I'm not on board with those tactics either. Yes, they might scare the enemy, but so do a lot of things that aren't ethical. Even the worst criminal has rights, and recognizing those rights is what makes us better than ISIS. We can't throw away the moral high ground to get the tactical high ground.
Why can't we? Didn't those attempts at "moral high ground" only got our people killed for no good reason? Besides, when you get down to it, we lost any moral high ground we could've had back when we started meddling with their affairs. Civilians, innocent people are getting killed. I wouldn't want to die for my government being ethical. Heinous? Yes. Necessary? Probably. And it's not like ISIS are any kind of lawful combatant, so they can't go complaining to the UN. They've not protected by the conventions and guilty of crimes just as bad. As far as I'm concerned, they'd have brought it on themselves.
Also, I'm talking
strategic high ground. This would be a show of strength. In Muslim culture, it's viewed differently than in ours. Notice how democracies in there fail, where military regimes prevail for a long, long time. Even the Arab Spring revolutions had military support, all successful ones were backed by significant strength. Even their religion is based around the concept of submission. What I propose falls in with how they seem to think. It also seems to have worked before. We need to play by their laws, beat them at their own game. We need to subvert the Islamic State, take it by the throat and crush it under our boot. Attacking their minds and souls would go a long way towards that.
Well, that, or just exterminate the movement to a man. This is the costlier option, slightly less heinous (arguable, more people will die, and some of them will be innocent), and probably much less effective. It would definitely result in more death on both sides. All in all, I prefer the first option. It might be an ugly thing to do, but IMO, superior to mass witch hunts and executions. I see no other ways of dealing with them. IS needs to cease existing. Otherwise, we're looking into more innocent deaths. They're not going to stop until someone goes and stops them. The later they're stopped, the higher the price will be, not that it's not bloody high enough already.