threat by IS or ISIS

[frontlemon]

Well, my point is to avoid people becoming insane in the first place.

Well you can't do that completely... then why do you think does a boy who was perfectly well-of by all means, leaves his country to join the Al Quaida? (news heard from DW TV)...

In your example the supressed attempt a passive protest. In reality the supressed are the one's falling for the false promises of the IS. This is why it does not sound to fitting in this case.

Just exchange the roles... think of the suppressed in my "REAL" example as the nations who are trying to thwart

IS

through negotiations and think of IS as the upper class brahmins who wiped off the village of the lower class.

One can proabably defeat the IS in a military way, at least to the point where it disappears as a visible power and dives into asymmetrical warfare. But when this happens without stopping their reinforcements - not just in material but also in followers or just helpers - this war will lead for a constant presence of foreign troups on that territory which will end in the loss of sympathies, with the final result of the old enemies getting back into power. Just like we see it happening in Afganistan.

I "COMPLETELY AGREE" with you on this point. My intention was not to emphasize the fact that only a military move can solve the problem. I firmly believe that only a mix of military and diplomatic (but not with the IS but with the probable factions who are more liberal but can potentially "join" the IS) can solve the problem. Yet I do also believe firmly that this is something that "any" American government has never ever tried or want to achieve.

 

[Ioanna]

Stop IS called a terrorist group it is a gang rampage killers who should as soon as possible
be destroyed !!
Sorry for the late reply to this topic Shelter.