at work

[stealth_finger]

you really hold an organization like ISIS and the US Govt on the same moral equivalency?

i don't care how much you hate the USA, you fail the ability of coherent thought if you think the USA and ISIS are morally the same

You're right, at least ISIS stand by what they believe in.

Re:Your government at work

[IamTheRealMike]

Drone strikes set people on fire if they aren't close enough to be completely incinerated. They're called "Hellfire" missiles for a reason.

You're right that they don't tend to end up on YouTube though. Better that they end up on CNN instead.

Re:Your government at work

[IamTheRealMike]

You are an idiot. The entire purpose of drone strikes is to carry out very targeted killings.

.... of civilians. You know, when the US says it killed "militants" what it means is "any adult male in the strike zone". This has been verified beyond doubt now, they openly admit it. Often they have no idea who they are killing as the drone strikes are targeted based on e.g. NSA tracking of a mobile phone. Whoever holds the phone at the time gets whacked. This is how they end up drone striking weddings and the like.

If we didn't care about collateral damage and didn't mind indiscriminately killing people, expensive drones would not be necessary.

Obviously you care about collateral damage, not because the USA is such a bunch of caring hippies but because the purpose of drone strikes is to exercise power. You cannot exercise power over dead people. You have to instead kill anyone who does something against your will, or is suspected of doing so, or just someone who got in the way to serve as a lesson to others. If you see the purpose of drone strikes as minimising casualties in a conventional war then you don't understand what drone strikes are for or why the USA uses them. Their purpose is power.

Re:Your government at work

[stealth_finger]

Yeah, well call me when John Boehner starts burning people alive and posting it to Youtube.

There was no youtube but don't pretend americans/christains are above burning people to death. Relatively recently too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

Re:Your government at work

[stealth_finger]

I think ISIS are ideological crazy bastards. And then I look a the American right, and see equally crazy bastards who want the world to reflect their religion and are more than willing to force their beliefs on power through force.

And then I'm forced to conclude they're really both crazy and delusional, and view their own cause as somehow being different.

Most of the USA does not agree with the American religious right, which is what you are referencing. Most of ISIS does not disagree with ISIS.

Nice, most USAians don't agree with the religious right but most of the religious right do. Most muslims don't tend to agree with ISIS either. Here your equivalents are UASians - Muslims and USA religious right - ISIS. If you want to tar them all with the same brush you're starting from very shakey grounds.

You can almost guarantee if they thought they could get away with it (at least some of) the religious right there(USA) would seriously consider carving themselves out some land, through force of arms most likely because the land is already claimed. Then try and expand that and take in all peoples under their brand of religion to 'save the souls of mankind' and kill everyone who disagrees. Just like ISIS are doing. just like happened in the crusades, just as any religion taken to the extreme is want to do.

Re:Your government at work

[AmiMoJo]

Just because you sanitized it a little doesn't make it right. Drones are a little more targeted but still kill unacceptably high numbers of civilians. Civilians you are not even at war with.

Drone strikes are what motivate a lot of the people fighting against you.

Re:Your government at work

[Joey Vegetables]

They are indeed not comparable. The U.S. government has murdered hundreds of thousands of Arab and Muslim civilians over the past few decades. ISIS? A relative handful.

Re:Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

we've already established, boehner is what passes as moderate these days. on both sides i'd say. The far right's flown further and further to the right, and the liberal left is eating it's own with litmus test after litmus test.

Can i really say, i don't remember it that well, but in retrospect, I miss the fucking bipartisanship of clinton and gingrich.

Re:Your government at work

[khallow]

"Relatively recent" is 1916. Nobody responsible for that is still alive. You falsely equate atrocities a century ago with ongoing atrocities today.

Re:Your government at work

[rvw]

you don't have to like the USA, but if you look at the leadership of the USA, and you look at the leadership of ISIS, and you see the same kind of people, you aren't announcing an understanding of the world, you are merely announcing that you have a horribly stunted social defect, and no grasp on moral reasoning

the usa has done horrible horrible things in the world. but to examine their motivations, actions, targets, etc., and see the same as ISIS on those measures, you're a moron on this topic. there's no other nicer way to say it. and it's not a baseless insult to call you that. it's an objective appraisal of the quality of the words you have written and the topic at hand. you're a socially stunted individual who should stop talking about a topic you lack the social abilities to understand

The USA just has a better track record at covering up. Look at who supported and designed the terror in Chili and Argentina in the 60s and 70s: CIA, with the helping hand of Ford Motor Company and Chicago University. Of course, the CIA didn't do any torture or killing, they just advised and gave support. Ford supplied cars and "students". Look at how Iraq is destroyed by US presence.

Now the CIA blame Iran for destroying Iraq - how ironic! Wasn't it the CIA who helped the Shah take power in a country that was on its way to a very reasonable democracy? If the US had kept out of Iran and Iraq, and hadn't helped Israel abuse its power in Palestine, I doubt if ISIS would have existed.

What ISIS does is horrific, but it's completely comparable to all terror done in South America by Pinochet and by the military in Brasil and Argentina.

Re:Your government at work

[stealth_finger]

100 years is relatively recent. I could pull out Salem and the witch trials where people were burnt alive by the hundreds, or before that in Europe by the church etc, Don't get all pissy because it happened. No where in the world is a bastion of righteousness. not even America, as much as you may want it. You want recent atrocities? How about the gunning down and flat out authorised murder of citizens by the police because they 'feel threatened'. Two big cases have been worldwide news recently but that's the tip of the iceberg. I bet those causes just as much pain and suffering to family and friends. Yeah, being burned alive is a horrible, brutal, painful way to go but that doesn't lessen any others.

Re:Your government at work

[PixetaledPikachu]

As much as I'd like my government to stop pissing away Trillions of dollars playing world police, if you feel they're basically the same I'd love it if ISIS moved into your neighborhood and you got your ignorant throat slit. Although I figure a pussy like you would convert quick and join the caliphate.

As opposed to what? Hellfire missiles from a Predator drone? A group of "freedom fighters" on your government's payroll?

Re:Your government at work

[stealth_finger]

"Then again, killing civilians indiscriminately with drone strikes as "collateral damage" is pretty barbaric as well."

You are an idiot. The entire purpose of drone strikes is to carry out very targeted killings. If we didn't care about collateral damage and didn't mind indiscriminately killing people, expensive drones would not be necessary. All we'd need is some far cheaper cluster bombs. Maybe some napalm.

The main reason for using a single targeted munition is not having to carpet bomb an entire area with multiple aircraft which is a lot more expensive and risky for your guys. The fact you get fewer additional casualties or damage is just a happy bonus.

Re:Your government at work

[stealth_finger]

Just because they use it more doesn't make them more savvy. The burning video did them more harm than good.

Re:Your government at work

[Ottibus]

Just because they use it more doesn't make them more savvy. The burning video did them more harm than good.

I'm not sure what harm you think it caused them but it certainly helped them achieve their goals. It gained huge attention to their cause and doubtlessly encouraged many other people to join them. They want to fight the US so antagonising them is not harmful, so by their distorted morality it did them more good and no harm.

Re:Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

Drone strikes set people on fire if they aren't close enough to be completely incinerated. They're called "Hellfire" missiles for a reason.

...

Sorry, but that's 100% bullshit. Hellfire missiles are anti-armor missiles. At best they are a shaped charge high explosive. Not a chance they are incendiary.

Re:Your government at work

[fustakrakich]

500 mil was just declared "unaccounted for"

what a moron

:-) Somebody doesn't believe me. This is how it's done, kid. Stuff just 'vanishes' into thin air.

Re:Your government at work

[stealth_finger]

It turned alot of people in the area who were on the fence about then to thinking that's a bit much, it also upped the air strikes from regional powers that are a little too close for comfort. It didn't cause an uprising or anywhere near, i suppose paying off the west so much was worth more to them.

Re:Your government at work

[fustakrakich]

You're not looking at the 'leadership' of the USA. You're looking at the TV screen. Does a suit and tie mean that much? I guess if Capt. Kangaroo said he was president, you would believe it. Why do you insist there is any 'morality' in the war business?? You ever read the propaganda? Both sides are claiming to be under attack. But the baldheads are more 'civilized', dropping their bombs while drinking champagne. *Tut tut, they are such savages, those people!*

Re:Your government at work

[Triklyn]

... you really invoke something that happened pre-WW2? why not just invoke gas chambers? it's more timely. we've also got you know

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...

racially motivated killings in the proximal part of the 20th century... but you had to go more than a century ago...

Re:Your government at work

[Triklyn]

you're missing the point, it's not the way that they died, it's the glorification of their death. you list two cases as "atrocities" which is an arguable descriptor of police shootings... but at the very least, nobody is trumpeting them as the just and correct way that society should behave.

People are, at least I am, more appalled by the fact that a revenge execution is glorified.

i think what you were trying to find was this picture

http://abhmuseum.org/wp-conten...

Re: Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

If the US were deliberately targeting civilians the dead would not number in the hundreds or even thousands but in the millions.

Actually I would bet the REAL body count is in the millions. The real question is "Who spilled first blood?" We went into their country burned down their houses and villages and killed their families. If it happened to you wouldn't you want to murder the aggerssor? Did you ever think that the photo you see of a guy shooting at US troops from a house that it could be HIS HOUSE he is shooting from and all he is doing is defending his home?

The God damn US has been doing this same shit for over 500 years. Come into a place kill the women and children and then get pissed off when the people fight back. "Oh how could they".

Bottom line "You reap what you sow." You sow death well your turn is coming.

Native America
Fighting Terror Since 1492

Re: Your government at work

[amiga3D]

For over 500 years? The US has been around for much less than 300 years. I'm not going to argue with you about who started what. Basically I wish we'd left it all alone myself but, I'm pretty sure ISIS and the other jihadi groups have killed more of the muslim population in the middle east that the US. I can't begin to recount how many times I've heard "suicide bomber blows himself and 80 other people up, 2 US soldiers wounded," or some such over the last decade or so. It's incredible.

Re:Your government at work

[stealth_finger]

Jeez, I pulled out a well known public burning the fact there are plenty of other examples of worse more recent things just adds to my point, which was basically people can be really shitty to each other for all kinds of reasons all the time.

Re:Your government at work

[stealth_finger]

That was a classic case of a glorified revenge killing. As for the police killings, when no charges are brought or disiplininary action taken the authority's are saying it is just and correct even though the majority of the population vocally disagree.

Re:Your government at work

[Gavagai80]

Frequently they're extremely gullible. And many of them are rebel teens who want to lash out. And many of them are just evil -- bound to be a few thousand of those per billion people. It would be interesting to see the age demographics -- how many 50 year olds move to Islamic State, compared to teenagers?

Re:Your government at work

[khallow]

100 years is relatively recent.

Last month is genuinely recent. That's when ISIS burned around 45 people. Then they stuck it on YouTube. They've also are in the process of committing genocide and allegedly selling human organs on the black market.

No where in the world is a bastion of righteousness.

What was the point of making that observation? I find it interesting how people are more concerned about a light case of hypocrisy in the US than a vile organization like ISIS. It's a pretty remarkable case of moral blindness.

Re:Your government at work

[Anonymous Coward]

[tongue in cheek]isn't that how people go to church in texas?[/tongue]

Hope this makes agencies to take doxing seriously

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Most soldiers are quite open and public about their service, proudly wear uniforms, sport bumper stickers and baseball hats with their units and affiliation. So this move by IS might get some news play but unlikely to do much damage to the military. There were never shortages of soft targets of US military personnel in the home land. This will not impact our soldiers much.

But doxing of other activists would really have a chilling effect in the political speech. Hope agencies take doxing seriously and if any of the perps are within jurisdiction, hope they catch them and punish them.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[bkmoore]

You've forgotten Colonel Sanders and General Tso, both responsible for the death of innumerable chickens.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

Kernel Panic?

Ah, feeble pun time. Best way to spend a Sunday morning.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[ConceptJunkie]

I hear Major Malfunction has gone into hiding.

So Where Are You Now, NSA?

[DanielRavenNest]

Our supposedly omnipotent spy agency should be able to track down where these posts are coming from. Their silence on this matter is deafening.

Re:So Where Are You Now, NSA?

[oodaloop]

You'd like to publicly hear the NSA's investigation the same day the news hits? And if they don't then what, the NSA is in league with ISIS?

Re:So Where Are You Now, NSA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Their silence on this matter is deafening.

Wouldn't that be the smart thing to do?

Re:So Where Are You Now, NSA?

[gtall]

Ever listen to what NSA and CIA say in front of Congress and the Press? The last thing they claim is omnipotence. Rather they emphasize how much they do not know. Maybe you could go back to your TV, you aren't ready for the real world.

Re:So Where Are You Now, NSA?

[hattable]

You're right. They should immediately reveals their sources and methods to the public and ISIS by saying how much they know about these posts...I mean if they never want to be able to use those sources and methods again.

Re:So Where Are You Now, NSA?

[Bite The Pillow]

It gets hard to figure out the location when the domain registrar is listed as "Muhammed, Dirt Hut, Off the Main Road to Kabul, Dirtmenistan."

Where do you think they are coming from if not the publicly known geographical locations currently in the hands of ISIS?

And now what, do we just blow up everyone in those areas, including the dirt farmers who don't give one shit about who is in charge as long as they can feed their villages?

You are the worst part of those people who read any news story and immediately think "Yeah well, [thing that I don't like] must suck because it hasn't solve the problem." There are good reasons and bad reasons to object, and this is one of the worst I've read yet. I suppose I could help you out by enumerating the good ones, but we're going to take baby steps here.

Perhaps then it's time to

[Anonymous Coward]

Drop some "nuclear teardrops" ALL over their native lands and families as payback? I think so - go on motherfuckers: TRY it! Fuck around and see where it gets you ALL assholes! I think our politicians would be totally pussies if they didn't retaliate in that manner for such bullshit happening.

Re:Perhaps then it's time to

[Cederic]

What is with fuckwit Americans wanting to use the nuclear arsenal that they've spent so much money on, and thinking there wouldn't be devastating consequences for America?

The rest of you must be awfully embarrassed.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

We heard he likes to stay at "The Suite and Sour" which apparently is a very luxurious high rise....

Meanwhile we are left Wonton more information...

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

Add Kernel Lingus to that list.

Seriously?

[wisnoskij]

How does that even work is the list millions of names long? It is not like any of this is highly guarded secret. If someone in america wants ti kill soldiers they would not need some random internet list to find any.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Says right in the summary. There are targeted individuals. The list is supposedly 100 long.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dunno, but it's not really a new concept. During the cold war the Russians sent "agents" to my country to verify the location of certain military personnel. The idea was that in the event of a war they should be able to assassinate key persons. In the particular case I know about the idea was to kill of the pilots to prevent any fighters from taking off.
Being a soldier is pretty permanent job. You can't just go to another country, play war for some time, and expect the enemy to respect your privacy when you decide to take some time off or call it quits.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[itzly]

I found General Failure... not sure why he was reading my hard drive.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[oodaloop]

Notice they're not dumb enough to go after Corporal Punishment.

Re:Hope this makes agencies to take doxing serious

[oodaloop]

The military takes a hard stand on Operations Security (OPSEC), with annual refresher training for every member. There are numerous rules in place regarding use of personal information and posters everwhere reminding everyone of good OPSEC practices. That said, you can't tell a soldier he can't have a Facebook page, and it wouldn't be enforceable anyway.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[freeze128]

God help them if they target Commander Shepard.

Turnabout is fair play?

[Maury Markowitz]

Considering they doxed ISIS fighters, does anyone find it surprising they're returning the favour?

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[AmiMoJo]

Don't forget...

Private Browsing
Corporal Punishment
General Recklessness
Sgt. Slaughter
Captain Jack Sparrow
Major Damage
Commander Riker

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[retroworks]

Major Major Major Major will be hard to find, as he always slips out the back window when approached in his office.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

Tsk. I'd have thought you'd mention Private Parts and Major Woody..

Laws too soft

[Anonymous Coward]

The terrorist that hide in shit holes (syria, iraq, yemen, etc) can be bombarded freely by drones and airplanes. That's cool.

But the proto-terrorists that hide or exist in plain sight in western societies are free to operate as they wish thanks to the liberal laws, which designed to protect liberals in the first place. We have to give back assassination powers to the CIA. The list of targets is long, it's time to get started before things get out of hand.

Re:Laws too soft

[Grishnakh]

AFAIK, the CIA never lost assassination powers, except for heads of state. That was basically a "gentleman's agreement" anyway; they didn't want more state agents trying to assassinate our President (like JFK), so they stopped assassinating other heads of state.

ISIS leaders probably don't really count in this policy. And the US routinely drone-bombs high-value targets in other countries; they've bombed lots of terrorist leaders in Yemen.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

suspiciously absent from the list was General Failure

what do you expect from Muslims

[tandavanadesan]

Why fight then in the east when you can ki kill them and their families at home? Islam has no morals.

Re:what do you expect from Muslims

[Chrisq]

Why fight then in the east when you can ki kill them and their families at home? Islam has no morals.

Actually Islamic morals are the opposite of those held by decent human beings. Beheading someone because they say something you don't like is seen as a virtue. If a woman is raped then she is prosecuted and the rapist goes free. Forcing people with different beliefs to live as second class citizens is seen as a worthy activity. Lying to promote Muslims above others is an imperative.

Kill them all.

[kheldan]

These so-called 'islamic state' assholes? They need to die. Every last one of them. No negotiations, no trials, no 'explanations' -- just fucking KILL THEM ALL, male, female, I don't fucking care, just KILL THEM. Children below a certain age can be de-programmed and put with families that will care for them and raise them to be rational, responsible, sane human beings -- but every last adult that is involved with this uber-asshole 'organization'? They need to be killed.

This isn't even about religion. It's about a power-vacuum that was created in the Middle East, which allowed these assholes to swoop in with their ultra-extremist bullshit and start setting up shop. These assholes are like a socio-economic version of the Black Plague, and like any other epidemic, it needs to be erradicated, completely.

Of course I can't ignore the fact that there will always be violent assholes in the world that will use religion of any kind as an excuse to be violent assholes on a large scale, and as unpopular an opinion as it apparently is in the world, I just wish that humans in general would fucking grow out of this apparently genetic need for a god or gods of any kind. All it seems to do is open the door for more atrocities, more ignorance (much of it willful ignorance), more backsliding, and in general more bullshit. I make jokes sometimes about how 'XYZ is the reason that alien civilizations won't contact us openly', but I'm only half kidding oftimes when I say it -- as is the case with this subject: If there are in fact starfaring alien civilizations out there that have been observing us, they must look at this sort of bullshit (and the Inquisition, and the Salem witch trials, and who knows how many other atrocities that have been committed over the centuries) and feel nothing but disgust and maybe pity for our poor race, that we're so afflicted by such a major flaw in our cognitive process.

Not posted as Anonymous Coward, because I'm not one. Come and get me, assholes. We, the sane, rational people of the world, we reject you and your fucking ultra-extremist bullshit. You claim to be doing the work of Allah? I CALL BULLSHIT ON THAT; you're just a bunch of power-hungry FRAUDS who enjoy killing people, and we will see you all DEAD for your crimes against humanity. It's time for this shit to stop.

Re:Kill them all.

[Larryish]

whooooosh!

Re:Kill them all.

[Earthquake Retrofit]

I understand your anger. But we're supposed to be better than them. I feel compelled to warn against becoming like your enemy.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

"just fucking KILL THEM ALL, male, female, I don't fucking care, just KILL THEM."

This is was the prevailing attitude that created the 'power vacuum' - enabling the rise of ISIS and their ilk in the first place.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

I am going to partially disagree with you on this.

We need to stop the PC bullshit that mainstream muslims are not in any way responsible for this.

It's just a minority of muslims involved in violence, but mainstream Islam promotes ignorance, intolerance and sexual inequality. Show me a mosque where women pray in front of men. Abu Hamza was allowed to preach hate and jihad in a mainstream mosque for 5 years and only stopped by the intervention of the police. It's these attitudes in Islam that make it easy to radicalize young people.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

"just fucking KILL THEM ALL, male, female, I don't fucking care, just KILL THEM."

This is was the prevailing attitude that created the 'power vacuum' - enabling the rise of ISIS and their ilk in the first place.

Some would argue that restraints preventing some ethnic groups in the region from "killing them all" created the current situation

Re:Kill them all.

[Mryll]

It only works with a sufficiently complete level of brutality, and I don't think we're willing to go there anymore

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

How would your sane, rational approach determine who is a member of ISIS and who isn't? Is your sane, rational rage willing to accept some degree of collateral damage?

You seem rather more like a simpleton than a sane, rational person. This is a rather more complicated situation than you seem to be able to grasp.

Re:Kill them all.

[NeutronCowboy]

If brutality would work, ISIS would be in complete control of the Middle East. But it doesn't, and that's why ISIS is being battered by both Western and Middle Eastern States.

Re:Kill them all.

[bkmoore]

....They need to die. Every last one of them..... It's about a power-vacuum that was created in the Middle East....

That's exactly the problem. We make a list of every so-called asshole and kill them all only to find out that the problem hasn't been solved and that we need to make a new list of the new assholes who filled in the power-vacuum we created by killing the last bunch of assholes. Not to get all soft here, but the ISIS, Al Quida, etc. are symptoms of underlying political and social-economic problems that need to be addressed. The middle-east was always politically unstable since we broke up the Ottoman Empire in 1920. But the violence was limited as long as the economy was able to provide employment for the majority of the population. What we have had since the 1990s is the rise of globalism and the erosion of middle-class jobs, especially in the countries that have failed to diversify their economies and encourage innovation. The combination of economic pressure and lack of legitimate political structures has caused a perfect storm in which organisations such as ISIS can thrive.

Re:Kill them all.

[gtall]

Actually, it is very much about religion. At its core, Daesh is a religious movement for control of Islam. The Koran backs much of what they do. Islam never had a reformation like Christianity and Judaism. The latter have effectively jettisoned those parts of "scripture" which are just plain wicked. In essence, humanity has triumphed over religion in those two cases (i.e., the Greeks won). Islam has never had a reformation. And it doesn't appear likely it will anytime soon because anyone attempting it is usually killed as being apostate. It is the triumph of the Mullahs and Imams, two classes of the least responsible people to lead a religion. They answer to no one, even Allah. The reason, Allah is so other He cannot be bothered to talk to Man personally, even Muhammad was talked to by Gabriel, an angel. Well, if hearing voiced makes you holy, then we have many holy people walking around today, we also have many institutionalized. Ever talk to the mentally ill, they are frequently very religious. Muhammad goes off to the mountains in his thirties and hears voices, so it must be Gabriel...late stage schizophrenia, classic case.

Ever read closely what the current crop of Islamic nutjobs spout? Read the Harvard Guide to Psychiatry to properly place their mental illnesses. It is very revealing.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody who uses that much bold text and italics could ever possibly be sane.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

When both sides are speaking the language of murder, then is when that bald old man from India, Gandhi comes to mind:
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

You have to make the enemy hate itself. When ISIS kills mainstream Sunni Muslims, Arab nations will unite and fight them without you getting dragged into the fight. That's how you win the game - by not playing it.

However, it seems from this distance that someone in the American MIC (and the Security Theater Complex) wants America to stay at war and "in terror" perpetually. This is the perfect recipe for that. Your dignity, self-respect and emotions are being played, trolled even, and you have to see it neutrally. American Muslims are not going to go around killing American soldiers. But if you go around killing them because they *said* that as opposed to *did* that, then you are falling into the endless revenge cycle.

There's no end to that. Ask Israel. Ask Palestine. The land of endless revenge for millenia. As long as both sides breed, the hatred will keep getting revived every now and then.

Re:Kill them all.

[ScentCone]

The last time we eradicated some power-hungry murderous group in the middle-east, we created ISIS.

No, that happened because we left before there was a half-decent force in place to keep Iraq functioning, and because the many crossed "red lines" in Syria turn out to be no red lines at all (says the administration), and that conflict has been allowed to fester - a situation the sort of people who morphed their groups into ISIS just love.

Re:Kill them all.

[swb]

It worked in Gaul, Carthage, post-WW I Russia, the Native Americans, Tiananmen Square, Nazi Germany (against the Nazis), Eastern Georgia under German Sherman, Imperial Japan...

Re:Kill them all.

[gstoddart]

The last time we eradicated some power-hungry murderous group in the middle-east

Except, you've never done any such thing.

You've convinced yourself that the forces of truth and justice went in and cleaned up things right good.

All you really did is bluster around for a while and then leave saying "mission accomplished". Only to discover you'd left a power vacuum in unstable societies where this could happen.

America has achieved damned little there, despite claiming the contrary.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

Because equity is praying in front of men. A feminist mosque it not more equal. Fucking idiot.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

I read cyclone B is kinda of efficient.

Re:Kill them all.

[DRMShill]

No one in this list were a part of a psychotic death cult...

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

just fucking KILL THEM ALL, male, female, I don't fucking care, just KILL THEM.

All you need to do is to steal their women. Like for like. That's what they did a thousand years ago.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

We shoot rabid dogs, yes?

I see very little difference between the public face of ISIS and a rabid animal.

Re:Kill them all.

[Opportunist]

The US invasion made the whole shit possible.

Let's not kid ourself, Saddam was an asshole. But he was a secular asshole. In the whole region, there was exactly ONE state that could be considered secular and not full of religious nuts, and that was the Iraq. 'cause they didn't get to gain any ground with Saddam. I sure as hell would not want to live in a country ruled by that madman, but he kept the whole region stable.

Sadly at the key moment, when the nation needed a smart, strong and level headed leader, all it had was a circus clown.

Re:Kill them all.

[Opportunist]

How did you determine in WW2 who is Nazi and who isn't?

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

It worked in ...

It worked because there was a force willing to occupy the land and unify the refugees with their culture. Over the last 30 years, the fall of Russia, Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq, Syria, and the Arab spring, has created an avalanche of isolationist countries struggling to stabilize and unify their own culture. What little Western aid that was offered, suffered mixed success because Western culture clashes violently with the local culture. Hence power-hungry cults had space to grow and Afghan/Syrian war veterans to recruit. Since those cults are also anti-West, the affected countries, at first, didn't want to fight them. This allowed the cults to invade neighbouring towns and gain territory.

Using a "complete level of brutality" to eliminate the Islamic state does not address the original problems: 1) a leadership and power vacuum, 2) the absence of a compatible culture to occupy and unify the refugees. There is now a third element to address: The army of disaffected men (who are created by an imbalance of wealth and power), willing to fight and die for anyone who provides them with identity and power.

Re:Kill them all.

[Bite The Pillow]

Your amygdala sounds fat. You should seek professional help to understand your body and the influences on it, especially the internal ones.

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/2...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it seems most likely to me that Mohammed had a brain tumour

Re:Kill them all.

[tarball]

Interesting that a thoughtful and informed comment has no response. Yours isn't the only orphan out there. But keep it up anyway.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

....They need to die. Every last one of them..... It's about a power-vacuum that was created in the Middle East....

That's exactly the problem. We make a list of every so-called asshole and kill them all only to find out that the problem hasn't been solved and that we need to make a new list of the new assholes who filled in the power-vacuum we created by killing the last bunch of assholes. Not to get all soft here, but the ISIS, Al Quida, etc. are symptoms of underlying political and social-economic problems that need to be addressed. The middle-east was always politically unstable since we broke up the Ottoman Empire in 1920. But the violence was limited as long as the economy was able to provide employment for the majority of the population. What we have had since the 1990s is the rise of globalism and the erosion of middle-class jobs, especially in the countries that have failed to diversify their economies and encourage innovation. The combination of economic pressure and lack of legitimate political structures has caused a perfect storm in which organisations such as ISIS can thrive.

Riiiight.

Because upper-class Kuwait-born, Brit-raised, college-educated, gainfully-employed Jihadi John didn't have any opportunities.

Please quit making excuses for murderers stuck in the Middle Ages.

Re:Kill them all.

[swb]

The Romans had little use for unifying the refugees of their occupied lands. They killed all that resisted and the rest were enslaved. Those that remained assimilted Roman culture because the opposite was death. This basic structure is the same in every place where force was successful.

The West's military misadventures have failed because Western militaries have become preoccupied with defeating armies and weapon systems. They are no longer focused on defeating a nation. Military force can only be successful to the extent that it is willing to defeat a people and break not only their ability to fight but to their willingness to fight.

This is not done through "nation building", nurturing or any other touchy-feely behavior. It is done by killing people who resist and destroying their places of living. Every act of resistence should be dealt with death and destruction until everyone willing to fight is dead and everyone else won't fight.

You approach a village and you take fire from it? You level the village and kill everyone who resists. You keep doing this and you will not have any resistence. People will learn that resistence is futile, that resistence means death.

There is nothing nice about this. It is vicious and it is brutal. Which is why we should not engage in military actions unless we are willing to pursue it. Because the opposite is viciousness and brutality for both sides without any resolution.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

Should have just nuked the place into an uninhabitable wasteland. Can't have a power vacuum if no one lives there.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no need for us to do the killing directly. By selectively arming opposed groups, encouraging them to fight each other and destroying all of the remaining infrastructure in Syria we can tie down Iran, Al-Assad, and Isis in a brutal and primitive civil war lasting decades and killing millions. It would only be necessary while doing this to isolate and contain the region, strictly controlling both entry and exit of people and materials to the best extent practicable, while the Iranians, Isis and other Jihadis fight to their mutual extinction. They key would be to allow entry of enough weapons, ammunition and other consumables to keep the war raging, but not enough to prevent starvation, disease and other hardships from also taking their toll. A decade of that and there wouldn't be anyone left to continue the fighting. They key word here is containment. Cut off and isolate the fighting from the rest of the world and allow the fire to burn itself out.

Re:Kill them all.

[Jack Griffin]

It does if you have a big enough gun. Do you think America would still be standing if ISIS had ICBMs? A few nukes and an occupation could end this all quite quickly if we had the stomach to do it properly.

Re:Kill them all.

[Jack Griffin]

The good thing about a death cult, is once they're all dead, it's really hard to recruit new members

Re:Kill them all.

[Jack Griffin]

The power vacuum only exist because we're too soft to occupy. The vacuum occurs only if you leave.
As you say it was stable under the Ottoman empire, because they took over and kept it, America needs to do the same thing. The US, Canada, Australia, NZ were all British colonies, but the difference is the white people never left, so they remain beacons of progress. Hate to sound all racist here, but there is a strong correlation between those and African, Middle Eastern states that were given back.

Re:Kill them all.

[Jack Griffin]

Actually I'll qualify that racism comment. It isn't racist, it's culture-ist. People in the most developed countries have similar values which seem to be more advanced (ie equal rights , freedom of expression) than less developed countries. Race has nothing to do with since any human raised in a developed country will have similar views (most of the time). We in the developed world need to ensure those less developed are brought up to our standards. Sometimes that can be achieved with carrots, sometimes with sticks.

Re:Kill them all.

[Jack Griffin]

The Koran backs much of what they do. Islam never had a reformation like Christianity and Judaism.

To be fair, Islam is a whole lot younger than the others so maybe their puberty is just kicking in now. In 300 years they'll look back and laugh about suicide bombings, just as we do now with witch trials and inquisitions.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

anyone living a comfortable life within germany during ww2 was a nazi or somehow associated with the nazi party.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

It isn't racist, it's culture-ist.

So if economic success is entirely cultural, how do you explain the difference between North and South Korea?

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

Too late for that; this is just an adaptation of drone strikes, and therefore this actually represents our enemy becoming like us.

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

Because upper-class Kuwait-born, Brit-raised, college-educated, gainfully-employed Jihadi John didn't have any opportunities.

Not all traffic accidents are caused by drunk driving and not all revolutions are caused by socioeconomic dysfunction. But some are. And, in such cases, the leaders of the revolution aren't necessarily from the same socioeconomic class as the followers.

Even if we assume that people are entirely selfish, the motivations for a leader are much different than for a follower. Typically, the most a follower can hope for if the revolution succeeds is a simple comfortable life. On the other hand, the leader of a revolution can hope for a lifestyle to rival the richest billionaires. In his early 20's, Jihadi John apparently had a job as a successful IT salesman in Kuwait. That's not bad. But it's not a billionaire lifestyle either.

Re:Kill them all.

[dunkelfalke]

Two actually. Turkey used to be secular as well.

Re:Kill them all.

[dave420]

And possibly working with the allies. See where your logic falls down?

Re:Kill them all.

[IamTheRealMike]

As you say it was stable under the Ottoman empire, because they took over and kept it, America needs to do the same thing. The US, Canada, Australia, NZ were all British colonies, but the difference is the white people never left, so they remain beacons of progress. Hate to sound all racist here, but there is a strong correlation between those and African, Middle Eastern states that were given back.

I think you should probably read a good history of the British empire, followed by 20th century history, before posting nonsense like this.

The causes of problems in the middle east have a lot to do with the long term history of the "beacons of progress" fucking with the region. Specifically when the Ottoman Empire collapsed the colonialists divided the region up along entirely arbitrary borders that often drew straight lines right through native tribes and populations, then appointed flunkies to rule these new countries. There was zero attempt to make something that worked for the people who lived there. This caused serious long term resentment.

Have you ever watched the ISIS video of them blowing up border posts? The ISIS soldiers keep talking about the end of Sykes-Picot. Even though I actually have read a history of the British Empire, I still had to look that one up. It turns out to be the British-French treaty that created the borders of Iraq. Families in different villages were suddenly divided from each other, etc. The people who live there apparently still hate Sykes-Picot to this day.

Plus, when countries in the region got leaders the western powers didn't like, there were interventions (e.g. Iran). There were invasions. Not to mention the gaping wound that is Israel and the absolutist support for it from the US.

There hasn't ever really been a time when more powerful militaries weren't fucking with people who live in the middle east. Religion certainly plays a part, but the USA is a lot more religious than other western developed countries and it doesn't seem to hurt them much ....

Re:Kill them all.

[Anonymous Coward]

We see your illogical ad hominem attack logic falls down http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

Re:Kill them all.

[Cederic]

I agree. Utah's spectacular, Colorada is beautiful and Texas does great barbecue, but you're right, a wasteland would greatly ease world tensions.

Re:Kill them all.

[kheldan]

What are you suggesting we do, have a nice sit-down with them over tea and crumpets and talk about their feelings that are making them act out? We're not talking about teenagers committing petty vanadalism and graffitti, we're talking about assholes that are running around the Middle East cutting off people's heads, slaughtering entire populations, enslaving women and turning them into sex slaves, and taking the children they capture and brainwashing them into being suicide bombers! How can there BE any other response to this other than 'Kill every last one of the bastards'? What the actual FUCK is your solution!? Are you one of them or something? Are you part of the 'islamic state' press corps or something? Do you not understand? These assholes would gladly and gleefully kill YOU, your FAMILY, and EVERYONE YOU KNOW, just to make a POINT! They make Al Qaeda, Hamas, Iran, and any other group of assholes currently out there in the world look like fucking pansies in comparison.

Re:Kill them all.

[kheldan]

Are you talking to me or someone else? Because I'm not part of any political party and likely never will be, because none of them represent the totality of my interests. If you are talking to me: Fuck you.

Re:Kill them all.

[ImprovOmega]

The only way to make it work is with an inhuman amount of brutality. It is within our power to eradicate their entire territory with nuclear weapons, and I promise you, nothing will rise up there to take its place (not for a few hundred years until the radiation dies down anyway). The rest of the world may then turn against the United States, but the ISIS problem would be 100% solved.

In other words, no, it never really works. That level of violence is self-defeating. ISIS is finding that much out themselves though, because all their Muslim neighbors (and *especially* Jordan) hate them with a passion. I agree that the U.S. needs to help put a stop to them, but cancers like ISIS do tend to get killed off pretty handily by the rest of the world.

Re:Kill them all.

[Jack Griffin]

I've have a pretty good understanding of the whole tribal divide thing. But again that's because they drew those lines when they gave it all back. If they didn't give it back it would still be an empire ruled by Europeans.
FWIW, the US, Canada, Australia and NZ all had tribal boundaries disrupted by British rule, but because they maintained governance, the net pain has been a whole lot lower.

Re:Kill them all.

[Sardaukar86]

There is nothing nice about this. It is vicious and it is brutal. Which is why we should not engage in military actions unless we are willing to pursue it. Because the opposite is viciousness and brutality for both sides without any resolution.

A hugely underrated post IMHO. I agree with you entirely, our collective appetite for wars on foreign soil would wane very quickly if we went in with this pragmatic approach.

Like antibiotics, military 'treatment' must be applied at maximum sustainable levels (as per your post) until the problem has been resolved. Tapering and other such pussy-footing behaviour strengthens the invader, undermines the treatment and prolongs the suffering of all involved.

Re:Kill them all.

[Sardaukar86]

I read cyclone B is kinda of efficient.

It's called Zyklon B . It is only "kinda of efficient" when used in controlled, enclosed spaces. I don't think anyone's likely to fall for the old take-a-hot-shower-in-here routine again anytime soon so it looks like we'll probably just stick with drones, thanks.

Re:Kill them all.

[swb]

Our appetite for foreign militarism is entirely the result of our politicians selling the idea that our enemy is the leadership and their military forces, but the populace is our friend. With our advanced military weapons, we can defeat the defined "enemy" and then the populace will embrace us as liberators.

What I don't know is where this idea originated. My only guess was that it grew out of the reconstruction era in postwar Germany where civilian resistance was minimal and largely theoretical understandings of the Soviet domestic political climate.

Both of these seem naive. The Allies let the Germans starve for a couple of years after the war and most felt this was a better alternative than their experience with the Soviets. Despite Stalin and his repression, the Russians took massive losses and fought for the Soviet state. Much of this was compelled, but at the same time the populace did it.

Yet somehow, it's become a cornerstone of US military policy that the civilian population is at worst neutral and most likely supports US goals, not to mention US belief systems and values. Which is ironic if you look at most of the American and British propaganda from WWII, which sold the idea that the enemy nations were subhuman races which deserved to be wiped off the map.

Re:Kill them all.

[NeutronCowboy]

Let me ask you this: if a country would come into the US and start razing cities and towns, would that break your will to fight? Or would that just inflame your desire to see of the invaders dead?

The problem with your approach is that it defeats the purpose of killing terrorists: it creates more than it kills. The only way you can actually succeed is if you wipe out every opposing person - and in today's connected world, that will very quickly be everybody but you and your buddies. Are you willing to go to war with the entire world? Even if they drop nukes on you?

Carthage worked because it was a city state surrounded by a desert. There were not enough people to take the side of Carthage once it was destroyed. But you won't find that today anymore.

WW1 and WW2 are interesting examples, where a local superpower thought it could win a total war.

Re:Kill them all.

[NeutronCowboy]

You mean, like how we effectively nuked Saddam's army and occupied Iraq? Your only way to continue is by actually turning all of Iraq into a glass desert. Then all of the Middle East. Then all of North Africa. And when the Russians and Chinese start calling, you'll have to turn the world into a glass desert.

Yeah, no thanks. I'd rather deal with a few crazies killing a few locals by taking a few potshots at them from a distance.

Re:Kill them all.

[swb]

Let me ask you this: if a country would come into the US and start razing cities and towns, would that break your will to fight? Or would that just inflame your desire to see of the invaders dead?

Of course, initially everyone has a natural response -- rally 'round the flag. Kill the invaders.

Now, what happens when people hear about the invasions continued advance? Cities in ruins, millions killed? Resisting military units wiped out, irregular paramilitary units crushed, cities and towns harboring resistance razed, their inhabitants summarily executed. Oh, and your town has been bombed, food supplies are sketchy, no electricity, etc.

Eventually the idea of anything but total surrender becomes impossible.

Re:Kill them all.

[Jack Griffin]

You mean, like how we effectively nuked Saddam's army and occupied Iraq?

Everyone keeps using this as a counter argument, but Iraq was never an occupation. Occupation is when we instill our own government, law, values, language, education and religion, and stay there for generations until the locals are assimilated. You know just like the British did in the US. It's why the US is no longer just a bunch of rabid tribes like the Middle East is. Sometimes progress needs to forced onto a country to improve it.

Re:Kill them all.

[Opportunist]

Too bad the bombs didn't discriminate between those living comfortably and those that don't. Actually, thinking about it, those living comfortably could probably also afford to not live in the big cities that were bombed routinely...

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

They'll have a fun time going after ol' Jack, he is too busy playing golf.

As long as

[Anonymous Coward]

As long as ISIS or whoever fall into that label, doesn't bomb weddings, I don't really care. I am ofc not a US citizen.

Re:As long as

[pspahn]

Really? Weddings? That's where you draw the line?

Killing people for bringing blankets and beds to kids, that's cool. Killing journalists, that's cool. Terrorizing locals, that's cool. Attacking schools, that's fine? Weddings none of that shit. ... that's it ... huh. To each his own, I guess.

Re:As long as

[Anonymous Coward]

The wedding comment was more of a sarcastic quip I will admit. (Btw, no weddings were attacked in my country.)

However, I guess you must be shocked to hear my opinion, that the soldiers basicly deserve to die, in a very simple way (ofc in this way, I think all soldiers everywhere do).

This specific notion of "deserving to die" is that ushc people undertake a certain risk by being in the service of a military force by supporting it or taking up arms, and have really no special priviliges other than the ones that they give themselves. Pointing guns at people, torturing them, outright murder, killing susupects, bombing people and destroying property, terror bombing, projecting military force, or the threat of military force, not really a civilized thing to do, more like systemic violence, a type of behavior typically associated with nation states and military forces, which for some, have their civilian adminstrations calling their "war departement" for "defense departement".

Even worse, all this under the guise of a nation's supposed "national interests", making me hold the view that all such states that have their high or low representative brazenly make a statement about "national interests" as a means to rationalize some action, are inherently facistic.

Don't Worry...

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry liberals. I'm sure if we just ignore them they will peacefully "go away". Your plan is sound.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[PPH]

Please, not Private Gomer Pyle.

ISIS this! ISIS that!

[fustakrakich]

Whoops! Four of our helicopters are missing! Who do you think could possibly have them? A common Hollywood byline in a few of their spy flicks was *knowing who to trust*. ...we have people everywhere. Am I right?

Re:ISIS this! ISIS that!

[Bite The Pillow]

Jesus Christmas, what in the hell do you mean? Omitting the HTTP part, this is your link:

img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_600w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2015/03/17/National-Security/Graphics/USYemen_graphicv2.jpg

It's a graphic about the number of things... and no context. Did you have a point, or is this just free association?

You said helicopters, but the picture shows an airplane. Does that cast doubt on the source?

So no, you can't be right. Not at this point.

Re:ISIS this! ISIS that!

[fustakrakich]

The graphic illustrates the point that is very obvious to anybody who pays attention. If ISIS is really the enemy, then the weapons are going to Iran, which just happens to be the only country actually fighting them. Either way, we have another "Iran/Contra" thing going on here. The "cold war" lives on, and nobody dares to raise any questions. If anybody is making up stories, it's the government, and there's certainly nothing new there.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[sconeu]

Colonel Panic, on the other hand, just stopped.

Ah

[cascadingstylesheet]

OK, now can we admit its not a "religion of peace"?

(quick, mod him down, he said something we don't like! Plus all religions are equally evil - Presbyterians are just itchin to shop off some heads! Plus, wascally wepubwicans!)

Re:Ah

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently not.

They'll let anybody mod nowadays.

Re:Ah

[Jack Griffin]

It'd more accurate say no religion is about peace, they're mostly all about ignorance.
Islam is only tolerated because we tolerate other religions too. Get rid of the Christians and the Jews, and it makes it a whole lot easier problem to solve.

Re:Ah

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm no fan of Islam, but consider something here.... We declare war on them, we bomb them from on high, and yet we somehow expect that in this "war" they are somehow not supposed to be allowed to shoot back? The whole reason we have soldiers in uniform are to identify them as valid targets for the enemy. The ISIS assholes are doing exactly what they should be doing for once while in a state of this "war on terror" - fighting soldiers.

Re:Ah

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't people disagree with your argument as much as your argument style. Just from this it sounds like you argue topics such as religion like a child. I wouldn't want to listen to you either.

GamerGaters will defend this

[Anonymous Coward]

Gaters have said over and over that there is no harm in doxing.

USian christians doing the same thing

[Anonymous Coward]

See this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVDMQr1Gohg

It isn't Islam that's making ISIS, it's religion. Any religion can lead you to do the exact same thing. All it needs is belief, and christianity is just as fixated on making pure unadulterated belief "holy".

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone's forgotten about General Confusion!

Another contribution to peace. Thanks Islam.

[walterbyrd]

PC mush heads still don't get it.

Re:Another contribution to peace. Thanks Islam.

[Bite The Pillow]

Another contribution to peace. Thanks Islam.

Did you mean "Thanks, very small set of ignorant radicalists"? Because otherwise you think that 2 billion people somehow are incapable of taking over the entire planet - of fighting multiple wars on multiple fronts - of organizing some kind of world takeover.

How could 2 billion people NOT take over the world in a small number of years?

Unless maybe, just maybe, you don't understand what you are talking about?

Re:Another contribution to peace. Thanks Islam.

[Anonymous Coward]

How could 2 billion people NOT take over the world in a small number of years?

Because we have all the money, ships, aircraft, guns, satellites, and nuclear weapons? Dude, you're overthinking this.

The Muslim nations that DO have money (oil) and guns ARE largely backwards, corrupt, and belligerent. The rest are basically impoverished and helpless, more worried about their next meal than world domination.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Nemyst]

And you forgot Colonel Sandurz, his cunning alter-ego.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

Colonel Jack O'Neil
Colonel Jack O'Neill

I wouldn't worry about these guys. The first one will grimace at the attacker and his head will explode. The second will fix it with magnets, because they make everything work.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget:

Major Woody
Private Parts

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Oh, my fucking God! The Muslims killed Captain Crunch . . . and Snap, Crackle and Pop . . . and the Trix Rabbit! Things are getting serious now! C'mon Americans! Radical Muslims are easy to spot. Their women wear head to toe burkas. You are armed to the teeth . . . you just need to shoot at the burkas!

Otherwise, Muslims will take out your breakfast precious bodily fluids!

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

but they wont go after Saunders - too many chickens.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[TheCreeep]

General Failure and Major Malfunction were reading my hard drive, looking for Private Porn. They all stopped when they ran into a Colonel Panic.

It is the shootback

[Anonymous Coward]

Independentely of ISIS, and about the drone killing in that region : Look, the US can pretend whatever it wants, but basically it is murdering people around in the hope that the survivor change their way or that nobody take place of the murdered guy. You know the definition of that ? State sponsored terrorism. There is no reason to drone kill a lot of people which have been killed lately. If they had done a bombing attack in the US that would be a reason, but none of those which were killed lately had never been in the US even. basically the US kill people for people from which the sole crime could be at most in some case to make a conspiracy against the US (something which is not a death penalty case even in the US) and in many case does not even get that legal level. And that crime (if any) was not even DONE in the US, and don't get em started on "declaring" any victim above 18 year old as being an accomplice not matter whther they were really accomplice or not.

basically the US has become a terrorist state, and the american do not even realize that.

And now we have reached that state, the people targeted only have one choice in that assymetric war : abandon their ideology, or target back guerrilla style. The US be ready to continue murdering people for a verrrry long time, because they are only seeding for the next generations of terrorists, those which lost a mother/father/brother/sister/uncle to drone killing.


As horrible as it sounds, we probably should do what we do when people massacre each other in other countries : nothing at all.

Re:It is the shootback

[HiThere]

It's sad, but that was my original thought on this.

OTOH, I haven't checked, so I don't know that the people DOXed are remote killers. For all I know they could be the regimental cooks.

I wish that it weren't a fair criticism to call the US a terrorist state. Unfortunately...very unfortunately...I feel that's a justifiable criticism. But I doubt that this will do anything to improve matters. And while low level soldiers are easy targets, they aren't the ones making the decisions. (I can't say that they are without guilt, but they are also easily replaceable.)

"The Old Man of the Mountain" had a system that was effective for quite awhile, but it depended upon being able to insinuate his followers into close proximity to their targets. That's probably not possible anymore, and in any case his system eventually failed when he was attacked by those he was unprepared against.

Re:It is the shootback

[Cederic]

Leaving aside your thoughts on terrorism, it's an interesting question whether this is legitimate self-defence.

US soldiers in the US are operating the drones killing ISIS members in Syria/Iraq, which implicitly makes them legitimate targets for anybody trying not to die to a drone.

Under US law that's not the case, but under the basic principle of "I have the right to kill someone that's motivated, capable and intent on killing me, to save my own life" it's a far more interesting question.

Some loss already happened

[robi5]

Each of those 100 real estate addresses are worth many ten k less because living in an address where a jihadist can appear for shooting is less desirable. Loss of about 5-10 million USD before doing anything. Since media is their enabler, perhaps censorship doesn't appear avoidable.

Re:Some loss already happened

[Bite The Pillow]

Says who, Zillow? Do you have some real estate sales to cite since, I don't know, yesterday? Or whenever the hell the news actually hit? Wednesday I assume. Are you a realtor?

You made a claim. Based on what? Blind ass retarded assumption?

How many Americans, who are actually going to buy a house any time soon, is this going to affect? Or are they going to be more influenced by 1) What they can afford 2) Where ISIS is, and isn't 3) Commute times 4) Distance from schools if applicable

I heard you say "Something happened and everyone in the world is both knowledgeable and a pussy." Is that what you meant?

Re:Some loss already happened

[robi5]

My impeccably logical rational friend, loosen up a bit :-)

Don't forget: location, location, location :-) Speaking of pussiness: if you buy one of those addresses, and happen to look a bit like the guy who lived there, and have three small kids, "courage" is not in the context of your bravery, more like not exposing your children to avoidable risk. If you didn't know, US real estate prices in these - probably - nice areas are impacted by new neighbors who are not of the majority race.

Also, proper notification of these guys by government agencies, and other preparations may also amount to a few millions. US officials probably don't want the type of revenge terrorism that killed most of a journal's staff in France a couple of months ago.

Gun control ...

[drnb]

Targeting those with the ability to shoot back seems like a less than cunning plan.

Unless the addresses are in jurisdictions that heavily restrict the private possession of firearms.

In other news water is wet!

[gorehog]

So ISIS wants to kill US soldiers? Wow! Holy shit! Clearly this is a surprising development!

Towns must not have the OPSEC memo

[drnb]

Various towns around here must not have gotten the OPSEC memo. For years they have flown banners on main street with local service members names and faces.

Personally I think it is a nice tribute and hope it continues. These service members are at a greater driving their car on the highway than from ISIS. Lets not get all hysterical, which is what ISIS wants.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[UnknownSoldier]

/Oblg. Captain Obvious ...

Captain Caveman
Captain Crunch
Captain Falcon
Captain Jack Sparrow
Captain John Carter
Captain Obvious
Colonel Jack O'Neil
Colonel Sanders
Colonel Sandurz
Commander Riker
Commander Shepard
Corporal Punishment
General Confusion
General Hospital
General Protection Fault
General Recklessness
General Tso
Kernel Lingus
Kernel Panic
Major Dad
Major Damage
Major Malfunction
Major Woody
Private Affairs
Private Benjamin
Private Browsing
Private Parts
Sgt. Bilko
Sgt. Slaughter

Think of it as evolution in action...

[rgbatduke]

... not of us, but of them. ISIS is sort of like an extremely virulent infection. It is really bad if you get it, but it kills so fast that the patient dies before the infection has time to spread much, and it has EVERYBODY working to exterminate it. At the moment, all of the batshit crazy teenagers filled with Islamic Angst are heading ISIS-ward to be indoctrinated and (one supposes) employed eventually as suicide bombers. The only problem is, it requires a special kind of crazy to become a suicide bomber or fatwah-murderer, and the world has a finite supply of that kind of crazy. The other problem is that collecting all of the nut-cases in one place makes it comparatively easy to (eventually) hit them with the moral equivalent of an antibiotic.

The only thing that I can see ISIS accomplishing is -- eventually -- convincing the moderate Islamic world that it is better to be an atheist (or at worst, any other religionist) than to be Muslim. Pakistan made a major play in that direction yesterday when the woman was beaten and then burned to death for allegedly burning the Quran. It publicly stated that it was wrong for the public to have killed this woman for burning the Quran -- only it (the government) got to prosecute and then murder the woman for burning the Quran. It never occurred to them that it might be absolutely insane to murder somebody, ever, for burning a book that you bought, paid for, and own. Especially a violent, psychotic, hate-filled document like the Quran. Or a violent, psychotic, hate-filled document like the Bible (either part). Or any religious text, violent, psychotic, and hate-filled or not. Or a copy of Dirac's Quantum Mechanics (although there it might arguably be an act of criminal stupidity).

I'm tempted to go out and burn a Quran myself out of sheer sympathy and in protest and in support of freedom of speech and freedom of (and from!) religion. But first I'd have to buy a copy of the Quran, and who wants to reward the idiots who publish it? So I just bring up copies of the Skeptics Annotated Quran on my browser and then -- wait for it -- close the browser window. Just like that, I make my current copy of the Quran disappear, even worse than just burning it. Over and over again. I may even write a script to copy an online version of it and overwrite it repeatedly with random numbers. Some people are so very, very, 17th century clueless about information.

rgb

Re:Think of it as evolution in action...

[jez9999]

So I just bring up copies of the Skeptics Annotated Quran on my browser and then -- wait for it -- close the browser window. Just like that, I make my current copy of the Quran disappear, even worse than just burning it.

Always restart the PC to make sure it's not still in memory.

Libertarianism meets human nature.

[Anonymous Coward]

Inside the borders, there ought to be a state of society. Outside the borders, it ought to be assumed that there exists a state of nature.

Where the government is Constitutionally authorized, it can never be too big, except for fraud (the "military-industrial complex"). However, the right things will never happen unless and until the federal debt is properly addressed.

With the lifting of capital controls in the USA in 1974, it became possible to influence USA internal affairs by merely lending the federal government by purchasing treasury bills, bonds and other instruments. Foreign money means foreign control. The racists were right all along.

This message is brought to you by Karl Martell. EDUCATE YOURSELF.

Re:Kill them all. - Glass Factory!

[gabrieltss]

The only way you will stop this madness and actually have middle east peace - is turn the ENTIRE middle east into a giant glass factory! PERIOD! Leave NO WHERE for the radicals to go - everywhere will be done and over.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Applehu Akbar]

And General DeBillity. He's just...sick!

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Applehu Akbar]

They're accusing General Tso of being chicken.

Disarmed at home

[Anonymous Coward]

Contributing to the problem is that Federal law prohibits the carrying of personally-owned firearms on bases (regardless of possession of a CCP), effectively disarming our military not only at work, but during their commute and even in their home if they live in base housing (note that most base housing isn't on base). Even after the Fort Hood, Fort Dix, and Washington Navy Yard incidents, Congress appears to be unwilling to repeal that law and permit servicemembers to carry in order to defend themselves, each other, and their families. There was a draft bill in 2013 to do exactly this, but it died in committee.

Why wonder if it is a false flag?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not a honeypot but again a blatant false flag operation just created to
strike fear in the hearts of the average JohnDoe so to further limit civil liberties in the US.
There is not a single high profile target on this list.
So much information of high profile targets is out in the open on the internet and the
Islamic State tries to stir up it's followers with this list of nobodies?

Re:Why wonder if it is a false flag?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not a honeypot but again a blatant false flag operation just created to strike fear in the hearts of the average JohnDoe so to further limit civil liberties in the US. There is not a single high profile target on this list. So much information of high profile targets is out in the open on the internet and the Islamic State tries to stir up it's followers with this list of nobodies?

It goes even further than this. In fact, not a single Muslim on the planet wishes to perform any acts of violence whatsoever. Every violent act supposedly committed by Muslims in the last 50 years has actually been committed by Americans in order to foster fear of Muslims to advance the American Empire.

You don't put Chuck Norris on a list

[Anonymous Coward]

Chuck will tell you to put him on that list.
But Chuck does not have time for false flag operations like these.
Chuck goes only for the real thing.
For all we know he is already gearing up to put all this madness to an end.

Wrong targets

[Anonymous Coward]

Doxxing pawns is just a poor strategy. They should be doxxing the politicians who control those pawns. Hell they might get some local help.

Re:Wrong targets

[Anonymous Coward]

If ISIS wanted to hit at the true power, they'd need to go after the rich people who control the politicians. But, if they did that, they'd be completely annihilated before they even had time to blink.

ISLAM IS THE CANCER OF THE HUMAN RACE

[Anonymous Coward]

Swine urine is the answer

Different from Drone strikes exactly how?

[Anonymous Coward]

You've got to congratulate ISIS on at least one thing; they watched the dispassionate view of common decency and the value human life demonstrated by the Western forces towards their "enemies" and translated it into the only tools *they* had on hand.

Even as a kid I knew not pick fights with people who had less to lose that I did. Welcome to your own bum fight USA: you can't do anything to these folks that hasn't been done before, but they're still at the start of their own learning curve.

Why would this even be considered to be terrorism?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's been no formal declaration of war with "ISIS", but the US got out of the habit of that ages ago anyway. It is indisputable that the US is bombing ISIS targets and supplying arms to ISIS enemies, so doesn't that mean that there is as close to a formal state of war between ISIS and the US as happens these days?

Why is it only allowed to be fought on ISIS's soil?

Re:Kill them all. - Glass Factory!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, because all the people who emigrated from the part of the world and are now living in Europe and Africa and North and South America and the whole freakin' rest of the world won't be radicalized at ALL by the mindless slaughter of their entire extended family.

Nope, not a bit. Just keep on killin' brown folks. It's been working so well, after all.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

They better not go after General Disarray. That would just be a bridge too far for me.

Re:Why would this even be considered to be terrori

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is it only allowed to be fought on ISIS's soil?

Yes, I also find the outrage puzzling. In a world where every day roughly 20,000 children die of poverty, I'm not really seeing why it would matter if ISIS somehow found a way to kill a few soldiers in the USA.

Actually they are the same

[Anonymous Coward]

You sez:

... you look at the leadership of ISIS, and you see the same kind of people ...

Perhaps you haven't have the time to digest this little bit of reality yet ...
 
The top guy of ISIS is a Muslim while the top guy of the United States of America is ... guess what ... a Muslims !!

Cabal and cabal

[Anonymous Coward]

... the NSA is in league with ISIS?

NSA is a cabal, ISIS is also a cabal

Who can guarantee that Cabal A doesn't work with Cabal B ?

I mean, can you?

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[nitehawk214]

Careful, that Colonel Jack O'Neil with one L has no sense of humor at all.

Re:List culled from public sources, and here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

Add to the list:

Major Asshole
Gunners Mate First Class Philip Asshole

Hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you saying it's turtles all the way down?

Same race, different cultures, different results

[Anonymous Coward]

Same race, different cultures, different results.

Culture is far more fluid and changing than you seem to think. NK and SK have enormously different current cultures, even if historically they share a similar culture.

IOW your example exactly supports GP's point.

False Flag?

[Anonymous Coward]

yet it's the corporate misinfotainment industry that gives them so much power.
Kind of makes you wonder if ISIL or ISIS or WTF isn't really a false flag operation to boost the US agenda.

Where do I sign up?

[weweedmaniii]

So how does one get on this "list"? I have absolutely no problem with any hajis showing up on my doorstep, I'll gladly let them meet 72 virgins...or whatever is waiting for them...

The JEW Nited States?

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's what jews own talmud shows us all: 1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal."

2. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."

3. Sanhedrin 59a: "A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death."

4. Yebhamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."

5. Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."

6. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Do not save Goyim in danger of death."

7. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Show no mercy to the Goyim."

8. Choschen Hamm 388, 15: "If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."

9. Choschen Hamm 266,1: "A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing, Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people."

10. Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17: "A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."

11. Baba Necia 114, 6: "The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."

12. Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: "When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves."

13. Nidrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L: "Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night."

14. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."

16. Gad. Shas. 2:2: "A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl."

17. Tosefta. Aboda Zara B, 5: "If a goy kills a goy or a Jew, he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy, he is NOT responsible."

18. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388: "It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces."

19. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348: "All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples."

20. Tosefta, Abda Zara VIII, 5: "How to interpret the word 'robbery.' A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew. But a Jew is NOT forbidden to do all this to a goy."

21. Seph. Jp., 92, 1: "God has given the Jews power over the possessions and blood of all nations."

22. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156: "When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn deceive him, so that the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile, according to our law, belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has full right to seize it."

23. Schulchan Aruch, Johre Deah, 122: "A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean."

24. Nedarim 23b: "He who desires that none of his vows made during the year be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, 'Every vow which I may make in the future shall be null'. His vows are then invalid."

So let's not try to make jews "heros" or "saints" here, or even victims. You can clearly see what they think of you all (yes, non-jews are Goy/Goyim and Gentiles from above), and quoted straight from their own belief systems (their bible(s)). Why've Jews been kicked nation to nation since the beginning of time? Despoiling (robbing) Egypt perhaps? No wonder their Arab relatives hate them. France, Poland, Spain are they nazis too? They kicked them out. You jewish Dave?

Incitement is incitement no matter who does it

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't be silly - incitement to murder is still illegal. Your link about a public pedophile registry case has NOTHING to do with this.

It has everything to do with it. All you've shown here is that you don't understand what a "public pedophile registry" is, nor the kind of actions it foments, nor who is on it, nor why. You are one of those special kind of stupid people that is perfectly happy to pick up a pitchfork or let others do so when you have no idea what it is you are facing off against. If you had any wit at all, you would be aware that the conditions that lead to murdering (and considerable other maltreatment) of the people on those lists -- who are certainly not all "pedophiles" -- and even those that are, have already been sentenced and by the courts, are both initiated and maintained by social pathologies that stem directly from political and media rhetoric. Incitement, most definitely.

It is truly no wonder that things are so screwed up with people like you completely unaware of the status quo. You are one fucked-up unit. My kids understand this issue better than you do.

Check the sig, comment history

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no point in paying any attention to someone who is so clueless they don't understand what intellectual property law accomplishes, doesn't understand the whys, wherefores and consequences of the constitution, can't use capital letters, habitually name-calls, and more often than not constructs his posts out of a series of disjointed, typically poorly related, partial thoughts.

That's CTS. That's always been CTS.

FFS

[Anonymous Coward]

Hamburg, Dresden, Tokyo firestorms? Hiroshima? Nagasaki?

These were all events where civilians were burned alive, in very large numbers. And that isn't all of them by any means, just the well-known ones. The survivors were all horrific to consider.

You can rationalize the actions that led to those results all you want, but you can't say that the USG hasn't been quite effective at committing atrocities upon civilians; because they surely have. It's not speculation -- it's history.

As for today, pretty sure firing drone rockets into civilian weddings and at groups that contain children count somewhat in this regard as well, but you know, those are Muslims so who cares, right? Right?

You apologists make me sick, living off your red-white-and blue delusions as you do. Weak-minded history-ignorant misanthropes, the lot of you, cowering behind brittle veneers of nationalism and jingoism while the government's hands drip with blood and ruined lives are passed out right and left.

Not even pitiful. Just disgusting.