Yikes, Richard! You've really given this a lot of thought. Even down to the detail about sending ISIS leaders to work in ebola clinics. I'd say those patients are already suffering enough! Do you have an alternative plan?
On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:31 AM, "Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > >John, I'm not sure that jihadists driven to such horrific acts will cave in >due to their own vileness. And certainly not in response to the world's >censure. They LIVE FOR that censure. imo. > > My plan would be to send in a thousand drones to wipe out their infrastructure. First, disable all the tanks, jeeps, and Toyotas and then hit their oil and fuel processing facilities and pipelines. Then, enforce a no-drive zone on any highway or road in the entire ISIS-controlled areas. Without fuel, money coming in and no vehicles, it probably wouldn't take six months before the rag heads all come out with their hands in the air waving a white flag looking for a ride to a meal. Then, we would arrest all the leaders and hold them at Gitmo until they get a NSA chip implanted in their forehead so we could track them anywhere they go. Then, we would put the ISIS leaders to work in an ebola clinic for the rest of their lives. If there were any objections and for some reason this plan failed, we would then consider emptybll's final solution. > > > >On Monday, September 15, 2014 11:29 AM, "jr_...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" ><FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > > > > >Jedi, > > >That's too extreme. Non-combatants will be killed along with the hard core >criminals. I don't believe the world would accept that solution. > > >The ISIS militants are already feeling the world opinion against their >ideology. They will eventually cave-in due to their own vileness. > > >Once the Iraqi forces take back their towns and lands, ISIS will be surrounded >in their homeground in Syria by forces that are against them. It's possible >that Assad's forces could wipe them out first. > > >If not, Obama could start bombing their weapons and equipment to further >degrade ISIS. But this could also create international furor for attacking a >sovereign land in Syria. Assad would complain, but he would be secretly >rejoicing in that the Americans are attacking his own enemy. > > > >---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jedi_spock@...> wrote : > > > > > >You want my advice? A single neutron bomb would be enough to >wipe them out. The infrastructure will remain intact. > >These people are savage bandits. There is no other way out >of this. > > >--- <jr_esq@...> wrote : > > >Actually it would be easier for the Iraqi forces to retake the towns that the >ISIS militants have occupied after the US bombs the ISIS equipment, weapons >and stronghold. > > >However, it's another scenario in Syria itself. At this time, I would assume >Assad's forces are more likely to finish the job after the US bombs the ISIS >stronghold, equipment and weapons. If they don't, the so-called friendly >militants would take control and Assad's power will more likely be degraded. > >The soldiers that are flying the drones can see fairly well through the cameras from as far as 5 to 6 miles away. They can pick out enemy combatants. > > > > > >
