ISIS Jihadi John and Hostages Found by Drones in Raqqa-

So apparently drones have tracked the whereabouts of Jihadi John, as well as people in orange jumpsuits believed to be hostages. Big news right?!?! Dont count on a rescue or kill or capture mission though. British special forces chiefs have said that they fear a kill or capture mission would "end in failure". So, first of all, since when are British special forces running the show?

The Islamic State terrorist known as Jihadi John has been tracked by drones flying over the Syrian city of Raqqa – but British Special Forces chiefs fear a ‘kill or capture’ mission there would end in bloody failure, sources disclosed last night.
Reaper drones deployed high above the terrorists’ strongholds are also believed to have identified hostages wearing orange jumpsuits but top brass are thought to have currently ruled out a rescue operation because IS defences are too strong.
Special Forces bosses have advised the Ministry of Defence that a sustained bombing campaign lasting several weeks would be preferable.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... mission-end-failure.html#ixzz3FFAywprI
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

www.dailymail.co.uk... mission-end-failure.html

I found this part very interesting:

Special Forces bosses have advised the Ministry of Defence that a sustained bombing campaign lasting several weeks would be preferable.

Were going to risk the lives of other hostages? Bold move by the US.

originally posted by: thesmokingman
So apparently drones have tracked the whereabouts of Jihadi John, as well as people in orange jumpsuits believed to be hostages. Big news right?!?! Dont count on a rescue or kill or capture mission though. British special forces chiefs have said that they fear a kill or capture mission would "end in failure". So, first of all, since when are British special forces running the show?

The Islamic State terrorist known as Jihadi John has been tracked by drones flying over the Syrian city of Raqqa – but British Special Forces chiefs fear a ‘kill or capture’ mission there would end in bloody failure, sources disclosed last night.
Reaper drones deployed high above the terrorists’ strongholds are also believed to have identified hostages wearing orange jumpsuits but top brass are thought to have currently ruled out a rescue operation because IS defences are too strong.
Special Forces bosses have advised the Ministry of Defence that a sustained bombing campaign lasting several weeks would be preferable.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... mission-end-failure.html#ixzz3FFAywprI
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

www.dailymail.co.uk... mission-end-failure.html

You can't kill off the bad guys just yet, there's more beheading to do.

He added that if terrorists looked directly into the sky they could be identified.
The US Air Force has more than 100 MQ-9 Reaper drones at its disposal, though how many have been sent to Syria is unknown.
The drone has a maximum range of 5,300 miles and can fly for up to 32 hours at 207mph.
Its image sensors are inside its nose cone and a ‘Gorgon Stare’ wide area surveillance system, used in missions over Afghanistan, can also be fitted.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... mission-end-failure.html#ixzz3FFChUu7Z
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

So even if someone has looked into the sky they can be identified. Pretty crazy. So, the US is apparently taking orders from British Special forces now, I guess the US is just the muscle? They sure are pushing this whole coalition partnership thing for some reason. Well, if it is really him, and there are hostages that were seen. Why not just go in guns a blazing? Oh, because they want to continue bombing of pre arranged targets like grain silos and oil refineries. Im telling you, they will not stop until Assad is out of power.

Top brass say that ISIS defenses are too strong? These "top brass" need to be fired immediately! If they think ISIS is too strong, then I am worried when a real war breaks out...you know, against a real country and real troops, with real equipment? This is all such BS. The jig is almost up guys

a reply to: thesmokingman

I've held a suspicion for a long time, that the U.S never really became independent from Britain.

originally posted by: thesmokingman
So apparently drones have tracked the whereabouts of Jihadi John, as well as people in orange jumpsuits believed to be hostages. Big news right?!?! Dont count on a rescue or kill or capture mission though. British special forces chiefs have said that they fear a kill or capture mission would "end in failure". So, first of all, since when are British special forces running the show?

Why should it have to fall to the USA to fix things constantly? When we jump in, we're yelled at/about by the rest of the world, saying how we're ''war hungry'' and ''want to be world police''. When we don't jump in, people complain cuz we didn't.

Let Britain take a turn. USA isn't the only country in the world being affected by ISIS. Maybe Britain or Russia or any number of other countries could take these jerks out once and for all.

Bravo to them for trying.

originally posted by: thesmokingman
Top brass say that ISIS defenses are too strong? These "top brass" need to be fired immediately! If they think ISIS is too strong, then I am worried when a real war breaks out...you know, against a real country and real troops, with real equipment? This is all such BS. The jig is almost up guys

Special forces rely on stealth. Any incursion would be expected. Sacrificing SAS troops is a non option.
Remember the U.S already failed in a similar op.

originally posted by: EA006

originally posted by: thesmokingman
Top brass say that ISIS defenses are too strong? These "top brass" need to be fired immediately! If they think ISIS is too strong, then I am worried when a real war breaks out...you know, against a real country and real troops, with real equipment? This is all such BS. The jig is almost up guys

Special forces rely on stealth. Any incursion would be expected. Sacrificing SAS troops is a non option.
Remember the U.S already failed in a similar op.

Fair point, however I think that possibly sacrificing a few troops is worth it to possibly save how many hostages? I mean seriously, how STRONG is ISIS compared to like, 40 countries and all their tech/weapons? Kind of like chess, sometimes you must sacrifice a couple pawns to take down the king.

a reply to: thesmokingman

Some people have the mindset that it is better to simply kill what you cannot control.

I am of the opinion that the Jihadi John videos are panning out exactly the way they were designed. They capture a lot of attention the squeamish would not be able to bear. There's no doubt how the victim ended up. There's no doubt the train wreck is gonna keep on keeping on.

Decades ago, the governments of civilized nations bought into the notion that one of the goals of terrorism was to cause 'an overreaction' ... and boy were they fooled. An overreaction is exactly what is needed. The civilized world should simply accept the challenge of Jihad and 'go biblical' on the whole area. Hence, I'm an advocate for the formation of an Islamic Caliphate. Let 'em all gather in one place ... go ahead!!

a reply to: thesmokingman

So, first of all, since when are British special forces running the show?

Since 1815, Captain America.

When the British do regime change, they do it right. Dhofar Rebellion.

Unlike the United Fruit Company and Rumsfeld's Rangers...

Oh, and:

I think that possibly sacrificing a few troops is worth it to possibly save how many hostages?

You first, soldier.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: thesmokingman

So, first of all, since when are British special forces running the show?

Since 1815, Captain America.

When the British do regime change, they do it right. Dhofar Rebellion.

Unlike the United Fruit Company and Rumsfeld's Rangers...

Oh; and:

I think that possibly sacrificing a few troops is worth it to possibly save how many hostages?

You first, soldier.

Oh, ok, so this is Britians war? I dont think so friend...By the way, I am not a soldier...

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: EA006

originally posted by: thesmokingman
Top brass say that ISIS defenses are too strong? These "top brass" need to be fired immediately! If they think ISIS is too strong, then I am worried when a real war breaks out...you know, against a real country and real troops, with real equipment? This is all such BS. The jig is almost up guys

Special forces rely on stealth. Any incursion would be expected. Sacrificing SAS troops is a non option.
Remember the U.S already failed in a similar op.

Fair point, however I think that possibly sacrificing a few troops is worth it to possibly save how many hostages? I mean seriously, how STRONG is ISIS compared to like, 40 countries and all their tech/weapons? Kind of like chess, sometimes you must sacrifice a couple pawns to take down the king.

The SAS are not pawns. Even if a successful raid was mounted it would not "topple the king".
Sending them on a suicide mission is a non starter.

originally posted by: EA006

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: EA006

originally posted by: thesmokingman
Top brass say that ISIS defenses are too strong? These "top brass" need to be fired immediately! If they think ISIS is too strong, then I am worried when a real war breaks out...you know, against a real country and real troops, with real equipment? This is all such BS. The jig is almost up guys

Special forces rely on stealth. Any incursion would be expected. Sacrificing SAS troops is a non option.
Remember the U.S already failed in a similar op.

Fair point, however I think that possibly sacrificing a few troops is worth it to possibly save how many hostages? I mean seriously, how STRONG is ISIS compared to like, 40 countries and all their tech/weapons? Kind of like chess, sometimes you must sacrifice a couple pawns to take down the king.

The SAS are not pawns. Even if a successful raid was mounted it would not "topple the king".
Sending them on a suicide mission is a non starter.

I think you are giving ISIS a little to much credit. Look, point is, this is all a front anyways, ISIS is not the terror orginization that they would like you to believe they are. I guarantee they are no match for the single most powerful military complex in the world...Care to explain exactly how it would be a suicide mission?

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: EA006

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: EA006

originally posted by: thesmokingman
Top brass say that ISIS defenses are too strong? These "top brass" need to be fired immediately! If they think ISIS is too strong, then I am worried when a real war breaks out...you know, against a real country and real troops, with real equipment? This is all such BS. The jig is almost up guys

Special forces rely on stealth. Any incursion would be expected. Sacrificing SAS troops is a non option.
Remember the U.S already failed in a similar op.

Fair point, however I think that possibly sacrificing a few troops is worth it to possibly save how many hostages? I mean seriously, how STRONG is ISIS compared to like, 40 countries and all their tech/weapons? Kind of like chess, sometimes you must sacrifice a couple pawns to take down the king.

The SAS are not pawns. Even if a successful raid was mounted it would not "topple the king".
Sending them on a suicide mission is a non starter.

I think you are giving ISIS a little to much credit. Look, point is, this is all a front anyways, ISIS is not the terror orginization that they would like you to believe they are. I guarantee they are no match for the single most powerful military complex in the world...Care to explain exactly how it would be a suicide mission?

Yeah. The SAS operate in 4 man teams or multiples there of.
You want to send those few men in without the element of surprise, to rescue hostages you can't pinpoint exactly in a region controlled by an UNKNOWN number of enemy combatants armed with looted hi-tech American weapons.

Guys its the Dail Mail - read it with a pinch of salt - it is a crap source of News and being British would have said SAS advise to give the readers something to cheer about.

Yes, Dail Mail readers will believe the hype and buy more newspapers. Its trash.

As pointed out, it doesnt matter who is running the show - if the SAS said it was too dangerous, and Delta said it wasnt their bag I am sure Seals would HooHar and jump at it, or Rangers, perhaps Iraqui SF may want to do it....they (SF) do advise the government on what SF are capable of, but the ultimate decision lies with the Prime Minister and the Commander in Chief.

However as its the Mail - the story would have been lifted from another non credible outlest.

a reply to: thesmokingman

I would guess that Britain calls the shots on this one because Jihad John is a British citizen. Ironically, there was a lot of uproar on this very website a few years ago after Obama issued a death warrant on an American citizen.

Funny how things change...

originally posted by: thesmokingman

originally posted by: EA006

originally posted by: thesmokingman
Top brass say that ISIS defenses are too strong? These "top brass" need to be fired immediately! If they think ISIS is too strong, then I am worried when a real war breaks out...you know, against a real country and real troops, with real equipment? This is all such BS. The jig is almost up guys

Special forces rely on stealth. Any incursion would be expected. Sacrificing SAS troops is a non option.
Remember the U.S already failed in a similar op.

Fair point, however I think that possibly sacrificing a few troops is worth it to possibly save how many hostages? I mean seriously, how STRONG is ISIS compared to like, 40 countries and all their tech/weapons? Kind of like chess, sometimes you must sacrifice a couple pawns to take down the king.

They won't sacrifice elite soldier without at least a fair chance that the hostages will be saved. Obviously not the case here.
Furthermore the coalition also needs the hostages to make sure that every beheading angries the world even more. If not the coalition looses momentum and glue.
And the pawns to be sacrificed? They are called "hostages".

Funny thing is that if ISIS had been less brutal and murderous they could have taken the whole region in less than five years and nobody would have raised a finger. As long as oil is delivered at our door steps the world is happy.

originally posted by: thesmokingman
...By the way, I am not a soldier...

Nobody is surprised...

originally posted by: thesmokingman

Fair point, however I think that possibly sacrificing a few troops is worth it to possibly save how many hostages?

Why not sacrifice the hostages? What makes them worth more than the soldiers? The soldiers are sent there by someone who gives them orders. The hostages went to the area themselves. All of them knowing the risk.