will check on it;;; Thanks! -- j
.

If we have to remove ourselves from the United Nations. Then also remove ourselves from the Geneva Convention for the Sovereighty of our country. We will tell the French and Russians that we will coming in "Rolling Hot" and we will use the tactics of a Civil War General by the name of William Tecumseh Sherman. We will use the most powerful conventional weapons that we have available even if the're just being tested. Make them all mobile with blast hardened armor. Up graded wing of A-10 Warhogs with larger caliber cannons, A wing of Spooky Gunships that will work at night. ISIS would be blasted day and night.

Anti-military politicos do understand they cannot eliminate the military. They might need it themselves to enforce something after all. So what they do instead, is weaken it incrementally by changes like grounding the A-10.

Another example of this is grounding the Blackbird. UAVs take up some of the slack but don't have the same capability. (If Darth Vader had to pick something to fly from current tech, that would be it. It just looks right for that)

if it were up to me, I would show the usaf, the army, the navy and the
marines the red-splotched map of Iraq and Syria, marked that way
to indicate the areas controlled by ISIS, and I would say, "Take 'em out.
The entire red-marked area. . No prisoners." -- j
.

you are not the only one who thinks that. . giving up the a10
is like severing an arm during a fight. . absolutely stupid. -- j
.

That last line made me laugh.
It's also very true, though.

"Since ISIS likes to set prisoners on fire,I do not have a problem with..."
ISIS is the worst role model possible.

Since ISIS likes to set prisoners on fire, I do not have a problem with the USA dropping lotsa good old-fashioned inexpensive "dumb bomb" napalm on a marching ISIS horde or any military position from a heavy bomber flying at an high altitude.
I read that the Navy got rid of their napalm stockpiles but I don't know about the other branches.
O'Prissy Sisisy would likely think napalm is not politically correct but Trump or Carson may think otherwise.

Obama claims he's found and is arming "trustworthy rebels" who oppose both Assad and ISIS. Only they're really members of ISIS, and he has to have known this for some time. My guess is he allowed the Benghazi massacre to take place to protect exactly that secret.

I suppose that's true, since Obama created ISIS on purpose and is still arming them.

sounds like both wires are driven with the signal. . yes? -- j
.

and I wonder why the french must invoke article 5 -- the truth is the truth. -- j
.

The Two Prong Attacks of Islam


A false dichotomy is afoot. The notion that Islam is only composed of “Radical” extremists and the other Muslims are simply peaceful is actually a two prong effort to instill Sharia law by two methods of infiltration. First ,the one that gets the most attention is the bloody acts of killing and maiming witnessed most recently by the attacks in Paris. Here the suicidal fanatics demonstrate to the innocents and the muslim population at large how dedicated and ruthless they can be. Willing to blow themselves up to instill terror in the hearts of the innocents they simultaneously instill that same terror in the Muslims passively going along who dare not speak up against their fanatical brothers acting out the atrocities of Mohammad. This method of spreading Islam has been the strategy of Islamists from the first days of this religion. The objective of creating Sharia law and the killing of infidels, the worldwide conquest of all nations, and the establishment of a caliphate drive this movement.

Once the terror is established by the fanatics the road is clear for the passive Muslims to make their move by infiltration and non-assimilation into countries primarily of another persuasion. Relying on the altruism and fear of their victims, mobs of Muslims take over by majority as in the town of Poleville Michigan. It is equivalent to a mopping up operation after the blitzkrieg of the fanatics. This follow up movement must be reinforced by periodic acts of violence and terror to reinforce the followers belief that the movement is inevitable.

Americans and many others have not wised up to this approach and have excused the followers as deserving of innocence. The taking over of pockets of formerly non-muslim areas proves otherwise.

If you couple this approach with a willingness to lie to promote Islam you have a potent objective that can only be stopped if it is recognized as the devious monstrosity it is. The intellectual defense of claiming islamaphobia when “innocent followers” are accused of compliance to this spread of Islam works well in a country willing to give the benefit of the doubt and turn the other cheek .

This war is a different war than those of the past. It is not a war of identified enemies with uniforms and national loyalty. It is a war of subversives willing to connive and infiltrate, perform suicidal carnage and simultaneously slither into the population of the unsuspecting in two different forms. One is the fanatic and one is the follower but both have the same objective and only perform differently to obtain this goal.

The term radicalized has real meaning when the follower becomes the fanatic. Passively infiltrating and avoiding assimilation is a more subdued method so those who want to speed up the process and inspire the followers to comply become who we call “ radicalized” which means they are now of the fanatic class and will do violence to intimidate and strike terror.

So what is to be done in such a war? First identify the strategy for what it is and realize how attitudes and mores are affecting our ability to counteract the movement. Calling the followers innocent is a major mistake. When the followers do not denounce the fanatics you can be sure they are being compliant. How many Muslims did you see condemn the killings in Paris?

This logically leads to the need to identify and root out those who are plotting against the people who are innocent. The source of propaganda is wherever the notion of a caliphate and Muslim dominance is taught. These centers whether in America or the Middle East or the Far East must be targeted as seeds of conquest and infiltrated and monitored and/or destroyed. Hiding behind the “sacredness” of a religious temple or sanctuary is only another tool the true Muslims hide behind just as they hide behind women and children in battle.

Once the enemy knows we are onto their game, the game is over. When they talk we know they lie. When they seek peace we know they seek dominance. When they claim innocence we know they only use a different method to overtake us. When they cry discrimination, we simply tell them we discriminate against all criminal behavior. We need to give no quarter to this enemy that is doing everything it can to overtake us. They think they are being clever but the identification of their methods and connivance puts us in the position of strength they fear. Once they know that we know what they are up to, trepidation will begin, doubt will spread and the cleverness they were sure was undecipherable will disappear. Know your enemy is the first requirement of victory.

not our job...isolate them...it is the responsibility of the people of the middle east to clean up their own trash....

You don't think that we have the duty under NATO, now that the IS has committed (and admitted to) an act of war on French soil?

another long wire beneath the existing one ....... end-fed
like the existing one, or grounded? -- j
.

we strung a long wire inside the crest of the attic here,
about 120 feet long or so, and it does 40 well -- through
a heathkit sa2500 tuner. . should be good from here to there. -- j
.