Comrades in Arms Discussion Board

(11-01-2015, 04:27 PM)Watchmen link Wrote:Speed up the war effort so we can give everyone what they want sooner. The refugees want to return home and so does Europe. If this is not at least shortly possible because of a lack of military strength, i some think funds should be channeled to the war effort instead of providing accommodation. ISIS are bronze age scum with 21st century weapons technology in their hands, there is no way any intelligence could come out of them to generate capital where on earth do they get their funding? Instead of deploying more soldiers i wonder if it would be more viable to investigate this issue and put a stop to it.

It's not going to happen. The west will not act, they could have already if they wanted. ISIS will only be fought if they manage to cut the oil supply, as is usual. Until such time, any fight against ISIS will stay a token war only.

Yes, they want to go home, but unless the war is over, they won't. Until such time, House Stark is right - Winter is coming. You can't leave them out in tents.

(11-01-2015, 04:42 PM)Watchmen link Wrote:Hell, if it comes to discussing practical war strategies, fuck the geneva convention and fuck ethics, use napalm bombs and mustard gas, take captives and pull out their teeth. The ISIS do not treat people with basic human rights and would do the same if they were in our position and had the first world's resources. This certainly deserves an exception and think of all benefits of winning the war sooner.

Are you serious? Because one side doesn't treat people right, you want to stoop to the same level? I can't believe what I am reading.

You might think differently, but the ends do NOT justify the means. If we give up basic human decency just because the others behave like animals, they have won no matter how this ends. WE should be better than THEM. If we aren't, what right do we have to claim superiority? None.

Yes i am being serious. I think the reason justifies the means. This isnt a contest of fair sportsmanship and decency, lives are at stake. If human suffering was measured on a scale the hardship and suffering of millions far outweigh the suffering of at most thousands of radically insane warmongers.

(11-01-2015, 04:42 PM)Watchmen link Wrote:Hell, if it comes to discussing practical war strategies, fuck the geneva convention and fuck ethics, use napalm bombs and mustard gas, take captives and pull out their teeth. The ISIS do not treat people with basic human rights and would do the same if they were in our position and had the first world's resources. This certainly deserves an exception and think of all benefits of winning the war sooner.

You must be fucking with me. My family are Vietnamese refugees. (My cousins and I are born in US though, but the previous generations on my mom's side all moved over to the US). My mom swam away from a communist prison mind you... my dad fled the country during the draft for the Vietnam-Cambodian war since people get wreck to shit there. I've seen some images of napalm bombs effects and ITS NOT PRETTY!!! You'll end up hitting civilians more often then you'll hit terrorists as well and it'll be hell for everyone. You can say all the crap you want, but if you're privileged to be able to sit there and encourage bullfuckery of things that'll violate human rights and cause war crime, that's a very low point to stoop to.

(11-01-2015, 05:06 PM)Watchmen link Wrote:Yes i am being serious. I think the reason justifies the means. This isnt a contest of fair sportsmanship and decency, lives are at stake. If human suffering was measured on a scale the hardship and suffering of millions far outweigh the suffering of at most thousands of radically insane warmongers.

This sounds remarkably like what Adolf Hitler used to justify the Holocaust. "Hey, they're not even real humans. They are trying to infiltrate Europe, take over our culture. We must fight back. Let's forget about fair sportsmanship. They are animals, let's treat them like that".

It seems, unfortunately, that not everybody has learned the lessons out of this disaster.

There is a concentration camp close to were I used to live. I would recommend to visit it one of these days. That's what happens if you throw decency and humanity overboard.

You are wrong. This IS a contest of fair sportsmanship and decency. What exactly are you defending when you throw these things overboard? You only become what you are fighting.

Most of all, we do not even NEED to stoop to this level. The west is doing nothing. If they would ISIS would already be beaten. We have more men, better equipment, everything. If the west wanted, we would have an army there in no time at all.

(11-01-2015, 05:07 PM)Phantom link Wrote:You must be fucking with me. My family are Vietnamese refugees. (My cousins and I are born in US though, but the previous generations on my mom's side all moved over to the US). My mom swam away from a communist prison mind you... my dad fled the country during the draft for the Vietnam-Cambodian war since people get wreck to shit there. I've seen some images of napalm bombs effects and ITS NOT PRETTY!!! You'll end up hitting civilians more often then you'll hit terrorists as well and it'll be hell for everyone. You can say all the crap you want, but if you're privileged to be able to sit there and encourage bullfuckery of things that'll violate human rights and cause war crime, that's a very low point to stoop to.

You have been displaced from your home by war, your contrywomen are being raped and your countrymen are being killed in cold blood. They have destroyed your homes, taken your property forced you to travel by foot to a foreign land where the people hate you and wish you had died back in your country instead of coming over. What is this for?oh simple they just want to conquer the world and return everything back to the bronze ages where we stone people and chop off genitals/limbs. Sound like a great alternative? I am thinking of the suffering of immigrants and the future of the world. Your parents probably would rather be back in their homecountry than forced to leave because of the communists, and these people are worse. War refugees would be the first to know the of war and the justification in ending it. I dont know how you can sit there and ignore the suffering of millions of innocent lives just because you think evil men that seek the end of the world deserve to be treated with respect.

@Alwareen the number of jews murdered is many times larger than the number of ISIS lives. And tell me aside from what Hitler thought, were the Jews doing anything wrong?

ISIS can be beaten without replicating their dark methods. All that is necessary is western political will, which is not existent.

(11-01-2015, 05:32 PM)Variable link Wrote:ISIS can be beaten without replicating their dark methods. All that is necessary is western political will, which is not existent.

Which is absolutely the reason why i think we should turn to alternative methods because the current ones are not working.

Well, Lebanon with a population of 4 million accepted 1 million refugees and still the country didn't crumble. And that's way more refugees than in entire EU. Also, check Turkey and Jordan.

(11-01-2015, 05:29 PM)Watchmen link Wrote:@Alwareen the number of jews murdered is nothing to the number of ISIS lives. And tell me aside from what Hitler thought were the Jews doing anything wrong?

I am sorry, numbers are irrelevant. One, a thousand, a million, it doesn't make a difference. If you'd ask me, the most horrific aspect of the holocaust is not the numbers, or the heaps of corpses, the most horrific aspect is how it turned genocide into an industry. It turned the process of mass murder into a well-oiled machinery, with efficiency reports, book keeping, a complete dehumanization of the process. Even if only a handful of Jews were murdered instead of six million, it would still be one of the most despicable acts in history.

As to Hitler's motivation, I guess as a German I am more involved in that, but I thought it was common knowledge.

The catholic church did not allow people to lend out money and ask for interest. Jews could. That lead to a lot of Jewish bankers. Hitler was from Austria, he grew up in Vienna, more or less in poverty. He saw, however, that Jews were wealthy (of course this was pretty selective vision, but then, you only ever see what you want to see).

Hitler blamed the Jews for trying to take over the world. He thought they were secretly trying to get into key positions to make the whole world a Jewish state. The ideas of Zionism became popular by that time (early 20th century) and events like the Balfour declaration (1917 I believe) further fueled his belief that the Jews were conquering the world.

The destruction of the Jewish people was, in his opinion, self-defense. He was convinced that the Jews posed a danger to the "Occident" (There are speeches of Goebbels using the word "Abendland", the German translation of Occident, which incidentally is also the 'A' in PEGIDA, the new German right-wing movement). In his twisted world view, he was doing the world a favor. He was convinced that he was doing the right thing, and, you know, that the ends justified the means. He was, incidentally, quite surprised by the UK entering the war because he thought they would share his opinion.

Quote:ISIS can be beaten without replicating their dark methods. All that is necessary is western political will, which is not existent.

Exactly my point. If the west wanted to, they'd already be history.

(11-01-2015, 05:41 PM)Watchmen link Wrote:Which is absolutely the reason why i think we should turn to alternative methods because the current ones are not working.

What "current ones"? The occasional bomb dropped?

I think perhaps the UK's idea of taking refugees from the camps around Syria is a better idea than just letting anyone in who manages to make it to Europe, although the number (20,000) the Government is proposing to take is pitiful.

Otherwise only those with the resources to pay smugglers (scum getting rich out of misery) and the strength to make the journey are helped, whilst the poorest/weakest are left behind. Germany's approach just sends out the message that if you make it you'll be welcome and that is encouraging people from all over the world to try their luck. Clearly we can't take all the world's poor and even Germany has had to close their borders now, whilst criticising other countries for not taking more people but they decided to signal that all are welcome, thus aggravating the problem, without agreeing this approach with those countries first. People are also worried that welcoming everybody who turns up could allow ISIS supporters (or other terrorists) to get in and taking people from the refugee camps after vetting them avoids that risk.

Providing financial support to Syria's neighbouring countries to care for refugees also seems like a sensible option that will make it easier for them to return home and rebuild their lives and country once the situation is under control (if that ever happens of course), although I recognise that even with such support those countries can only accommodate a certain number of people before it causes problems.

In the UK any person with children (including refugees) gets priority for social housing, so single people in desperate need of a home get pushed to the bottom of the list (basically you have no chance as a single person unless you're disabled enough to get priority), so naturally people see any influx of people as harmful to their own chances. This is largely due to successive Governments failing to build much needed social housing and selling it off at a discount to tenants, as they're obsessed with private ownership and keeping house prices high but that's out of the control of the average person with no home. I believe the Government is planning to introduce a 5  year residency test to qualify for social housing, which would help but I don't know if that would survive a challenge in the EU courts.

(11-01-2015, 05:51 PM)Alwarren link Wrote:He was, incidentally, quite surprised by the UK entering the war because he thought they would share his opinion.

I believe that the genocide started with killing the disabled, homosexuals and other 'undesirables' before Hitler moved onto the Jews.

Sadly, if it was happening now and was limited to the disabled I fear the UK wouldn't mind as it's doing its best to kill them off itself, although in a less obvious, more British and bureacratic way by denying them social security, which is their only means of survival. The Government and right-wing media has also stirred up hatred of the disabled as an unaffordable drain on resources (much like the justifications used in Nazi Germany) and disabled people are reporting increasing hate crimes against them as a result.

The UN has actually opened an investigation into the UK's treatment of disabled people but they don't really have any power to do anything other than produce a critical report, so it's unlikely to help much.

(11-01-2015, 05:29 PM)Watchmen link Wrote:Your parents probably would rather be back in their homecountry than forced to leave because of the communists, and these people are worse. ... I dont know how you can sit there and ignore the suffering of millions of innocent lives just because you think evil men that seek the end of the world deserve to be treated with respect.

Don't make assumptions about my parents or my family when you don't know them. A good amount of them would've went over to the US since their test scores are high enough to go abroad anyways.


I am not ignoring the suffering of millions of innocent lives nor do I believe that evil men that seek the end of the world should be respected either. Yeah, ISIS should die, but do you really think that just throwing in chemical weapons, napalms, or other stuff that are banned by Geneva convention going to solve anything? You wield too much power and you can go corrupt yourself. Rally the people to support such means by using xenophobic tactics. Now that someone's going to use it just for the sake of using it as an excuse "we must do all means to destroy evil". Think of how a leader can manipulate people to justify their use of using banned weapons for other means now that they have already use it.


In all cases of war, its not just enemy territories that you hit, but also civilians get hit in the crossfire. Also the environmental damage by such means.


If the west want to end it, then they might as well just do it. The question is why don't they? They have enough firepower to do it.