More ISIS atrocities

[Tbrightson]

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3135913/Sickening-new-ISIS-video-shows-caged-prisoners-lowered-swimming-pool-drowned-shot-RPG-blown-explosive-filled-necklaces.html

Vile jihadis fighting for the Islamic State in Iraq have brutally murdered five prisoners by locking them in a metal cage and lowering them into a swimming pool.

Filmed in the ISIS stronghold of Mosul, the sickening seven minute long video uses expensive underwater cameras to film the terrified men as they sink below the surface with no hope of escape.

Shortly afterwards the cage is lifted back out of the water, with the dying men - who are understood to have been accused of spying - seen foaming at the mouth as they lie motionless on the floor of the cage, piled on top of one another.

Elsewhere in the video, ISIS militants are filmed brutally killing prisoners by locking them in a car and shooting them with a grenade launcher, while another group of jihadis chain a set of prisoners together with explosive necklaces which are then detonated.

 

[powerofk]

Ugh. I’m not watching that video, btw. I don’t need to be disturbed more than your small quotation made me. It’s looking like ISIS has taken notes from every totalitarian government of the 20th century - especially Stalin’s Soviet Union. First, exterminate “threating” minorities. Then, go after stalwarts who aren’t “loyal” enough. One of these days, they’ll execute someone simply for getting tired arms from clapping (Stalin was infamous for executing the first person to stop clapping after one of his speeches - even if that person had clapped for 15 minutes).

But again - only God’s army can defeat Satan’s army. We need to keep praying that these atrocities stop, and (hopefully) that ISIS will wake up and realize that they are not performing God’s will, but Satan’s.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Their atrocities continue to get worse. It is sickening and disturbing that they can’t be stopped and they continue to terrorize the whole world with their videos.

 

[Tomdstone]

Their atrocities continue to get worse. It is sickening and disturbing that they can’t be stopped and they continue to terrorize the whole world with their videos.

Barbaric. I hope this will not lead to nuclear war which could be even more barbaric and brutal.

 

[Dorothy]

Ugh. I’m not watching that video, btw. I don’t need to be disturbed more than your small quotation made me. It’s looking like ISIS has taken notes from every totalitarian government of the 20th century - especially Stalin’s Soviet Union. First, exterminate “threating” minorities. Then, go after stalwarts who aren’t “loyal” enough. One of these days, they’ll execute someone simply for getting tired arms from clapping (Stalin was infamous for executing the first person to stop clapping after one of his speeches - even if that person had clapped for 15 minutes).

But again - only God’s army can defeat Satan’s army. We need to keep praying that these atrocities stop, and (hopefully) that ISIS will wake up and realize that they are not performing God’s will, but Satan’s.

That last sentence says it all! We who are blessed with the gift of faith in Our Lord Jesus Christ need to pray for our enemies, and that God’s holy will be done.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Barbaric. I hope this will not lead to nuclear war which could be even more barbaric and brutal.

If ISIS gets a dirty bomb and uses it or if they get access to nuclear weapons who knows what could happen.

 

[Latias]

If ISIS gets a dirty bomb and uses it or if they get access to nuclear weapons who knows what could happen.

A state will not give them access to a nuclear weapon since nuclear weapons are too valuable to a state to give away to a bunch of apocalyptic terrorists.

 

[Ridgerunner]

A state will not give them access to a nuclear weapon since nuclear weapons are too valuable to a state to give away to a bunch of apocalyptic terrorists.

Maybe not, but somebody will eventually sell them one if they want it and can pay for it. My guess would be North Korea.

But Barack Obama promised this situation, and he delivered.

 

[Latias]

Maybe not, but somebody will eventually sell them one if they want it and can pay for it. My guess would be North Korea.

But Barack Obama promised this situation, and he delivered.

Well, if North Korea wants to sell nuclear weapons, the US should try to bargain with North Korea by at least restricting sanctions and normalizing relations, and giving them aid. The US intelligence community should know about North Korean intentions to sell their weapons. Besides, North Korea will not let its nuclear weapons fall into the hand of terrorists, since that would be the pretext for military intervention, and perhaps nuclear retaliation.

Still, a nuclear weapon is too valuable for North Korea to give up. It is a powerful strategic weapon and deterrent (although their tests only had a 10-20 kt yield) to give to terrorists.

The notion of ISIS acquiring nuclear weapons is a fantasy unless you could convince me that the Islamic State can develop the infrastructure to procure weapons-grade plutonium or weapon and the technical expertise to assemble a nuclear weapon

Obama? Why mention him?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Well, if North Korea wants to sell nuclear weapons, the US should try to bargain with North Korea by at least restricting sanctions and normalizing relations, and giving them aid. The US intelligence community should know about North Korean intentions to sell their weapons. Besides, North Korea will not let its nuclear weapons fall into the hand of terrorists, since that would be the pretext for military intervention, and perhaps nuclear retaliation.

Still, a nuclear weapon is too valuable for North Korea to give up. It is a powerful strategic weapon and deterrent (although their tests only had a 10-20 kt yield) to give to terrorists.

The notion of ISIS acquiring nuclear weapons is a fantasy unless you could convince me that the Islamic State can develop the infrastructure to procure weapons-grade plutonium or weapon and the technical expertise to assemble a nuclear weapon

Obama? Why mention him?

One should not make assumptions about NoKo, and certainly not that it would not sell nuke weapons or technology. It is widely believed that NoKo is providing some tech aid to Iran in its program. Why would ISIS be different.

Likely NoKo is the one place from which the U.S. has the least intelligence. And the U.S. found out long ago that no agreement with NoKo is worth anything.

Why Obama? Because he’s the one responsible for the ISIS/Iran war. Could have prevented it and knew it, but didn’t. Just giving credit where credit is due.

 

[garn9173]

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3135913/Sickening-new-ISIS-video-shows-caged-prisoners-lowered-swimming-pool-drowned-shot-RPG-blown-explosive-filled-necklaces.html

Vile jihadis fighting for the Islamic State in Iraq have brutally murdered five prisoners by locking them in a metal cage and lowering them into a swimming pool.

Filmed in the ISIS stronghold of Mosul, the sickening seven minute long video uses expensive underwater cameras to film the terrified men as they sink below the surface with no hope of escape.

Shortly afterwards the cage is lifted back out of the water, with the dying men - who are understood to have been accused of spying - seen foaming at the mouth as they lie motionless on the floor of the cage, piled on top of one another.

Elsewhere in the video, ISIS militants are filmed brutally killing prisoners by locking them in a car and shooting them with a grenade launcher, while another group of jihadis chain a set of prisoners together with explosive necklaces which are then detonated.

Meanwhile in the United States, the media is obsessed with scrubbing from history any mention of the Civil War and the Confederacy and forgetting about the lives lost in last week’s tragedy.

 

[Tomdstone]

Meanwhile in the United States, the media is obsessed with scrubbing from history any mention of the Civil War and the Confederacy and forgetting about the lives lost in last week’s tragedy.

I consider these executions by ISIS to be brutal, horrific and barbaric. I don’t see any evidence of the victims being spies, but if they were, then is it true that other countries have executed spies, such as for example, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg? It is true that there were other historical atrocities since war is horrific, as was slavery of the black man and there were a lot of innocent children killed as the US annexed Mexico and dropped the atomic bomb on Japan.

 

[Latias]

One should not make assumptions about NoKo, and certainly not that it would not sell nuke weapons or technology. It is widely believed that NoKo is providing some tech aid to Iran in its program. Why would ISIS be different.

Likely NoKo is the one place from which the U.S. has the least intelligence. And the U.S. found out long ago that no agreement with NoKo is worth anything.

Why Obama? Because he’s the one responsible for the ISIS/Iran war. Could have prevented it and knew it, but didn’t. Just giving credit where credit is due.

One should not repeatedly make dire assumptions about alleged DPRK and Iranian “aggression”.

So what agreement did the North Koreans reneged on? The NPT? Besides, I have no problem with the DPRK having nuclear weapons since it is a nuclear deterrent for self-defense.

Also:

Some analysts believe North Korea agreed to the freeze primarily because of the U.S. agreement to phase out economic sanctions that had been in place since the Korean War. But because of congressional opposition, the U.S. failed to deliver on this part of the agreement.[24]

International funding for the LWR replacement power plants had to be sought. Formal invitations to bid were not issued until 1998, by which time the delays were infuriating North Korea.[23] In May 1998 North Korea warned it would restart nuclear research if the U.S. could not install the LWR.[25][26] Formal ground breaking on the site was on August 21, 1997,[27] but significant spending on the LWR project did not commence until 2000.[28]

There was increasing disagreement between North Korea and U.S. on the scope and implementation of the treaty. When by 1999 economic sanctions had not been lifted and full diplomatic relations between U.S. and North Korea had not been established, North Korea warned that they would resume nuclear research unless the U.S. kept up its end of the bargain. The U.S. repeatedly stated that further implementation would be stalled as long as suspicions remained that the North Korean nuclear weapons research program continued covertly.

From wikipedia on the “Agreed Framework”.

So the US did not normalized relation nor did it lift the sanctions. nor promptly provide assisting in constructing the light water reactors.

Do you have any evidence that they cooperated on nuclear technology, as opposed to ballistic missile technology. Let’s say that a nuclear weapon costs $5 billion. How will ISIS accumulate $5 billion?

–

Perhaps Obama could have removed al-Maliki, who fueled discontent among the Iraqi Sunnis, but to Obama’s credit, he tried to moderate the “autocratic” policies of al-Maliki and assuage Sunni-Shite relations in Iraq. Also, it was ignored because those rebels could be seen as temporary assets to be put pressure on Bashar’s regime.

Administration officials said that they tried to “get our foot back in the door” in Iraq after the troop withdrawal, as one put it, to create a joint counterterrorism effort, but that Baghdad was eager to be rid of the Americans and resisted. In 2012, when there were roughly five suicide bombings in Iraq a month, that did not seem to be a major issue. But a year later, there were as many as 50 a month as the Syrian war increasingly spilled over the border.

“There were a lot of us saying this is a real massive problem,” said another senior official. “The Syria policy people are so focused on taking down Assad, they were blind to this problem.”

But intelligence underestimated the “Islamic State” (if it could be considered that in retrospect), ambitions and ability to seize territory. Perhaps, they did not realize that ISIS utilized the military expertise of the former disillusioned generals of Saddam’s Iraqi Army.

Intelligence agencies were caught off guard by the speed of the extremists’ subsequent advance across northern Iraq. And the government as a whole was largely focused on the group as a source of foreign fighters who might pose a terrorism threat when they returned home, not as a force intent on seizing territory.

“I’m not suggesting anyone was asleep at the switch necessarily, but the organization definitely achieved strategic surprise when it rolled into Iraq,” said Frederic C. Hof, who previously handled Syria policy for the State Department under Mr. Obama and is now at the Atlantic Council.

In interviews in recent weeks, administration officials privately agreed that they had not focused enough on the Islamic State’s territorial ambitions but said they were hamstrung in responding by an Iraqi government that was fanning the sectarian divide that helped give rise to the Sunni extremists in the first place.

nytimes.com/2014/09/30/world/middleeast/obama-fault-is-shared-in-misjudging-of-isis-threat.html

 

[Ridgerunner]

It is true that there were other historical atrocities since war is horrific, as was slavery of the black man and there were a lot of innocent children killed as the US annexed Mexico and dropped the atomic bomb on Japan.

Mexico would have been wiser not to have attacked the United States. That the U.S. countered and prevailed is not an “atrocity”.

Nor is the atomic bombing of Japan an “atrocity” if balanced against the likely quarter million American soldiers and million Japanese who would have died had it not been done.

 

[Ridgerunner]

One should not repeatedly make dire assumptions about alleged DPRK and Iranian “aggression”.

So what agreement did the North Koreans reneged on? The NPT? Besides, I have no problem with the DPRK having nuclear weapons since it is a nuclear deterrent for self-defense.

Also:

From wikipedia on the “Agreed Framework”.

So the US did not normalized relation nor did it lift the sanctions. nor promptly provide assisting in constructing the light water reactors.

Do you have any evidence that they cooperated on nuclear technology, as opposed to ballistic missile technology. Let’s say that a nuclear weapon costs $5 billion. How will ISIS accumulate $5 billion?​

Perhaps Obama could have removed al-Maliki, who fueled discontent among the Iraqi Sunnis, but to Obama’s credit, he tried to moderate the “autocratic” policies of al-Maliki and assuage Sunni-Shite relations in Iraq. Also, it was ignored because those rebels could be seen as temporary assets to be put pressure on Bashar’s regime.

But intelligence underestimated the “Islamic State” (if it could be considered that in retrospect), ambitions and ability to seize territory. Perhaps, they did not realize that ISIS utilized the military expertise of the former disillusioned generals of Saddam’s Iraqi Army.

nytimes.com/2014/09/30/world/middleeast/obama-fault-is-shared-in-misjudging-of-isis-threat.html

Neither NoKo nor Iran is likely to publish their nuclear cooperation in the NYT. But in any event, aren’t ballistic missiles (which Iran doesn’t need for defense) troubling to you? Guess not.

North Korea has repeatedly violated agreements, including its withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 1994. One of them it violated the day after it entered into it. Even the UN has sanctioned North Korea. www.cnn.com/2013/10/29/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-timeline—fast-facts/t

It’s a lot more complicated than a delay in providing NoKo with a light water reactor.

And Obama did know ISIS was a threat when he pulled out of Iraq, because DIA told him it was. It was just called IS then, but it was accurately described. Obama was informed by the CIA, DIA, American military, the Secretary of Defense (his own) and the CIA director (his own) that pulling out of Iraq was a big mistake. He was also told by the Sunni tribal leaders, the Kurds and the Sistani Shiites.

He didn’t have to “remove Maliki”. The Sunni and Kurds weren’t demanding that. All he had to do was leave 10,000 or more troops in Iraq to keep the peace, but he wouldn’t.

Now the number of “non-boots on the ground” is up to what? 3500 not counting CIA people?

 

[bibcat]

I consider these executions by ISIS to be brutal, horrific and barbaric. I don’t see any evidence of the victims being spies, but if they were, then is it true that other countries have executed spies, such as for example, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg? It is true that there were other historical atrocities since war is horrific, as was slavery of the black man and there were a lot of innocent children killed as the US annexed Mexico and dropped the atomic bomb on Japan.

Spies are amongst the lowest form of life, right there with pedophiles and drug dealers. Executing them is not wrong per se. Executing them in a horrible, barbaric manner is wrong.

 

[Tomdstone]

Mexico would have been wiser not to have attacked the United States. That the U.S. countered and prevailed is not an “atrocity”.

Nor is the atomic bombing of Japan an “atrocity” if balanced against the likely quarter million American soldiers and million Japanese who would have died had it not been done.

These are the fallacious arguments used to justify the killing of innocent children who have nothing to do with the wars being waged around them.

 

[Tomdstone]

Spies are amongst the lowest form of life, right there with pedophiles and drug dealers. Executing them is not wrong per se. Executing them in a horrible, barbaric manner is wrong.

I agree that executing people in a barbaric and brutal manner is wrong. I see this as especially wrong when children are brutally and barbarically burned to a crisp by an atomic bomb. But we have some Americans attempting to justify such on the grounds that burning children to death by the atomic bomb was not an atrocity since it might have saved American lives:

Nor is the atomic bombing of Japan an “atrocity” if balanced against the likely quarter million American soldiers and million Japanese who would have died had it not been done.

Although it may not be surprising that ISIS and other countries use a similar type of argument claiming that by executing these spies, it will save many lives of their fellow countrymen from traitors, still, I reject an argument based on the premise that a good end justifies a barbaric means.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I agree that executing people in a barbaric and brutal manner is wrong. I see this as especially wrong when children are brutally and barbarically burned to a crisp by an atomic bomb. But we have some Americans attempting to justify such on the grounds that burning children to death by the atomic bomb was not an atrocity since it might have saved American lives:

Although it may not be surprising that ISIS and other countries use a similar type of argument claiming that by executing these spies, it will save many lives of their fellow countrymen from traitors, still, I reject an argument based on the premise that a good end justifies a barbaric means.

Maybe this is a teaching moment. How would you have ended the war in the Pacific if presented with the choices Truman had? Be specific so we can understand.

 

[7_Sorrows]

A state will not give them access to a nuclear weapon since nuclear weapons are too valuable to a state to give away to a bunch of apocalyptic terrorists.

If they invade and conquer the right city or know the right contacts there is always the possibilty of getting what they need on the black market.