ISIS on the offensive in Iraq

[Husar]

Actually, we DO do this - the Foreign Office will advise Britons not to travel, and if they do so it is at their own risk. That doesn't mean the government will do nothing if you get captured by IS, but it does mean that if you DO get captured you've been told there's not much they can do.

I think most countries do this, I just wasn't aware of whether it change their behavior a lot when you go to the country anyway.

Gnashing of teeth and pulling of hair is cold? What do you consider expressive?

You may well think me strange, but I have considered this issue before and I am decided - there is only one correct decision, and that is not to facilitate the monsters who do these things. The best way to do that is to slit their throats and rip out their windpipes, but failing that not paying accomplishes the same goal.
[...]
I honestly find that hard to believe when the last thing in that post was, "... scream and curse and cry and gnash my teach and tear the hair from my head..." sic. I could have said "I would still have been anguished" but I actually painted a picture for you and you still missed it.

Yes, I actually must have missed it, twice...my apologies. It did not happen on purpose.
I need to finish my assignment, maybe it's distracting me too much.

[Montmorency]

No, not at all. If you hold a gun to my mother's head and demand I strangle a little girl I am not responsible for my mother's death if you shoot her - but I am responsible if I kill the little girl. Likewise, if you kidnap a member of my family and demand money to fund your terrorism for their release I am responsible for what you do with that money.

To be a little more technical - I become responsible when I engage with you on your terms, because then I agree your terms are reasonable and I enter into a contract with you, my family member's life for the lives of others.

Seriously? By my recollection, this makes your position different than in 2012. At any rate, pseudo-solipsism is not a moral device that can rescue the continually-benighted.

[HopAlongBunny]

But "engaging with them on their terms" sort of defines the entire "War on Terror".
The suspensions of rights, the breaking of the rule of law, torture, deportation and identifying a class of citizen as enemy.
The terrorists have roundly won the battle of ideology.

[Pannonian]

But "engaging with them on their terms" sort of defines the entire "War on Terror".
The suspensions of rights, the breaking of the rule of law, torture, deportation and identifying a class of citizen as enemy.
The terrorists have roundly won the battle of ideology.

Engaging the enemy on their terms isn't by definition a bad thing. Engaging them on terms that benefit them is a bad thing. There are any number of ways in which we can engage ISIS on their terms which would harm them and protect us. There are any number of ways in which we can keep to our liberal democratic ideals which would benefit ISIS.

[HopAlongBunny]

Engaging the enemy on their terms isn't by definition a bad thing. Engaging them on terms that benefit them is a bad thing. There are any number of ways in which we can engage ISIS on their terms which would harm them and protect us. There are any number of ways in which we can keep to our liberal democratic ideals which would benefit ISIS.

That sounds much like the: "well they won't be coming for me" defence. Good luck with that.
The War on Terror has mission creep written all over it. What exactly is terrorism? What public dissent rates as an act of terror? What communication?
Much of the legislation amounts to "Humpty Dumpty Laws: It means whatever I say it means, no more no less.
And good luck with a challenge. Evidence can be "secret"; though governments have been forced to lift the veil in some cases, that requires a request, a judgement and pretty much the good will of the gov't.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...rorism/277844/

[Pannonian]

That sounds much like the: "well they won't be coming for me" defence. Good luck with that.
The War on Terror has mission creep written all over it. What exactly is terrorism? What public dissent rates as an act of terror? What communication?
Much of the legislation amounts to "Humpty Dumpty Laws: It means whatever I say it means, no more no less.
And good luck with a challenge. Evidence can be "secret"; though governments have been forced to lift the veil in some cases, that requires a request, a judgement and pretty much the good will of the gov't.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...rorism/277844/

There are Muslim preachers who are taking the with our acceptance of all cultures as relative and their knowledge of our liberal tendencies. Promoting the most backward forms of Islam and arguing that it has a place here and so on. I take Ataturk's line on this; there are many cultures, but only one civilisation. If they want to undermine our civilisation, they can bugger off to where their ideas have a history.

I can't find the url at the moment, but I've read one Guardian interview with one of these preachers, who argued that man and woman were biologically different, and therefore Islam's treatment of the sexes was correct, and our treatment of them was corrupt. Corrupt it may or may not be, but equality of the sexes is also a British thing, and if he doesn't like it, then he can bugger off. If he's actively preaching that we're corrupt because of stuff like that, then we should bugger him off whether he likes it or not.

[Brenus]

Well, it is quite easy to deal with these preachers. Apply the law. Ah, I forgot. No law in UK. Hate speeches are the one against religions, not the against the religions that spread hate and discrimination...
And call to murder is freedom of speech as well, no?
In France, to call to kill the gays and the infidels is not considered as an opinion, but an incitement to murder/violence. To wear a burka is not considered as an element of fashion but an element of fascism as the tenets of this faith are against the principles written in the Constitution and basic human rights. So, as such, it is recognised as a political statement from a political party that doesn't respect the Constitution so is not legal.
See, it is easy. Common sense and no hypocrisy.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think most countries do this, I just wasn't aware of whether it change their behavior a lot when you go to the country anyway.

Well, can a government really abandon someone because they travelled to a particular part of the world? Not really, not unless you want to accept the principle that yyou citizens are, in effect, only citizens within your borders.

Yes, I actually must have missed it, twice...my apologies. It did not happen on purpose.
I need to finish my assignment, maybe it's distracting me too much.

Your apology is accepted.

[Myth]

http://www.conflictarm.com/publications/

Plenty of US weapons. Some assault rifles have "Property of the US government" on them. What is this?

[rory_20_uk]

Given the Iraqi army (financed and supposedly trained by the USA) ran away abandoning pretty much everything I'm hardly surprised.

[Viking]

According to this article, coalition airstrikes are killing 1 000 IS fighters a month:

Overall, Operation Inherent Resolve (the U.S.-led combined joint task force in Iraq and Syria) is killing about 1,000 ISIS fighters a month. The death toll roughly matches the number of new recruits ISIS is able to field each month, effectively capping its manpower strength at about 30,000 to 40,000 fighters.

That sounds rather extreme. But if it is true, and IS fighters also happen to have lower empathy levels and higher psychopathy scores than average, it would in effect be a eugenics program.

[Crandar]

According to [URL="http://www.newsweek.com/hunting-isis-were-killing-1000-fighters-month-[/URL]

Stupid numbers. On the one hand, they claim that ISIS has 30,000 fighters and on the other, they pretend that the Kurds and their aristrikes kill several thousands of them.
It's a typical contradiction of an overblown propaganda, if it was true, the half of Iraq would be controlled by a couple of patrols.

Never trust the participants to give you an accurate casualty figure. The world has improved since Arrian and his Persian genocide, but not much.

[Viking]

Doesn't look like you read what it said. They say IS recruits ~ 1000 new fighters a month, and that their airstrikes kill ~ 1000 IS fighters a month; so those numbers add up. Verifying them is another matter. The core of the statements seems to be that they think the number of IS fighters is currently about constant.