Photos show IS militants fleeing Manbij with 'human shields' - Polidicks

[img]http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/15210/production/_90844568_mediaitem90843261.jpg[/img] [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-37129408[/url] [quote]As it became apparent that the town would fall, some 100 to 200 IS militants gathered members of their families, supporters and civilian hostages, Baghdad-based US-led coalition spokesman Col Chris Garver told reporters on Tuesday. The civilians were then placed with the militants in every vehicle in the convoy that headed north, tracked by SDF fighters and the coalition, he said. "We had to treat them all as non-combatants. We didn't shoot. We kept watching."[/quote]

I don't wanna sound crazy here but at what point do you just sacrifice those among ISIS for the greater good?

[QUOTE=Hilton;50913881]I don't wanna sound crazy here but at what point do you just sacrifice those among ISIS for the greater good?[/QUOTE] All that would do is further their recruitment flow. ISIS would spin it off as the evil American dogs/UN dogs trying to snuff em out.

[QUOTE=Hilton;50913881]I don't wanna sound crazy here but at what point do you just sacrifice those among ISIS for the greater good?[/QUOTE] Because we're better than them, and this is a clear demonstration of that fact.

[QUOTE=Hilton;50913881]I don't wanna sound crazy here but at what point do you just sacrifice those among ISIS for the greater good?[/QUOTE] It sounds like something President Trump would do.

Cheeky fuckers honestly, using hostages because otherwise that convoy would've been Highway of Death 2.0

[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;50913886]I mean it's nice and all that civilians don't get caught in the crossfire, but I have a feeling the ISIS shitheads are just gonna kill the civilians anyways once they crawl back into their holes to hide[/QUOTE] If they're not going to degrade them into slaves, yeah. It's a shitty situation where there's no right moral decision.

Remember, isis as a group is dying, its the idea behind them that inspires terrorist attacks that we need to deal with

[QUOTE=Hilton;50913881]I don't wanna sound crazy here but at what point do you just sacrifice those among ISIS for the greater good?[/QUOTE] Because it would be a war crime and crime against humanity. Also Kurds are frequently accused of attempting to do ethnic cleansing of Syrian Arabs and are struggling to recruit Syrian Arabs to fight with them. Killing mass amount of civilians would not only be very immoral and illegal, but would also be strategically retarded.

[QUOTE=Grandzeit;50913936]If they're not going to degrade them into slaves, yeah. It's a shitty situation where there's no right moral decision.[/QUOTE] There really is, though? Not bombing them seems like a pretty morally right decision. Far as the article tells me, the civilians in question were mainly people with allegiance leaning towards ISIS and not prisoners or hostages, which means that they probably won't be sold as slaves or whatever by them. And before you go "Well if the civilians support ISIS they are evil and should die too", try to remember that they are still non-combatants and civilians. We didn't, nor should we have, round up every card-carrying Nazi party member after WWII and give 'em a bullet in the head, and I don't think it's reasonable to start doing that now.

[QUOTE=Riller;50913979]Far as the article tells me, the civilians in question were mainly people with allegiance leaning towards ISIS and not prisoners or hostages, which means that they probably won't be sold as slaves or whatever by them..[/QUOTE] I don't think showing allegiance towards ISIS matters much, looking at what happened to the people that have volunteered to join ISIS. From being forced to carry water and clean toilets to act as a public or private sex toys. Regardless, I'm not saying anybody should be killed. I'm not really in position to judge that.

I think it's more detrimental to moral if ISIS has to run with their tails between their legs and give up an entire town without the opposing force firing a shot. For a group dedicated to die in the name of Sharia Law they sure did a poor job.

[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;50913886]I mean it's nice and all that civilians don't get caught in the crossfire, but I have a feeling the ISIS shitheads are just gonna kill the civilians anyways once they crawl back into their holes to hide[/QUOTE] The ones who were hostages were allegedly released (in the hundreds) once they were a safe distance away. The other civilians were the ISIS fighter's actual families and other ISIS sympathizers. ISIS didn't want the same thing to happen to them like when fleeing Fallujah, hundreds of dead and hundreds of blown up vehicles on the exit road. Though there is some shady evidence to say that massive convoy had civilians mixed in too, but Iraqi air force decimated everyone and thing there regardless.

[QUOTE=spiritlol;50916454]I think it's more detrimental to moral if ISIS has to run with their tails between their legs and give up an entire town without the opposing force firing a shot.[/QUOTE] That was hardly the case here. Or are you hypothesizing?

[QUOTE=Riller;50913979]And before you go "Well if the civilians support ISIS they are evil and should die too", try to remember that they are still non-combatants and civilians. We didn't, nor should we have, round up every card-carrying Nazi party member after WWII and give 'em a bullet in the head, and I don't think it's reasonable to start doing that now.[/QUOTE] Devil's advocate, but the bombing of German civilians is perhaps not the best argument to use here. In fact it was worse, because we bombed the hell out of them, we bombed them day and night, east and west. [img]https://static01.nyt.com/images/2009/08/16/books/ladd-600.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Aman;50916515]That was hardly the case here. Or are you hypothesizing?[/QUOTE] I meant within the context of the evacuation, but my word choice did make it seem like I was referring to the entire seige so I apologize for the lack of clarity on my part.

What would be the up side to killing all of them? It's not like the entirety of ISIS was in that convoy, even if you did manage to kill every combatant, then what? Just more will come and bring with them every brother, cousin, and father of the civilians killed. Or, we could let them go, not literally murder hundreds of non-combatants, and not breed even more hatred towards the West.

Let them be pathetic. Let them show their fear of death. I'm so happy we didn't line up a warthog to gun that convoy down. We showed that these people you (as up and coming Islamic jihadists) worship are so cowardly and so unwilling to die (as men) that they must use civilians, women and children to protect them. The more we show our grace, our human standards of life, the more we strip away from them. The more we allow to live, the more they die.

[QUOTE=urbanmonkey;50916579]and not breed even more hatred towards the West.[/QUOTE] No matter what we do, it breeds hate to the West. If we bomb them, their relatives hate us. If we don't, they spread hate against us. It's a no-win situation as far as that goes.

Should've dropped some ordinance 300 yards on either side of the convoy to demonstrate that we chose not to hit them, despite having the capability.

[QUOTE=soulharvester;50916682]Should've dropped some ordinance 300 yards on either side of the convoy to demonstrate that we chose not to hit them, despite having the capability.[/QUOTE] I think ISIS is well aware we have the capability to vaporize their pathetic existence with JDAM's lol

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;50916516]Devil's advocate, but the bombing of German civilians is perhaps not the best argument to use here. In fact it was worse, because we bombed the hell out of them, we bombed them day and night, east and west. [img]https://static01.nyt.com/images/2009/08/16/books/ladd-600.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] And it had only made German people continue to strongly support Nazi regime by these terror bombing, even though goal for terror bombing was to make German people stop supporting Nazis. It is a terrible strategy to do morally and strategically.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;50916679]No matter what we do, it breeds hate to the West. If we bomb them, their relatives hate us. If we don't, they spread hate against us. It's a no-win situation as far as that goes.[/QUOTE] Key word being "more". I find it hard to argue that not indiscriminately bombing civilians would breed more hate than the mass murder of anyone standing next to an ISIS thug, especially unwillingly. There might not be a win involved, but there are certainly varying degrees of losing.

[QUOTE=soulharvester;50916682]Should've dropped some ordinance 300 yards on either side of the convoy to demonstrate that we chose not to hit them, despite having the capability.[/QUOTE] They would spin it that the US missed and god diverted the bombs. [editline]20th August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Grandzeit;50913936]If they're not going to degrade them into slaves, yeah. It's a shitty situation where there's no right moral decision.[/QUOTE] There is a right moral decision. The moral choice is, objectively killing is immoral. From that point, you must choose whether to break that immoral choice is the only option available. Which it isn't in this scenario. In this case, the ISIS militants are running scared, innocent civilians among them that do not deserve death "for the greater good", and the ISIS sympathizers among them who possibly haven't killed or fought anyone, leaving their crime simply for sympathizing (thought crime, perhaps?). Bombing that retreating convoy is completely wrong, even in a military sense. The objective of a campaign is to defeat the enemy, not literally kill every last soldier. If you leave no retreat, no window for them to choose flight or fight, then they will [I]always[/I] fight to the death and just cause a higher death toll overall.

We had a very similar situation in 1991 in Iraq with the Highway of Death (Highway 80 from Kuwait to Safwan Iraq) where the military was fleeing Kuwait and had civilian hostages and refugees. [IMG]http://ummahislam.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/FB_IMG_1452032116994.jpg[/IMG] In that case there wasn't much hesitation. It was brutal but it effectively knocked out a major part of their mechanized force. Not to say we morally made the right choice with any of that to begin with though.

[QUOTE=Ajacks;50919354]We had a very similar situation in 1991 in Iraq with the Highway of Death (Highway 80 from Kuwait to Safwan Iraq) where the military was fleeing Kuwait and had civilian hostages and refugees. [img]http://ummahislam.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/FB_IMG_1452032116994.jpg[/img] In that case there wasn't much hesitation. It was brutal but it effectively knocked out a major part of their mechanized force.[/QUOTE] We actually had the opportunity to continue the attacks, but the administration demanded that the operations cease as the carnage was just too immense.

[QUOTE=Ajacks;50919354]We had a very similar situation in 1991 in Iraq with the Highway of Death (Highway 80 from Kuwait to Safwan Iraq) where the military was fleeing Kuwait and had civilian hostages and refugees. [IMG]http://ummahislam.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/FB_IMG_1452032116994.jpg[/IMG] In that case there wasn't much hesitation. It was brutal but it effectively knocked out a major part of their mechanized force. Not to say we morally made the right choice with any of that to begin with though.[/QUOTE] I don't think it was really the moral choice either. The goal was to liberate Kuwait. That goal was accomplished, why continue wracking up the death toll of a defeated army?

Anyone see Eye In the Sky? It was Alan Rickman's last film and covers a very similar topic to this that is represented very well imo.

[QUOTE=CroGamer002;50918015]And it had only made German people continue to strongly support Nazi regime by these terror bombing, even though goal for terror bombing was to make German people stop supporting Nazis. It is a terrible strategy to do morally and strategically.[/QUOTE] No sir, no. Ian Kershaw, "The Myth of Hitler". Reports from Abwehr and members from the SPD showed that the population was completely demoralized and did not want to know anything more about the war, especially in those areas with heavy industrialization.

Doesn't ISIS believe that they will meet the world's armies on the battlefield at a certain location and Allah will come down and turn the tide of battle in their favor and that's how they'll win? If that's true I say we set up there and tell them to come fight us there and then see how their prophecy holds up.