In order:
- Islamic State (IS) is, literally, an apocalyptic death cult. Which is to say, they believe that they are all going to die in a violent fashion that will lead to the end of the world; that the various atrocities that they commit in the process are all pleasing to the entity that they worship; and that there is no point to reason with IS on this, because they’re right and will gleefully die for their beliefs. Your basic High Fantasy Evil-With-A-Capital-E Cult, in other words.
- You probably didn’t need this Atlantic article to tell you this, although it’s nice to have the background material on the aforementioned death cult. It’s a very detailed article, by the way. Well worth your time.
- Under no circumstances should anybody who can write “I even enjoyed their company” after meeting one or more of IS’s High Priests should be allowed anywhere near a position of authority or responsibility or influence when it comes to American foreign policy. I understand and appreciate that author Graeme Wood went on to write “…and that frightened me as much as anything else,” but unfortunately better safe than sorry when it comes to possible ethical infections.
And one other thing: contra the Atlantic article, there is a very simple strategy to use when it comes to apocalyptic death cults who aren’t afraid to die; you kill them. From as far away as possible, so that they can’t kill you back easily. This can be done, especially when the cult in question adamantly refuses to hide its membership or activities. Again, it’s like a High Fantasy Evil Cult: you just have to look for the local equivalent of the black robes and the flame-shaped daggers.
Look, IS burns people alive. And they’re going to get worse. So I make no apologies for simplifying the moral calculus, here.
Moe Lane
*sigh*
.
Yes to all of the above.
.
On one paw, the more craniorectally-impacted leftists will insist (nay, INSIST!) that the american religious-right are the moral equivalents of IS no matter what The Atlantic or any other news rag says ..
.
On the other paw, the more reactionary religious-right will assert that anyone who doesn’t fall in line with their religiosity is the moral equivalent of IS no matter what.
.
This puts some of us – those who think Knife Party** sampled a pretty good solution to the IS problem but don’t believe in the great sky-sugar-daddy (or the flying spaghetti monster, for that matter) in an awkward position.
.
Alas.
.
Mew
.
.
** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKTpWi5itOM
They are begging for attention, so I say let’s nuke the entire Death Cult from obit. Allah will know his own.
one point, if i may…. being personally charming is not incompatible with being a deranged psychopath. Hannibal Lecter would be great to have dinner with as long as you were not on the menu. as far as the rest of it… this reminds me so much of ST:TNG when they were deciding whether to get their hands a bit dirty to destroy the Borg or to remain pure and let the Federation be destroyed. IS needs to die and any and all workable tools need to be employed. will innocents die? yep. will we survive and hopefully prosper? yep. can we ignore those who think that we need to submit and/or die? i know i can.
I take it it is now acceptable to argue for the use of “targeted special munitions,” a/k/a nukes, against this scum. If we had a real leader in the White House, (but, of course, we have a Democrat, instead) Raqqa would be a sea of molton glass. Just perfect as a parking lot for the Greater Syrian Mall. I do not argue for indiscriminate nucking back to the Stone Age, but we can make a statement that would stop this madness. Besides, they are already in the Stone Age. (I never thought I would get to use these sixties era military quotes again. Good times.)
No, it is still not acceptable to argue for nuking here. Aside from the fact that it’s wicked to commit mass murder, IS seems determined to put itself in situations – and, more importantly, places – where an A-10 can actually be used as a selective good-government tool; it seems downright rude to take advantage of that.
….Mind you, if we can ever con IS into gathering up its forces for a set-piece battle outside of a town… then by all means: let us introduce them to the concept of a thermobaric weapon.
May I ask your opinion on the use of a “Rods from God” system? No residual radiation, and limited “collateral damage” …
.
Mew
It’s a natural extension of America’s basic military instinct, which is to control the airspace and only allow stuff we approve off to move around freely.
Unlike Star Wars, America has moved to the point that making as many of the actual bad guys die, from a great range, in large numbers, is the preferred method. ‘Rods from God’ is lovely except for dealing with re-entry and having the satellite in place, over the target area (and then figuring out how to re-arm it.) The better is a MOAB (if in the open) or targeted weapons. The MOAB cleans out a large area, the targeted weapon – well, that means you drop just one bomb instead of fifty.* And that is much easier on the logistics train. And Logistics is where the USA is the undisputed champ.
*Imagine 2 A-6 Intruders over the IJN carriers at Midway. There would have been no need for the second strike.
Well there was that open field that they think the last battle is supposed to take place, but conning them there would require ground troops, and thus prevent use of nukes, but it’d draw the whole lot of them out into the open.
I am not aarguing for mass murder. Nuclear weapons are just weapons and can be used at the tactical level. Fuel Air Explosives (FAE) are another tool. The emphasis is on tool and weapon. When fighting cowards that routinely hide behind women and children and use civilian clothes, the Law of War allows for the collateral death and destruction of those that aid or merely fail to resist shuch tactics. A morter is a weapon that causes “mass destruction” when used in civilian areas and yet we and the death cultists use them. Part of the problem here is the Left’s very effective demonization of “EVIL” nuclear weapons. Also, a small nuclear tactical weapon used against a command headquarters, or my favorite, the local Republican Guard facility, may have the same demonstration effect that it had against Janan. Saves a lot of lives if it works. We need to stop thinking emotionally and start using reason in this area. Still not arguing for gunning down civilians, but at some point, after being warned of the consequences, they are part of the problem if they stay. Besides, FAEs killed more people in Dresden than nukes. I do not want to be banned ffrom this site, I like this site ant all who post here, but this is an important issue that we need to face. It should be discussed.
As a believing Christian and former professional military officer, I have thought long and hard about this and I urge all to do so. These choices are morally frought and hard whichever side of the debate you come down.
Fair enough.
There are innocent people in Raqqa currently living under oppression and praying they aren’t the next to die. So no we shouldn’t nuke them.
There is something to be said for a policy of only using NBCs in response to NBCs. a) I’ve no idea what ISIS has actually used. b) If we were going do this, we probably should have used them earlier.
When dealing with a death cult, one also quickly finds those familiar to opposing said cult, and allies with them. If we just told the Peshmerga “You keep what you kill/conquer,” we’d be free of this mess quickly.
.
I know, Turkey would whine, but what have they done for us since the Iron Curtain fell? Besides, don’t they benefit from diverting Kurdish restlessness South-ward?
*Technically*, we’d probably have to throw some pseudo-Marshall-plan in the mix, the Peshmerga are .. a little cash-strapped.
.
That said, we’d also have to phrase it in a way that doesn’t completely piss off the Turks .. although, frankly, this is less of a concern for me this year than it was pre-Erdogan…
.
Mew
I think The kurds would do okay with the oilfields. They would have earlier, but *we* wouldn’t let anyone buy it from them in our quixotic attempts to keep Iraq in it’s original, cobbled-together-by-colonialists form.
I would encourage caution there, you appear on the border of agreeing with Joe Biden.
.
Mew
*shrugs*
Eh. Stopped clocks, twice daily.
I’m thinking B-52s and lots and lots of dumb bombs would result in a remarkable change of attitude.
Just sayin’.
Future glass parking-lots aside, people seem to be less disturbed by firebombing Tokyo and Dresden than by vaporizing Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
.
.
.
I’m forced to be pacifist by inclination, because if I weren’t I’d be very, very *thorough*. No sense in half-assing and ass-kicking.
*an ass-kicking.
I’d suggest that many of those so disturbed by Hiroshima and Nagasaki are wimps who aren’t really aware of Tokyo and Dresden, much less Purple, or how many non-Japanese Asians Imperial Japan was killing on a monthly basis.