Air strikes against Islamic State/ISIS..

[linderman]

 

 

 

The point is that there was no 'they' until we invade Afghanistan and Iraq and completed destabilised the region. 'They' have come to be because of the failed strategy of intervention and invasion.

 

Interestingly there were no Nazis before they came along either. Which country do you think we bombed that persuaded Hitler to invade Poland?

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2014 at 12:40 ----------

 

How exactly do IS fighters with their AK47's and armoured vehicles board domestic flights departing from places like Paris, Tokyo, Berlin and LA when they are in Iraq and Syria?

 

They may have captured a handful of planes but (even if they do have people who can fly them) they cannot get on them and fly to the West to start a new front. They will be shot down a thousand miles away.

 

You need to get a grip.

 

 

 

 

How do you think IS got all their tanks and artillery. They take over countries and take whatever they happen to find. So if they infiltrate airports they can hijack planes on the ground. They can also get ground to air missiles from the arsenal of countries they take over. If islamists take over Syria they have a large airforce. If they take over in Pakistan they have a large number of nuclear weapons. So don't tell me to get a grip. Go out into the real world of today and get yourself a reality check.

[Zamo]

Did it escape your attention that there were more people killed on 9/11 than have been killed by all the terrorist attacks since. So since the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan both happened after 9/11 you are talking rubbish.

 

More people died in the 9/11 attack than have died since from Islamist terrorist attacks in the West, so we have clearly achieved something.

 

I do not think there is a single intelligence agency or government that hasn't acknowledge that the threat from terrorism is worse following our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

Tightening up airport security is what has stopped another 9/11.

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2014 at 13:07 ----------

 

Interestingly there were no Nazis before they came along either. Which country do you think we bombed that persuaded Hitler to invade Poland?

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2014 at 12:40 ----------

 

 

How do you think IS got all their tanks and artillery. They take over countries and take whatever they happen to find. So if they infiltrate airports they can hijack planes on the ground. They can also get ground to air missiles from the arsenal of countries they take over. If islamists take over Syria they have a large airforce. If they take over in Pakistan they have a large number of nuclear weapons. So don't tell me to get a grip. Go out into the real world of today and get yourself a reality check.

 

Ask any military officer to assess the military threat to the UK posed by IS and the answer will be none. They cannot reach us other than through terrorist attacks and the threat of this will not reduce by bombing IS positions in Iraq... it will probably increase the threat.

 

IS pose also no threat to the likes of Pakistan. It would be like an under-8 football team taking on the Brazilian national team. And you think I need a reality check?

[charmer]

Where is this Jewish state of which you speak?

 

Israel? Was that a real question?

[linderman]

Israel? Was that a real question?

 

But Israel isn't a Jewish state. There is total freedom of religion in Israel and you don't get beheaded for picking the wrong one. There are more Muslims living in Israel than there are in Gaza. Indeed there are more Muslims living in Israel now than there were on the land before Israel was founded.

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2014 at 13:46 ----------

 

I do not think there is a single intelligence agency or government that hasn't acknowledge that the threat from terrorism is worse following our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

Tightening up airport security is what has stopped another 9/11.

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2014 at 13:07 ----------

 

 

Ask any military officer to assess the military threat to the UK posed by IS and the answer will be none. They cannot reach us other than through terrorist attacks and the threat of this will not reduce by bombing IS positions in Iraq... it will probably increase the threat.

 

:

 

Can you name these agencies rather than just inventing them and the opinions that they hold?

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2014 at 13:48 ----------

 

IS pose also no threat to the likes of Pakistan. It would be like an under-8 football team taking on the Brazilian national team. And you think I need a reality check?

 

So presumably IS pose no threat to Syria or Iraq. Why it would be like an under-8 football team taking on the Brazilian national team.You need a reality check?

Edited September 30, 2014 by linderman

[L00b]

How many different countries air space would they need to fly over to get to us? Do you not think that airliners have to identify themselves?

Nobody seems to know where they are so that's a redundant question to begin with.

 

Why do they have to 'get to us' for the threat to be considered tangible and worth at least consideration?

 

Assuming they are 'somewhere' between Lybia and Syria and under control of IS (and/or affiliated), downtown Athens and Istanbul (capital cities of NATO members) are fairly close-by at jet airliner ranges and speeds.

 

And IS will be looking at something to aggravate Turkey with (IS middle game is draw in NATO boots on the ground), now that Erdogan has started massing Turkish armour at the Syrian border (unsurprisingly, considering IS' recent and unrelenting gains towards Aïn al-Arab).

 

What's the ultimate provocation IS could come up with, to attract Turkish tanks onto the 'wrong' side of the border and thereby bring Assad's regulars into the fray, and by potential extension (domino effect) Iran? Do you think ploughing an airliner or two into the Hagia Sophia would do it?

 

As regards identification and tracking, don't make me laugh: MH70 can't have escaped your memory already, surely.

It is laughable to suggest that IS could invade the West in captured jumbo jets.

It is indeed, and I have not suggested anything of the sort

 

But when you see how much damage (both immediate and consequential over a period of subsequent years) careful planning and 3 airliners achieved on 9/11, just think how much more could potentially be achieved with 9. Only fools underestimate their enemies, si vis pacem, para bellum

Edited September 30, 2014 by L00b

[charmer]

But Israel isn't a Jewish state. There is total freedom of religion in Israel and you don't get beheaded for picking the wrong one. There are more Muslims living in Israel than there are in Gaza. Indeed there are more Muslims living in Israel now than there were on the land before Israel was founded.

 

So Israel isn't a Jewish state?

 

The reason there are more Muslims living in Israel than Gaza is because Israel is much, much, much bigger than Gaza.

 

People may not be beheaded for picking the wrong religion now but when the state was being set up, and the Muslims forcibly removed from their homes, many many deaths occurred. I would venture to guess that if IS get what they want (a homeland), then their tactics will shift 70 years later. I use historical evidence to support this claim.

[Mecky]

So Israel isn't a Jewish state?

 

The reason there are more Muslims living in Israel than Gaza is because Israel is much, much, much bigger than Gaza.

 

People may not be beheaded for picking the wrong religion now but when the state was being set up, and the Muslims forcibly removed from their homes, many many deaths occurred. I would venture to guess that if IS get what they want (a homeland), then their tactics will shift 70 years later. I use historical evidence to support this claim.

 

What kind of an argument is that? Canada is much bigger than India or China for that matter and has less people living there. Norway is much bigger than the UK and has a fraction of number of people living there than in the UK

[johncocker]

If that was possible why didn't they shoot down the 9/11 terrorists, could it be because they didn't know at the time who had control of the planes or what their intentions were.

 

Some times the only possible result in a game of chess is stalemate, which means you can keep them in check indefinitely but you can never win, but if you decide to stop playing you can still loose.

 

the americans still have 30,000 troops in korea 60 years after the korean war:)

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2014 at 15:12 ----------

 

We cannot prevent the odd one from getting through and committing acts of terrorism (which bombing will not stop wither) but they do not pose any threat to national security. They cannot invade. There will be no gun battles on the streets.

 

 

You don't think the successful establishment of a "caliphate" run by homicidal religious maniacs just across the Mediterranean might have some implications for Europe a little bit further down the road?

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2014 at 15:20 ----------

 

So Israel isn't a Jewish state?

 

The reason there are more Muslims living in Israel than Gaza is because Israel is much, much, much bigger than Gaza.

 

People may not be beheaded for picking the wrong religion now but when the state was being set up, and the Muslims forcibly removed from their homes, many many deaths occurred. I would venture to guess that if IS get what they want (a homeland), then their tactics will shift 70 years later. I use historical evidence to support this claim.

 

if you care to take a look at historical evidence you'll find that

these lands have seen genocide and unspeakable cruelty long before western imperialism came along.

Before the British Empire, before US led invasion, before the oppression of Saddam, these lands saw constant cruelty metered out between different tribes of people who supposedly worshiped the same God.

Things are no different now. Blaming the US and west is just lazy and myopic. Violence of the type we see now is a tradition that goes back centuries.

 

 

The best option for us is to do nothing over there - let them slaughter each other to their hearts' content. It's a problem for themselves and their neighbours. We should concentrate on border security, better surveillance, and getting rid of the Human Rights lobby's grip on our judicial system.

Edited September 30, 2014 by johncocker

[Lobos]

WE were in oludinez Turkey last week when the bombing was going on and we could hear the bombs going off from the beach there were some real big booms that shook the place,it was loud from all that distance away so heck knows what it must have been like for those under it, it went on for about three hours or so ironic we are sat there sunning our self when some poor sod it getting the crap blown out them only 900 miles away....

[charmer]

What kind of an argument is that? Canada is much bigger than India or China for that matter and has less people living there. Norway is much bigger than the UK and has a fraction of number of people living there than in the UK

 

So when someone says "more people live in place a than place b" you do not find it reasonable to consider the size of the places?

 

the americans still have 30,000 troops in korea 60 years after the korean war:)

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2014 at 15:12 ----------

 

 

 

You don't think the successful establishment of a "caliphate" run by homicidal religious maniacs just across the Mediterranean might have some implications for Europe a little bit further down the road?

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2014 at 15:20 ----------

 

 

if you care to take a look at historical evidence you'll find that

these lands have seen genocide and unspeakable cruelty long before western imperialism came along.

Before the British Empire, before US led invasion, before the oppression of Saddam, these lands saw constant cruelty metered out between different tribes of people who supposedly worshiped the same God.

Things are no different now. Blaming the US and west is just lazy and myopic. Violence of the type we see now is a tradition that goes back centuries.

 

 

The best option for us is to do nothing over there - let them slaughter each other to their hearts' content. It's a problem for themselves and their neighbours. We should concentrate on border security, better surveillance, and getting rid of the Human Rights lobby's grip on our judicial system.

 

I haven't blamed the West in this thread. My point is that IS are doing nothing new, we did something very similar in the 40's and 50's (about the same time Elvis was in the charts). Therefore perhaps we should engage them in discussion instead of bombing them to pieces. Perhaps then we could start making friends in this world instead of enemies.

 

The violence does predate everything you mentioned, this is something I hope you explain to the idiots who blame Islam for this problem. It has been happening, all over the world, for centuries.

 

I do agree with you regarding how we deal with this. Leave them to it, with the exception of mediating. Interventionism rarely makes things better.