I feel sympathy. They were 15 and 17 for god's sake. Do you think they had any idea what they would get themselves into? Sure running away with an exotic arab for a cock ride is a bad decision that should have consequences, but (in my opinion) they don't deserve a life of servitude and fear.

I can't agree with people on here laughing at the situation and saying these girls got what they deserve. Teenage kids are very impressionable and looking for something to believe in and their place in the world. Why do you think America starts recruiting for the military in highschool? Just as the USA recruiters promise kids in highschool all these amazing things, I'm sure these ISIS recruiters are twice as slick with making it sound like ISIS is the only way to go. Plus it says ISIS targets girls from broken backgrounds and that are easily impressionable.

To us as grown men the idea of joining ISIS is as retarded as it is in reality. To some teenager from a rough background belonging to something that I am sure the ISIS recruits made sound like one big happy family doesn't sound as bad.

These girls don't deserve to die or the life of rape and violence they will face since they have been outed as wanting to leave.

Quote: (10-11-2014 10:48 AM)Cr33pin Wrote:  

... Plus it says ISIS targets girls from broken backgrounds and that are easily impressionable.

To us as grown men the idea of joining ISIS is as retarded as it is in reality. To some teenager from a rough background belonging to something that I am sure the ISIS recruits made sound like one big happy family doesn't sound as bad.

These girls don't deserve to die or the life of rape and violence they will face since they have been outed as wanting to leave.

Look - there is nothing "rough" about growing up in Austria. Even if they came from a broken home and their mother was on the dole, they had a living standard close to the 30% income level in the US, since the state subsidizes apartments, good schools are for free, good healthcare is for free, and there are subsistence level social security payments. It is a lot easier being poor in Austria than in the US.

If it is not a usual psy-op, then the girls likely fell in love with some local Jihadi bad boy and got into watching plenty of "uplifting" videos.

I for one refuse to give 16-year-olds a pussy pass. When I was 16 I was reading one book daily and was delving into Sartre. Sure you are impressionable, but that excuse can be cited by anyone. If you spend your time fucking bad boys, watching TV and getting religious indoctrination - that is your choice. Sure - any sane father would have locked them up for their own good, but due to all-around female empowerment, that would be called domestic abuse.

I am certain that for any girl making that choice and regretting it, there are 300 young boys who have either joined the Jihadist or the US army at age 18. Plenty of those regret having made that decision as they are thrown into one hellhole or another for the sake of the plutocracy. Life is all about choices and sometimes you pick a jar filled with a big pile of shit instead of cookies.

I'm not here to change anyones mind or argue with anyone. I simply stated my opinion on the matter.

I simply will never be joyed or unsympathetic at the death, or violence against kids, boy or girl.

When I was younger I made some stupid decisions that put myself in danger and honestly I am lucky to be alive today. As I have grown I would not make those decisions again but as a kid I didn't even think of the consequences.

Look - I am not devoid of empathy and wish them well.

But still - why treat her any different to a 17-year-old Jihadi who travels from cushy UK to Iraq to become a "freedom fighter"? There are countless young teenagers going that way.

Of course we know that females incite greater sympathy of us men and it is a just a basic instinct. We all know that regardless of our equality perception we would still risk our lives more likely for teenage girls than teenage boys - especially in battle. Just as the Israeli forces found out painfully and realized that their casualty rates in mixed-gender-units were 400-500% higher than in all-male units. Why? Because men in battle did the utmost to protect their female companions in arms. This instinct of ours of protecting women and children is hardwired.

Still - what is the difference to a 16-year-old male Jihadi who straps on a bomb-belt or picks up an AK-47? It is sad, but there are more tragic stories of people who have actually not even done anything to deserve it (seemingly because I personally believe in reincarnation, but that is another matter).

And to make the point clear - if they truly became Jihadist and the guys would let them use guns, the likelihood is high that they would shoot a captured 18-year-old US soldier in the head watching his head explode. It's a myth that girls are some frail creatures unable to see pain and suffering. In Abu Ghraib the female soldiers were equal in sadism to the male ones. Tender snowflakes - my ass.

Quote: (10-11-2014 02:43 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

The real kicker is, if the Austrian government did rescue them the first thing they would do is friendzone all the Betas around them.

That suggests these Jihad guys are alphas. They're not.

They're some of the worst white knights you can come across. Ultra violent psychopaths who don't listen to reason or logic.

These girls are stupid. They were suckered into a life of adventure. I hope Austria doesn't let them back.

No sympathy here

You choose to join a group that beheads innocent people and kills thousands of others. And let's hold some accountability for both girls and boys who are teenagers as they are not children. We are not talking about two girls who decided to smoke some weed, steal some clothes, or something else petty.

Quote: (10-10-2014 03:11 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

^ Attraction phase strong. Comfort phase weak.

They Gotta brush up on Mystery Method

If their idea of comfort phase is enjoying a nice beheading together, they're gonna have a bad time

Quote: (10-11-2014 12:23 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

Quote: (10-11-2014 02:43 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

The real kicker is, if the Austrian government did rescue them the first thing they would do is friendzone all the Betas around them.

That suggests these Jihad guys are alphas. They're not.

They're some of the worst white knights you can come across. Ultra violent psychopaths who don't listen to reason or logic.

These girls are stupid. They were suckered into a life of adventure. I hope Austria doesn't let them back.

I don't care if they're Alphas by our definitions, as you're completely right that they're not. But to a hot teen girl surrounded by supplicating Beta guys, violence often is Alpha. She craves dominance, and there is nothing in the world more dominating than a hard slap and manhandling to her.

Whether they're Alpha or not, the point is that they're the opposite of 99% of people these girls hang out with (and who don't get their panties wet).

You guys are forgetting one important factor here: propaganda (brainwashing)

We have all seen the consequences of effective propaganda and at the end of the day they're both 15 and 17.

During WW1 many draftees didn't want to fight and saw no reason to kill someone just because they're from another country. Think "if fate was different that could be my best friend." Now after WW1 the propaganda machine came and in by WW2 many of the younger generation embraced warfare and had no problem shooting at the opposite side.

My point in all of this is propaganda is a bitch and social media sites need to just ban everyone from the middle east Via IP address (except for Israel) until this whole thing blows over. They obviously won't because of revenue and "its not fair" that everyone should be banned.

Quote: (10-11-2014 10:08 AM)turkishcandy Wrote:  

I feel sympathy. They were 15 and 17 for god's sake. Do you think they had any idea what they would get themselves into? Sure running away with an exotic arab for a cock ride is a bad decision that should have consequences, but (in my opinion) they don't deserve a life of servitude and fear.

If they were boys, would you change your mind?

WIA

Quote: (10-11-2014 02:06 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

Quote: (10-11-2014 10:08 AM)turkishcandy Wrote:  

I feel sympathy. They were 15 and 17 for god's sake. Do you think they had any idea what they would get themselves into? Sure running away with an exotic arab for a cock ride is a bad decision that should have consequences, but (in my opinion) they don't deserve a life of servitude and fear.

If they were boys, would you change your mind?

WIA

Not speaking for TC but in my personal opinion most of the people including forum members here would be telling boys that age to get lost or let them die there or give them prison sentences if they do come back home.

Quote: (10-11-2014 10:08 AM)turkishcandy Wrote:  

I feel sympathy. They were 15 and 17 for god's sake. Do you think they had any idea what they would get themselves into? Sure running away with an exotic arab for a cock ride is a bad decision that should have consequences, but (in my opinion) they don't deserve a life of servitude and fear.

Joining an internationally known group of Jihadi terrorists is a bit different than simply going through a 'bad boy phase"

I remember quite a bit about when I was 15-17 and you couldn't have payed me to do what these dumb sluts did. There are plenty of women deserving of sympathy, but not these cunts. They deserve everything that happens to them.

If a young man joined this group who came from the same background that they did would you feel sympathy for him? Not one dollar of aid should be spent on these women. They grew up in the internet age, knowledge is only a click away.

I won't judge these girls without fully knowing their situation. What kind of home life did they have? Maybe their mothers were riding the cock carousel and constantly fucking abusive men?

One thing I find interesting is that these girls definitely do NOT have German names. Names ending with -ovic usually have a ch sound at the end. These names are either Serbian or Croatian. So, they may already feel like outsiders in their home countries.

These girls would probably make quality wives, too. Now that has all been lost.

Quote: (10-11-2014 02:06 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

Quote: (10-11-2014 10:08 AM)turkishcandy Wrote:  

I feel sympathy. They were 15 and 17 for god's sake. Do you think they had any idea what they would get themselves into? Sure running away with an exotic arab for a cock ride is a bad decision that should have consequences, but (in my opinion) they don't deserve a life of servitude and fear.

If they were boys, would you change your mind?

WIA

I would change my mind and I have no idea why

Actions have consequences. Sucks for them.

I'm still not convinced they want to come back?

All I've seen as proof that they want to come back are a few news articles that say "Austrian media is reported the girls have sent a message to their family stating that they are homesick and want to return."

How do we know that is not propaganda in itself and the truth? If the girls did indeed send Facebook messages to their families, how do we know the girls sent them and it's not an orchestrated ploy by ISIS?

Quote: (10-11-2014 01:58 PM)L M McCoy Wrote:  

You guys are forgetting one important factor here: propaganda (brainwashing)

We have all seen the consequences of effective propaganda and at the end of the day they're both 15 and 17.

During WW1 many draftees didn't want to fight and saw no reason to kill someone just because they're from another country. Think "if fate was different that could be my best friend." Now after WW1 the propaganda machine came and in by WW2 many of the younger generation embraced warfare and had no problem shooting at the opposite side.

My point in all of this is propaganda is a bitch and social media sites need to just ban everyone from the middle east Via IP address (except for Israel) until this whole thing blows over. They obviously won't because of revenue and "its not fair" that everyone should be banned.

I highly recommend reading this book: On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society
http://www.amazon.de/On-Killing-Psycholo...0316330116

This has more to do with training than geopolitics. In Napoleonic/Civil War times, casualty rates were much lower and many men deliberately shot above the head. You would see massive lines of infantry firing at each other at point blank, but with few men getting hit. WW2 and Vietnam changed all this, when the word "kill" became ingrained during training. When I went through basic (2004) it was "shoot, move, communicate, kill", with "kill" said after just about everything. It's a way of reconditioning to become more lethal in combat.

What's worth noting in the ISIS conflict is their willingness to use knives and blunt objects, which are more "personal" methods of killing during war, leading to further psychological trauma. As illustrated in the book, the majority of soldiers have no problem shooting the enemy with rifles and grenades, but freeze up or have second thoughts when engaged in hand-to-hand.

Quote: (10-12-2014 04:41 AM)Blick Mang Wrote:  

Quote: (10-11-2014 01:58 PM)L M McCoy Wrote:  

You guys are forgetting one important factor here: propaganda (brainwashing)

We have all seen the consequences of effective propaganda and at the end of the day they're both 15 and 17.

During WW1 many draftees didn't want to fight and saw no reason to kill someone just because they're from another country. Think "if fate was different that could be my best friend." Now after WW1 the propaganda machine came and in by WW2 many of the younger generation embraced warfare and had no problem shooting at the opposite side.

My point in all of this is propaganda is a bitch and social media sites need to just ban everyone from the middle east Via IP address (except for Israel) until this whole thing blows over. They obviously won't because of revenue and "its not fair" that everyone should be banned.

I highly recommend reading this book: On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society
http://www.amazon.de/On-Killing-Psycholo...0316330116

This has more to do with training than geopolitics. In Napoleonic/Civil War times, casualty rates were much lower and many men deliberately shot above the head. You would see massive lines of infantry firing at each other at point blank, but with few men getting hit. WW2 and Vietnam changed all this, when the word "kill" became ingrained during training. When I went through basic (2004) it was "shoot, move, communicate, kill", with "kill" said after just about everything. It's a way of reconditioning to become more lethal in combat.

What's worth noting in the ISIS conflict is their willingness to use knives and blunt objects, which are more "personal" methods of killing during war, leading to further psychological trauma. As illustrated in the book, the majority of soldiers have no problem shooting the enemy with rifles and grenades, but freeze up or have second thoughts when engaged in hand-to-hand.

One wonders at the psychological effect of ancient warfare. And its impact on society at large since much of such warfare included up-close and personal hand-to-hand combat.

Quote: (10-12-2014 04:41 AM)Blick Mang Wrote:  

...

This has more to do with training than geopolitics. In Napoleonic/Civil War times, casualty rates were much lower and many men deliberately shot above the head. You would see massive lines of infantry firing at each other at point blank, but with few men getting hit. WW2 and Vietnam changed all this, when the word "kill" became ingrained during training. When I went through basic (2004) it was "shoot, move, communicate, kill", with "kill" said after just about everything. It's a way of reconditioning to become more lethal in combat.

What's worth noting in the ISIS conflict is their willingness to use knives and blunt objects, which are more "personal" methods of killing during war, leading to further psychological trauma. As illustrated in the book, the majority of soldiers have no problem shooting the enemy with rifles and grenades, but freeze up or have second thoughts when engaged in hand-to-hand.

WWII was still a far cry off from current warfare. There are countless stories of selfless heroism, where US pilots shot down German pilots over sea and then alerted US ships to save them from drowning - sometimes US soldiers were risking their lives to do that. And the GIs regarded this as common decency and the right thing to do - it was natural for them to do so.

The reasons for the lack of empathy right now are varied. Video Games were one of the more leading factors of "hardening" the youth and the future soldiers. As much as I like games myself I still am fully aware of the strong interest in the military in aiding the games industry. Hollywood did it's part too, but the shooter games were by far more effective to lower the killing threshold.

Nowadays pilots would not be rescuing shit - they might fly a next round and shoot them in the water to make sure they are dead. US and UK Soldiers in Afghanistan were routinely going on killing sprees where anyone - women, civilians - were fair game. Needless to say - this kind of behavior leaves even the young soldiers perpetrating it traumatized.

Now I am not advocating for Jihadists here, because they are a lot more fucked up, but still - we should be aware of the propaganda changing societies behaviors.

Quote: (10-12-2014 05:54 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Nowadays pilots would not be rescuing shit - they might fly a next round and shoot them in the water to make sure they are dead. US and UK Soldiers in Afghanistan were routinely going on killing sprees where anyone - women, civilians - were fair game. Needless to say - this kind of behavior leaves even the young soldiers perpetrating it traumatized.

Now I am not advocating for Jihadists here, because they are a lot more fucked up, but still - we should be aware of the propaganda changing societies behaviors.

I can tell you haven't been to war by the first quoted paragraph. I'll promise you that the aforementioned killing sprees were not going on "routinely" as you put it. There are atrocities in war, but they are called atrocities because they are on the extreme side of violence and are so few and far between that it still shocks people to learn of them.

Also, unless you've been put in a position where you had to risk your life to save someone who was attempting to take it from you in the first place, you can't possibly understand how difficult or just seemingly pointless that is. Also remember that the atrocities get publicized every single time, while the beautiful things that some soldiers do rarely get a prime time spot on the evening news.

Propaganda works both ways.

Quote: (10-12-2014 06:36 AM)AntiTrace Wrote:  

I can tell you haven't been to war by the first quoted paragraph. I'll promise you that the aforementioned killing sprees were not going on "routinely" as you put it. ...

Granted - did military training in 2 different countries, but no real-life action on Iraq magnitude. And I experienced the psychological makeup of battle - essentially you fight for your buddy next to you. If he got hurt or shot dead, many guys would be doing a lot of shit to avenge him. Maybe those "sprees" were not close as common as it seems. And this is not belittling the current US soldiers - they are mostly honorable and brave men thrown into shitty conflicts created by the plutocracy who don't give a rat's ass about them.

Still I believe that perceptions especially of the enemy have changed. Even in the American Civil war most men did not fire at the enemy because they did not wish to hurt anyone. The same was true for WWI.

And on a different relevant note on ISIS:



A drone has supposedly caught an ISIS warrior raping a donkey - see how the poor bugger tries to escape the dick of the freedom fighter:






Don't know if true, but then it is clear why having 2 white human teenagers is such a treat to them. They won't let go of that pussy if they have donkey as alternative.

Quote: (10-12-2014 06:56 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

They won't let go of that pussy if they have donkey as alternative.

In Islam women are not allowed to divorce their husbands anyway, only men can divorce.

Quote: (10-12-2014 05:54 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Quote: (10-12-2014 04:41 AM)Blick Mang Wrote:  

...

This has more to do with training than geopolitics. In Napoleonic/Civil War times, casualty rates were much lower and many men deliberately shot above the head. You would see massive lines of infantry firing at each other at point blank, but with few men getting hit. WW2 and Vietnam changed all this, when the word "kill" became ingrained during training. When I went through basic (2004) it was "shoot, move, communicate, kill", with "kill" said after just about everything. It's a way of reconditioning to become more lethal in combat.

What's worth noting in the ISIS conflict is their willingness to use knives and blunt objects, which are more "personal" methods of killing during war, leading to further psychological trauma. As illustrated in the book, the majority of soldiers have no problem shooting the enemy with rifles and grenades, but freeze up or have second thoughts when engaged in hand-to-hand.

WWII was still a far cry off from current warfare. There are countless stories of selfless heroism, where US pilots shot down German pilots over sea and then alerted US ships to save them from drowning - sometimes US soldiers were risking their lives to do that. And the GIs regarded this as common decency and the right thing to do - it was natural for them to do so.

The reasons for the lack of empathy right now are varied. Video Games were one of the more leading factors of "hardening" the youth and the future soldiers. As much as I like games myself I still am fully aware of the strong interest in the military in aiding the games industry. Hollywood did it's part too, but the shooter games were by far more effective to lower the killing threshold.

Nowadays pilots would not be rescuing shit - they might fly a next round and shoot them in the water to make sure they are dead. US and UK Soldiers in Afghanistan were routinely going on killing sprees where anyone - women, civilians - were fair game. Needless to say - this kind of behavior leaves even the young soldiers perpetrating it traumatized.

Now I am not advocating for Jihadists here, because they are a lot more fucked up, but still - we should be aware of the propaganda changing societies behaviors.

I believe it was some general in the US marines who noticed behaviour in his troops in WW2.

There is a book or two about this very topic.

All soldiers are from civilian backgrounds, barring some types of people who join for the thrill of killing, most human beings are not capable of just being plonked in front of someone and willing to kill them with a weapon.

Military training changed to train this humanity out of soldiers and make them better killers. Something about bullets fired-to-kill ratios.

If a company is firing 1,000,000 rounds before getting a kill, the kill rate is low. This is perceived as an un-willingness to kill. When that figure is in favour of higher mortality rates inflicted on the enemy they perceive it as a good rate of success.

They changed training to include human targets. Psychology of suppressing the desire to hold off killing someone was suppressed and in a lot of cases, removed.

There are plenty of cases where men went off on killing sprees. That is a by-product of this type of training. You are made into a killer but there is no come-down from it. No reverse training.

Is it any wonder why so many soldiers these days go loco, kill themselves or dive into drink and drugs.

Quote: (10-12-2014 06:56 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Don't know if true, but then it is clear why having 2 white human teenagers is such a treat to them. They won't let go of that pussy if they have donkey as alternative.

It is 100% true. I was in an overwatch position observing a house that was going to get raided. Essentially, we were to watch and give the go signal when the time to hit it was right.

I watched, under night vision and thermal goggles, as the target tucked his kids in, kissed his wife good night, and then went outside and proceeded to fuck his donkey.

I'll give you one guess as to when I called up the "go" signal. Man, watching that goat-fucking freedom hating bastard trying to run away and pull up his pants as troops kicked in his front door and blew charges on his back gate had my rolling over in laughter, almost compromised my position...


I think it is more about dehumanizing your enemy than it is about being psychologically turned into a killer. Hence how I referred to that guy, a man, a father, a husband, brother, etc. I referred him simply as a "target". That is dehumanization of the enemy. That is what makes killing them easier, not shooting at paper human silhouettes at the target range.