UKC

Islamic State: Britain joins coalition to 'destroy' Isis.....

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
'Islamic State: Britain joins coalition to 'destroy' Isis – but battle could take three years, warns Obama'

Three years who's mr vote for change cult leader trying to kid? This isn't mission creep, this is continuous state sponsored manufactured warfare. As the best solution out wise leaders can come up with is to kill more people because people are been killed, and all this will do is radicalise another generation to avenge the deaths of those that have gone before them. I wouldn't be surprised if our psychopathic leaders are planning some downtown redevelopment using a couple of mini nukes left in the back of a 68 split screen and similar to do enough damage that people are crying out for more bloodshed and the job will get pinned on the latest well funded terror group....

Just sayin
 dale1968 06 Sep 2014
In reply to The Mystery Toad:

What are you sayin? Just give them hug, and try and understand all they want is their own mini state where there idea of liberalism is slavery and mass executions.
Don't suppose you would be interested if they were on your doorstep enslaving your gf wife daughter. Some liberal crap will deter them.
 Rob Exile Ward 06 Sep 2014
In reply to The Mystery Toad:

I've got sympathy for your point of view but in this case I think you're wrong. It isn't the beheading of journalists that's the problem, vile though that might be; the reality is that they are fragmenting the middle east without any sensible coherent strategy or plan for the future, other than returning to a sort of dark ages with iPhones. They're as bonkers as the Lords Liberation Army, but with far more money and far wider appeal because of the support from a few barmy old men who enjoy sending repressed young men off to war for their 'religion'.
 Timmd 06 Sep 2014
In reply to dale1968:
> What are you sayin? Just give them hug, and try and understand all they want is their own mini state where there idea of liberalism is slavery and mass executions.

> Don't suppose you would be interested if they were on your doorstep enslaving your gf wife daughter. Some liberal crap will deter them.

I can remember hearing a specialist saying that if we get 'the war on terror' right it could take ten years, and if we get it wrong it could take thirty.

At this rate it does (to me) look like taking thirty years, that as we continue to get involved militarily and as disorder continues, new kinds of groups continue to form.

It's not an area I claim to know anything about, but I can't help wondering if our whole approach since 9/11 couldn't have been more constructive.
Post edited at 11:20
 atrendall 06 Sep 2014
In reply to The Mystery Toad:

Some serious paranoia here. Just saying.

IS needs nipping in the bud and the only way is with military force. Not "state sponsored manufactured warfare" but common sense and if the west doesn't deal with it rapidly and effectively it will only spread like the virus it is.

Just saying.
 dale1968 06 Sep 2014
In reply to Timmd:

> It's not an area I claim to know anything about, but I can't help wondering if our whole approach since 9/11 could have been more constructive.

Possibly,with hindsight, but procrastination certainly won't help, we have to deal with the now, I am sure in 30 years this won't be a done deal.
If not IS then it is someone else, threats are always out there, they evolve whatever the policy of the incumbent government.
We really like to believe we have so much control, all we can do is react to the threat IS poses
 Timmd 06 Sep 2014
In reply to dale1968:
We need to act with more foresight/wisdom, whatever you'd want to call it.

Most of the countries where Islam is the majority religion or the only religion, are not under attack, but the narrative that the radicalised people follow is that Islam is under attack from 'the west', and that they need to rise up against the oppressors.

With 9/11 happening as a result of this radicalised point of view, mounting invasions possibly doesn't seem to be the best way of countering the threat posed by radicalised Muslims. Isis appearing with it's goal to have a Caliphate, almost seems like the predictable next step. America wanting to do something after 9/11 is entirely understandable too.

As you say, it's more obvious with hindsight.

(I'm not saying we should give in to terrorism, or that the terrorists are in some way right, in case this post gets misinterpreted.)
Post edited at 11:41
 Greenbanks 06 Sep 2014
In reply to The Mystery Toad:

Anyone who puts a time-span on this kind of thing is shooting in the dark (sic). History is littered with examples of prolonged (and failed) attempts to subdue
 dale1968 06 Sep 2014
In reply to Timmd:

No simple solutions, even the intellectual might of UKC might flounder with this.
I think Arab nations should do more, but they cannot move past their own divisiveness, to come up with solutions
 Timmd 06 Sep 2014
In reply to dale1968:
> No simple solutions, even the intellectual might of UKC might flounder with this.

> I think Arab nations should do more, but they cannot move past their own divisiveness, to come up with solutions

Yeah, it beats me what the best approach from now on would be. It could be some of the Arab nations don't want to get too involved in case it comes back on them, though I am generally charitable I've been told.

Something more from the Arab nations could be helpful.

Thus endeth my thoughts on this...
Post edited at 12:28
 Dauphin 06 Sep 2014
In reply to The Mystery Toad:

Ismalic extremism is the gift that keeps on giving. To Lockheed-Martin, Thales & BAE. No boots on the ground this week apart from SF and or FACs. Only a matter of time. How else do you hold ground, restore infrastructure, eliminate stay behinds, basic counterinsurgency?

D
 woolsack 06 Sep 2014
In reply to The Mystery Toad:

Recruit IS, train IS, equip IS, fight IS, destroy IS

and repeat.....
 dale1968 06 Sep 2014
In reply to woolsack:

Do I detect a hint of cynicism?
 squarepeg 06 Sep 2014
In reply to The Mystery Toad:

It's like the crusades in the middle ages.............were going over there to destroy them before they come here n kill us. Only its never really over n nobody really wins.................
 Billhook 06 Sep 2014
In reply to The Mystery Toad:

Troll I'd say!
 pec 06 Sep 2014
In reply to squarepeg:

> It's like the crusades in the middle ages.............were going over there to destroy them before they come here n kill us. Only its never really over n nobody really wins................. >

Where would you rather live, the Midle East or Western Europe? Its pretty clear who won really.

 Bruce Hooker 06 Sep 2014
In reply to The Mystery Toad:

I don't have a quick fix but perhaps a start would be to think a bit before acting? ISIS seems to have got under way in Syria when it was one of the Islamic groups opposing Assad... so arms were sent and training was given to those opposing Assad without any real thought, apparently, about the risk of these arms and trained men falling into th hands of ISIS and other "bad guys", which is what appears to have happened.

Before this, in Libya there was, we are told, a great risk to the people of Libya caused by Ghadaffi, so again arms were sent and help given - even "boots on the ground" but above all bombs in the air and the islamists in the area built their strength up and took the place over... and then set about using the arms to have a go at taking over much of Saharan Africa... leading to France sending 2 or 3000 troops to the area to "do something" about it. They're still there by the way.

In both cases the need to "do something" beat any notion of caution and the results are catastrophic. At least they are on the human side, the oil companies might not think so but is it for oil companies to rule the planet and the foreign policy of the Western world?
 Banned User 77 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

> I don't have a quick fix but perhaps a start would be to think a bit before acting? ISIS seems to have got under way in Syria when it was one of the Islamic groups opposing Assad... so arms were sent and training was given to those opposing Assad without any real thought, apparently, about the risk of these arms and trained men falling into th hands of ISIS and other "bad guys", which is what appears to have happened.

OK.. how?

You've gone A =B then f*ck it lets do C..
 atrendall 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

So Bruce do we just stand back and hide our heads in the sand, do nothing rather than do something? Lets just let a bunch of deviant islamic terrorists butcher their way around the middle east, crucifying, burying alive, mass rapes, murdering anyone who dares to have a different religion to their own perversion of islam.

As for oil companies...another pet hate like all multi nationals, the USA, the western world in general. But I bet Bruce uses a computer produced by a giant corporation, uses the product of the oil companies and lives in a stable country free to express his own beliefs etc.

I can't see Bruce moving to live in IS's caliphate but if we do nothing you can be sure that creeping cruel caliphate will be working its way west. Destroy it while we can before any more innocent people are beheaded, be they innocent journalists, or innocent civilians in the UK.
 Mark Sheridan 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Stick by your views as your dragged screaming from your house in five years buddy?
 dale1968 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Mark Sheridan:

He's quiet on that isn't he?
 Bruce Hooker 07 Sep 2014
In reply to IainRUK:

> OK.. how?

Err, by walking? Syria isn't that big and militants can quite easily move from one group to another. Read this if you think that it's simple, ity's about wher IS fighters come from:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29043331
 Bruce Hooker 07 Sep 2014
In reply to atrendall:

> So Bruce do we just stand back and hide our heads in the sand, do nothing rather than do something?

Doing the wrong thing is worse than doing nothing IMO.

> Lets just let a bunch of deviant islamic terrorists butcher their way around the middle east, crucifying, burying alive, mass rapes, murdering anyone who dares to have a different religion to their own perversion of islam.

I quite agree so perhaps we should avoid creating these groups? We created the Taliban and now we have created the monster that is IS. Do you think this was a good idea? Doing the wrong thing in the name of "doing something about it". The attitude of an adolescent who loses hiss cool and lashes out at anyone rather than thinking first?

> As for oil companies...another pet hate

One of the main consequences of the fall of Ghadaffi was that his plans to transfer the operating of the oil production to Chinese and other companies was blocked and the previous Western companies got back in there. It's not just "hate" it's a reality in this case... as you would know if you were less blinkered. Is Libya a success story for the average Libyan do you think? Again the desire to "do something" rather than think what is best to do leaves thousands dead, a country destroyed and to what advantage? Or rather whose advantage?

> I can't see Bruce moving to live in IS's caliphate

Which the stupidity of those who you appear to support helped create in the first place? Your logic is weird. I don't think I've ever said anything in favour of IS BTW, can you point out where I did?


 Bruce Hooker 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Mark Sheridan:

> Stick by your views as your dragged screaming from your house in five years buddy?

So IS is coming to Western Europe? Carrying Saddam's WMDs on their camels I suppose.
 dale1968 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Mehdi Nemmouche, maybe only one, but he was here in Europe, I think mark was meaning from the comfort of the west it's easy not to be angry and be analytical
 abr1966 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

I don't disagree with a lot of what you say Bruce ,but, what would you donow? You're take on it seems to be....we shouldn't be in this position in the first place....but we re so are you happy to keep out and let IS do whatever they like?
 Bruce Hooker 07 Sep 2014
In reply to abr1966:

Yes, that's the problem but my point is that we have continually got it wrong in the past so one important thing to do would be not to once again get it wrong.

As for what to do now it seems to me that just bombing them is probably the worst thing to do as has been shown time and time again? It's not like a normal army which when you kill most of them you've won it's more like a Hydra, as soon as you kill some this act recreates new fighters. For example the yanks are crowing that they have killed a prominent leader in Somalia but the next day a new leader has already been named and all it has done is intensified the hatred of those surviving.

In the immediate it seems wiser to give maximum support to local muslim rivals like the Kurds and the Shias rather than us infidels being on the front line, but on the close medium term it seems to me that attacking the motives which drive thousands of ordinary people taking up arms and going to die for the "cause" is important..

Examples are the corruption and inequalities in some muslim countries with whom we are closely allied, the problems which remain from the fairly haphazard way the Middle East was carved up at the time of the collapse of colonial empire and, above all, the problem of Israel, look at the video I linked above, the end part of it shows islamists holding a banner saying "First Damascus then Jerusalem" - for many, maybe most, muslims this a a thorn in their sides they cannot forget, a permanent reminder that the Western world sees them as inferior beings.

Now people will say I always say the same thing, but maybe it's because the same problems subsist?
 Mark Sheridan 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

> So IS is coming to Western Europe? Carrying Saddam's WMDs on their camels I suppose.

I don't think Lee Rigby's murderers run him over with a camel. This very bad thing grows like a cancer in a country as well as spreading from further afield.
But don't worry, they'll say;
"Leave Bruce alone, he's alright. He's always been very supportive of the plight of us poor, suffering extremists".
Wake up!
 Bruce Hooker 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Mark Sheridan:

> "Leave Bruce alone, he's alright. He's always been very supportive of the plight of us poor, suffering extremists".
Wake up!

Why are you making things up like this, I've said nothing in support of IS, I'm trying to point out the best way not only of doing away with this lot but making sure we don't create yet another similar movement is a few years. Your policy, as much as we can grasp it, is, IMO, the best way to strengthen radical islam.. is that what you really want?
 wbo 07 Sep 2014
In reply to The Mystery Toad:

I wonder if it is wise to treat IS as a terrorist organization as that is not how they're functioning - they're a proto Taliban/caliphate. They take taxes , export oil, provide crude services and so on. I honestly do not know if they're a threat to the uk as they seem to be rather 'over there' - are they bothered about 'over here'? If we left them alone would they spread, grow? They do appear pretty vile and are effectively subjugating the population so they have a size they can reach before they suffer a rebellion and break down.

As I doubt they're popular with the population where they rule I suspect they could be toppled and not return in the power vacuum strikes would create.

 Bruce Hooker 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Mark Sheridan:

Here's an article that might interest you, it's a bit long but then these sort of problems can't be sorted with a twitter:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/World/WOR-01-030914.html

Two quotes but they don't sum up the article itself:

"Americans prefer to believe that all problems have solutions. There may, however, be no obvious or at least immediate solution when it comes to ISIS, an organization based on exclusivity and divisiveness in a region that couldn't be more divided. On the other hand, as a minority movement that has already alienated so many in the region, left to itself it might with time simply burn out or implode. We don't know. We can't know. But we do have reasonable evidence from the past 13 years of what an escalating American military intervention is likely to do: not whatever it is that Washington wants it to do. "

"But ISIS lives and breathes and grows, and across the Greater Middle East Islamic extremist organizations are gaining membership and traction in ways that should illuminate just what the war on terror has really delivered. The fact that we can't now imagine what might be worse than ISIS means nothing, given that no one in our world could imagine ISIS before it sprang into being.

The American record in these last 13 years is a shameful one. Do it again should not be an option."
 squarepeg 07 Sep 2014
In reply to pec:

who? who won................who lost? what difference?
I'll live here thanks, feeling not one thousandth of a percent threatened by IS, Iraq WMD or the Taliban, thanks!
 moac 08 Sep 2014
In reply to The Mystery Toad:

I've heard there are only about 30 000 Isis troops, that's a smaller crowd than a Premier League match. Why can't we get the other Arab Nations to sort this out, why has it become our responsibility? I'm appalled as anyone by the atrocities going on but it's more the surrounding states duty to step in, they can't police their own but go crazy at the west if we do.
 jkarran 08 Sep 2014
In reply to Mark Sheridan:

> I don't think Lee Rigby's murderers run him over with a camel. This very bad thing grows like a cancer in a country as well as spreading from further afield.

I'm not quite clear on this, do you think prosecuting yet another overseas bombing campaign is going to increase or decrease the rate of domestic atrocities? I have no idea how you tackle a problem like IS without leaving a similar or bigger mess behind but one thing's for sure, bombing them won't achieve much long term but it gives them one hell of a recruiting sergeant to focus the next generation of angry young men at home and abroad.

Cutting their funding and disrupting their supply lines may once have worked but now they have the significant resources of their occupied territory at their disposal plus whatever external support they had to get going. We could damage that of course but at a terrible cost.

It's a depressing situation with no obvious solution but one that's hard to ignore morally given our complicity in creating the conditions for their growth.

The criminal gangsterism, poisonous ideology and systematic reign of terror is reminiscent of the Nazi approach in their occupied countries. I'm afraid it is something we ignore at our peril

jk
Post edited at 11:24

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...