ISIS and Islamic militants - discussion

robgmun said:
You said we've always had immigration, which is true, but that's not our problem isn't it?

You're trying to say it's always been the same, it hasn't, otherwise back it up
Click to expand...

Immigration has clearly never been the same as it is now, that is patently and forehead-slappingly obvious imo.
 
Richdog said:
Immigration has clearly never been the same as it is now, that is patently and forehead-slappingly obvious imo.
Click to expand...

That's my point, Dj_Jestar is trying to ascertain that we've always had immigration and we should moan about it, but he missed (or deliberately omitted) one very important point that you cannot ignore
 
Dj_Jestar said:
We have the option of pulling back. It's an option. Option. Geddit? Options.
Click to expand...

Destroying them is our only credible option. An Islamic caliphate run by al-Baghdadi isn't in our or the regions interests


Local forces need to stabilise. They will not do this with foreign powers invading all the time. "Great plan" indeed.
Click to expand...

They don't need our encouragement to slaughter each other, they've done it for centuries over petty things. It is in our interests to sort it out.
 
Above&Beyond said:
Destroying them is our only credible option. An Islamic caliphate run by al-Baghdadi isn't in our or the regions interests
Click to expand...
Firstly, no. It's not our only credible (nor viable) option. In fact - why do you seem to think it is even our responsibility at all?

Above&Beyond said:
They don't need our encouragement to slaughter each other, they've done it for centuries over petty things. It is in our interests to sort it out.
Click to expand...
Thus they need stabilising, not invading (again.) I'll ask again: What will happen when we withdraw?
 
robgmun said:
You said we've always had immigration, which is true, but that's not our problem isn't it?

You're trying to say it's always been the same, it hasn't, otherwise back it up
Click to expand...
No, I'm saying it's a recognisably British trait to have immigration and communities of immigrants banded, which it is and always has been. So "forehead slappingly obvious" yet somehow.. unrecognisable? No.
 
Dj_Jestar said:
Firstly, no. It's not our only credible (nor viable) option. In fact - why do you seem to think it is even our responsibility at all?
Click to expand...

Yes it is our only credible option, which is why we had a 7 hour debate and voted for it overwhelmingly in parliament as our option. It's why we are part of Operation Inherent Resolve and part of a 50+ strong coalition that is degrading and destroying ISIS.

Just handing a gun off to people who might drop it and run away for the enemy to pick up or worse, turn and shoot back at us isn't a credible option.

Thus they need stabilising, not invading (again.) I'll ask again: What will happen when we withdraw?
Click to expand...

You'll need to elaborate on 'stabilising' as it is too vague, especially in regards to the Middle East.
 
Dj_Jestar said:
Firstly, no. It's not our only credible (nor viable) option. In fact - why do you seem to think it is even our responsibility at all?

Thus they need stabilising, not invading (again.) I'll ask again: What will happen when we withdraw?
Click to expand...

OldCoals said:
How do you destroy them?
Click to expand...

so the 2 of you - whats your solution? other than critising others , you haven't offered anything constructive at all
 
*cough*

Dj_Jestar said:
It's way more difficult and complex than most give credence, is what I think. Particularly the numb-skulls who think boots on ground will just instantly fix it.

Many constantly underestimate the fighting forces of groups like IS and Al-Qaeda. The best armies in the world with the best equipment and the biggest budgets haven't beaten "goat herders hiding in the mountains" with 12 years of all out war. What the hell makes people think these guys will be any easier?

I'm of the opinion that we're on the right track already. Offering as much support, training and munitions as we can, without getting involved first-hand. It's not our fight for a start, and we need local forces to stabilise, not become dependent upon foreigners. Iraq collapsed in on itself because "the West" heavy footed in, eradicated any form of political structure they had before, and left a massive power vacuum.

I also often wonder why we do nothing to help the similar (and often graver) situations in Africa. Everybody always worried about the welfare and humanitarian needs of the middle east, but lets not worry about Africa. So what's the ulterior motive there? Why all the focus on the middle east? Not that I dispute help is needed, mind.

I also hold suspicion that the same people calling for boots on the ground from the comfort of their own homes will be the first to cry "bring them back!" the moment the media starts reporting losses.
Click to expand...
 
thank you Dj_Jestar ;

now a rebuttal?

the west created the problem in the first place - the lesson of Russia and Afghanistan went unheeded , and similar mistakes were made.

so now , we have extremist `policy` of Islamic factions gaining ground - with a convert or die philosophy , and they have stated they want to swamp eeurope !

then what? they start heading north (they go south and Israel will return the no prisoners policy as well) - what does `nato` do? Russia is invading Ukraine and nato is doing nowt.
 
Above&Beyond said:
Yeah I mean Saddam is still running things and the Taliban still run Afghanistan where they are a haven for Al-Qaeda right?
Click to expand...

And we were certainly right to remove Sad-- *ugh* petty sarcasm.

Saddam was found to not be the danger we were told he was. In fact in recent news there are allegations Blair and Bush knew all along.

IS are the result of our "help" in Iraq, Al-Qaeda are also still going strong after 12 years of conflict.

Again you've avoided answering a very simple question: What happens when we withdraw, after another invasion?
 
Last edited:
Couple of bits of news from today.

Jordan is massing thousands of troops on the Iraq border. Apparently this is a defensive measure against ISIS, but still worth keeping an eye on.

The US is closing its embassy in Yemen due to the Shiite rebels taking control of the country. Things have to be pretty bad for that to happen.

What a mess the Middle East is :(
 
Harlequin said:
thank you Dj_Jestar ;

now a rebuttal?

the west created the problem in the first place - the lesson of Russia and Afghanistan went unheeded , and similar mistakes were made.

so now , we have extremist `policy` of Islamic factions gaining ground - with a convert or die philosophy , and they have stated they want to swamp eeurope !

then what? they start heading north (they go south and Israel will return the no prisoners policy as well) - what does `nato` do? Russia is invading Ukraine and nato is doing nowt.
Click to expand...
If they actually show any threat of leaving the middle east we'd have a problem. As it stands, they haven't got very far out of Iraq and Syria. At this moment I don't believe them to be a credible threat on Europe. There will (and have been) attacks, but nothing on the scale of a "swamping".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom