• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

ISIS executes 150+ women for refusing to marry militants, bury them in mass graves

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mohonky

Member
The Taliban murders 150 schoolkids in Pakistan, ISIS murders 150+ women in Iraq... it's like they're trying to one-up each other for most evil terrorist group.

Basically its Al Qeadas turn to step up to the plate now.

I honestly cant even begin to contemplate how you sort out such a shit show. Its funny because just this evening my father and I were talking about how beautiful Oman was and how the people there are so relaxed, friendly and eager to just show you how beautiful their country and culture is........of course not even a few hundred km's away you got all this backward ass shit happening. Its not even like countries like Saudi are much better, they just happen to have a fairly substantial police force and army to make sure its only the Religious Police that are running around performing the executions and absurd women hating.
 

M3d10n

Member
How fucked up in the head one must be if they think God approves of such actions? Or maybe some of them are aware what they are doing is fucked up and just keep at it because, "hey, I'm going to hell anyway, might as well go all the way".
 

Mrmartel

Banned
Saddam was better than ISIS objectively speaking. Saddam would have obliterated ISIS by now. He was a murderous dictator, but his rampage was limited to political reprisals. He conducted the Anfal campaign because Kurds tried to assassinate him when his motorcade passed by. Obviously being the asshole as he was, he used chemical weapons on the village in return. He doesnt get a pass, but he wasnt destroying his country. There was no shadow government from stone age that was running around like a mongol horde, pillaging, raping and enslaving everyone in sight. Someone mentioned Saddam's death toll was higher. How long was the dude in power? 50 years? Give ISIS 50 years unchecked, and the whole middle east will be wiped out, culture as well as people.

Indeed. Give them the resources, men and equipment Saddam had at his peak. I'd only give the Mid East 5-10 years with no outside intervention.
 
We don't really need to get into a "which evil was the more eviler!" debate today, do we? ISIS is fucking awful. Saddam was fucking awful. The world is better without of all the above.
No. Objectively the world is far worse now without Saddam. Taliban, sure. But not Saddam.
 

Dabanton

Member
Not to ever excuse these sons of bitches as they're fucking crazed. But Shinobi could have least posted this part of the article.

However, while Isis has been regularly exposed as spreading misinformation, there are also increasing concerns by some experts that those against the militant group are increasingly spreading misinformation in a bid to undermine it.

One example of this was a document purporting to show the prices placed on the heads of captured Yazidi and Christian girls being sold at a slave market by Isis.

This was dismissed by an expert as most likely fake because of one key discrepancy in the top right hand corner - it refers to Isis as the Islamic State of Iraq, not as just the Islamic State or Islamic caliphate.

The Independent is attempting to verify the reports.
 
No. Objectively the world is far worse now without Saddam. Taliban, sure. But not Saddam.
We'll agree to disagree. Mostly because I don't feel like circularly debating settled matters with you guys who seem to make it your job to reach the highest post counts in these threads.

Some of you post in these threads as frequently as ISIS drops bodies. With respect.
 

dan2026

Member
Holy shit these guys really are pure evil.

How can they possibly justify this in their religion?
They must believe they are going to the deepest hell for their actions.
 
Holy shit these guys really are pure evil.

How can they possibly justify this in their religion?
They must believe they are going to the deepest hell for their actions.

Actually majority of Muslim clerics who oppose them and predicted such groups would rise up within muslims since Islam's inception
 
Saddam used chemical weapons on civilian targets, he was in no way better than IS.

Saddam was a LOT better than anything that has transpired in Iraq for the past 13 years. Nearly every single person in the country is worse off than they were before.
 

Valhelm

contribute something
People really need to stop saying this. ISIS have caused far less deaths than Hussein did; go read up about the Al Anfal campaign and the death toll in the Kurdish community before you praise Hussein. Obviously, ISIS are pretty terrible, but Hussein was worse.

Well, "worse" is a tough one. People might argue that even though Saddam killed more people, the intent was different.

This is the same argument for why Hitler was a worse person than Stalin.

Personally, I think that describing evil in degrees is largely pointless and so subjective that it only gets people mad.
 
All the men beheaded and the women forced to become sex slaves or sold.

Is that the ISIS account? here is the historical account written today actually:

http://pakteahouse.net/2014/12/18/peshawar-attack-taliban-and-banu-qurayzah/

The Quran declares, “Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely.” (5:32)

This is the sanctity of life.

Anyone interested in knowing in detail about the Muslim confrontation with Banu Qurayzah should read the seminal book “Muhammad and the Jews” (1979) by Indian diplomat and scholar Barakat Ahmad. In this book, Barakat Ahmad has strongly argued that the source for the alleged “massacre” is based on an account of a person of dubious motivation 120 years after the Prophet’s time. He also highlights that Jewish sources are silent about the alleged killing of hundreds of Jewish men.

Following facts of the punishment of Banu Qurayzah must be kept in mind:
(i) Muslims had a treaty with the Banu Qurayzah that they will defend Medina from aggression as per Misaq-i-Medina. Banu Qurayzah broke the pact and conspired to side with a 10,000-strong tribal force campaigning to annihilate Muslims. After the Arab confederates left, Muslims besieged the Banu Qurayzah in their fortresses.
(ii) Had Bau Qurazah succeeded, Muslim men would have been killed and their children and women would have been enslaved.
(iii) The punishment of the Banu Qurayzah was not given by the Prophet (pbuh) but by Sa’ad bin Muadh (ra) who had been the Jewish tribe’s ally.
(iv) The punishment was for the crime of treachery and was based on Israelite scripture. See, for example, the Torah verses in Deuteronomy 20:14 and Deuteronomy 21:10-14 on the Jewish war code.
(v) Banu Qurayzah submitted to this punishment even though they were still armed and could carry on a fight.
(vi) Some Muslims who had Jewish friends asked for clemency from the Prophet (pbuh) who did pardon individuals. Even he himself asked the tribe’s leader to seek forgiveness at the last minute who did not seem interested.
(vii) Numerous accounts by the members of Banu Qurayzah attest that they felt guilt for treason, and even when offered clemency, they refused and went along with the punishment.
(viii) Banu Qurayzah’s women and children were later passed on to another Arab tribe that happened to be their (Banu Qurayza's) ally and who had been part of the invading confederate army.
 
Sadam was the lesser evil compared to ISIS. He was a scumbag but he kept terrorism in check, ISIS would probaly have destroyed or not existed if he was still alive.
 

Renzoku

Banned
1. Civilized countries of the world create a joint coalition.
2. With Iraqi Government's blessing, coalition proceeds to sweep through the country.
3. Coalition forces murder every last person associated with ISIS
4. Problem solved


Just fill in the nuance between the points with planning and ethical debates, and we can be done with these assholes.
 
The Taliban murders 150 schoolkids in Pakistan, ISIS murders 150+ women in Iraq... it's like they're trying to one-up each other for most evil terrorist group.

Don't leave Boko Haram out of the running. They kidnapped girls from a girls school. They bombed another school. And just now . .

Boko Haram unrest: Nigerian militants 'kidnap 200 villagers'

Militants have stormed a remote village in north-eastern Nigeria, killing at least 33 people and kidnapping about 200, a survivor has told the BBC.

He said that suspected Boko Haram militants had seized young men, women and children from Gumsuri village.

The attack happened on Sunday but news has only just emerged, after survivors reached the city of Maiduguri.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-30529178

It is the new contest, Islamist Idol . . . who can be the most violent Jihadists! :-/
 
Stupidest shit I've read this month. How do you quantify this?
Even without the bodycount, ISIS is far, far worse. Iraq enjoyed stability under Saddam. Saddam did not ban music and video stores, and did not implement a complete covering dresscode for women. ISIS does. ISIS has cut the hands of people found violating the smoking ban. Isnt that objectively worse compared to the baath government?
 

Mrmartel

Banned
I don't think they will lose. If only the rest of the world could get their thumbs out of their asses and kill those ISIS motherfuckers. Also, Saddam committed genocide against the kurds.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Anfal_Campaign

On a small scale yes. But not the complete and utter Genocide that would happen if ISIS won against them.

I think we are starting to get into specifics of the Evil levels of certains groups. I just hope that ISIS never gets anywhere near as big and powerful as the Iraq of the 80s.
 
If a CNN crew went to Iraq under Saddam they would have met the information minister who would have raised his hands up and said nothing bad is going on

if a CNN crew went to Iraq under ISIS...

oh wait they can't go because they will be dead


That is the difference.
 

Mrmartel

Banned
If a CNN crew went to Iraq under Saddam they would have met the information minister who would have raised his hands up and said nothing bad is going on

if a CNN crew went to Iraq under ISIS...

oh wait they can't go because they will be dead


That is the difference.

It really is that simple. The intent.
 
But now they can fight back. Under Saddam, they got gassed.
No point in fighting back when you cant win. Even with the support of airstrikes from 30 something countries. I am not saying it was rainbows and puppies under Saddam btw either. But under ISIS there is an existential threat.
 

rambis

Banned
Huh? The fact that the Mid East was more stable alone makes the case that Saddam was better than the current raging hordes in it now.
"Stability" doesn't mean a damned thing if you are constantly at the mercy of a murderous cunt that had no problem indiscriminately gassing and executing people.

People always try to make this stupid leap of faith. Removing Saadam isn't the problem, its removing him and not helping Iraq build a stable government that fucked Iraq. Meanwhile ISIS won't last near long enough to leave the kind of legacy Sadaam did.


If a CNN crew went to Iraq under Saddam they would have met the information minister who would have raised his hands up and said nothing bad is going on

if a CNN crew went to Iraq under ISIS...

oh wait they can't go because they will be dead


That is the difference.
Not Iraq but
https://news.vice.com/video/the-islamic-state-part-1
 
"Stability" doesn't mean a damned thing if you are constantly at the mercy of a murderous cunt that had no problem indiscriminately gassing and executing people.

People always try to make this stupid leap of faith. Removing Saadam isn't the problem, its removing him and not helping Iraq build a stable government that fucked Iraq. Meanwhile ISIS won't last near long enough to leave the kind of legacy Sadaam did.

Number 1. We shouldnt have gone there in the first place.

This is what f'ing happened after Iraq War

Number of Terror Attacks 1970-2013 in Middle East and North Africa

FNcB5Rb.png
 

ICKE

Banned
We can all thank the American foreign policy as Bush and his little supporters in their infinite wisdom decided to destabilize the region and create this Frankenstein.

There are no easy solutions now. Nobody wants to send ground troops into that region and bombing campaigns will only slow ISIS down, they can not be stopped completely as their ranks are constantly growing and they control large cities.
 

rambis

Banned
Number 1. We shouldnt have gone there in the first place.

This is what f'ing happened after Iraq War

Number of Terror Attacks 1970-2013 in Middle East and North Africa

http://i.imgur.com/FNcB5Rb.png[/IMG[/QUOTE]
Of course attacks are gonna rise after the enemy that these guys have been foaming at the mouth to take over decides to invade their territory. What is your point?
 
the source for them all is the same bad source hadith from 120 years after the Prophet's death and widely disputed by muslims themselves.....except ISIS/Taliban/Al-Qaeda/Boko Haram etc.......

but hey if you still want to give it credibility then go ahead.

If god is so great, how come god can't even implement a decent source control system? God could at least use one of the plenty of open source ones available.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom