Go after ISIS women and children?

The latest non politically correct thing from Trump is he wants to go after the women and children of ISIS and just wipe them all out: extinct.

I was listening to some commentary on this later and the talking heads were saying something like "Yes. For example the U.S. bombers and jets don't go after Al Baghdadi because he surrounds himself with his women and children and sex slaves."

This made me think about this a little. What a paradox this is that we aren't going to kill Baghdadi with a missile even though we know where he is because his wives and children and sex slaves and other slaves don't die too.

However, isn't Baghdadi now more dangerous than Osama Bin Laden ever was? And did we worry about killing his wives and children that much when the U.S. killed him?

In the end if you are going to be in a war and win that war you have to do literally "anything" to win it sometimes.

If this is just another police action then the rules are different. But, if this is an actual war that we have to win then Al Baghdadi's family, sex slaves and other slaves are just collateral damage. This is war and war is HELL.

Here are some of the countries that don't have rules against killing women and children:

Russia
Iran
Assad in Syria
and many others
including Saudi Arabia and other Sunni nations.

It's great if the U.S. and NATO are protecting women and children but in the end if you want to win you have to be willing to do anything to win. War is hell.

Police actions are different.

So, my question to you is this: "Is this a war for the survival of Western Democracies?"

Or "Is this just another police action?"

Your answer will say it all.