ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

Just listened to Michael Fallon (Secretary of State for Defence) tell Andrew Marr and therefore us that he wants to bomb ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, take your pick, command centre's.
So that will be a few blokes with mobile/satellite phones and a couple of laptops in tunnels deep underground in Raqqa.

Glad that is sorted. Soon as the vote has past then we the Brits will have matters sorted in no time.
I note Andrew Marr did not bother to ask Fallon what the end game is in Syria after all the western alliance left a right mess in Iraq and Libya.
 
leaskovski said:
OK, so if we don't do nothing, you can't complain when the government want to snoop everything. We need to protect ourselves, if we aren't taking it to them, then we have to be able to protect against them when they take it to us, because they won't just sit in their land doing nothing.
Click to expand...

There ability to attack is is mainly via there sleeper cells. This needs more surveillance and intelligence gathering. Increase the budget of the mi5 and co by 25%.

Bomb and send assassination squads against leaders. Less overt, more covert.
 
RoboCod said:
It appears that the old thread has been deleted, for reasons that I am unaware (please advise otherwise, should I be incapable of using the search function correctly).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33358267

Fallon remarking that it is illogical that we are not striking ISIL locations within Syrian borders and I agree. Looks like it's down to a vote in commons so should labour be onboard it may well happen, which I believe is likely.
Click to expand...

Yeah it has been deleted.

Your reply to me was that 'someone else killed all those people' with regards to my statistics of hundreds of thousands of deaths of innocents.

I'm not going to reply after this point, because, your in a mindset where you want to see the west as innocent, I get people become patriotic - hell the media is hellbent on 'programming' the public to say what your saying, i.e. anything but the obvious.

But I implor you to think a little more logically here................. I am using Iraq in my examples because were a little further along the timeline there, it is however the same in afgan, syria etc just at different timelines.

In a nutshell:

1) Iraq was led by crazy man Saddam Hussein, not a nice bloke no - HOWEVER because of this Iraq was a relatively stable country, for the people stayed in line and no ISIS/Taliban particularly existed there.

2) Bush/Blairdog made up a story about WMD (tell me, do you honestly believe that as well? despite the whole world laughing at that now)

3) Iraq is invaded, countless innocents die

4) Decade(s) on, the region is unstable, the 'government' there (put in place by the west) is a farce and factually all the oil there is now run and exported by USA businesses, of which some have huge steak holder / owners part owned by......... you guessed it - the Bush family - all facts, go look it up.

5) Invading Iraq has done v v v v little for the locals there, aside from bring a lot of death, sure Hussein was a nutter, many died, but no where near what 'we' have done....................

6) Doing this understandably has caused a lot of eastern folks to hate the west, these folks got a few mates together and they all happen to also be fundamentalist nut jobs - NO im not sympathising :rolleyes: but the west created 'today'.

7) Ask yourself, prior to 9/11 - perhaps the 90's iraq war, was there any 'muslim nutjobs'........... no ? thought so

You said all those deaths were not caused by us - in a nice way I am saying this, but that is gross ignorance on a massive scale. SURE not every single death...........but MOST are caused as a DIRECT result of the war there........a lot of people die stepping on mines and IED's or caught in cross fire - had WE not invaded, they wouldnt be there, however here is a singular case example of 17 dead from airstrikes in Mosul:

https://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/incidents/a1175

Feel free to browse the database..........The ignorance of people saying 'oh our bombs are so smart they will never hit anyone innocent' is just........beyond ignorance that past me making this informative post, I CBA to reply to - because you will come up with some weird and crazy reply ignoring the fact that dropping bombs even 'smart ones' is ....... as designed..........damn deadly, how come those 17 above died on the 28th Feb this year, 2015 ? why is bombing STILL going on in 2015 in Iraq?

Apply this to Afgan, and Syria and its the same..... the USA wants regime change in Syria for the same reason - oil.
 
PS:

Go to this page, scroll bottom left and download the CSV database file, its 6.44mb big and gives accounts of every single one of these deaths from various sources:

https://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/

The latter years are mostly suicide bombers etc, the first 6-8 years are mostly caused by USA solders, the western forces etc, remarkably a lot of people were simply shot by 'us' - of course there are also many accounts of criminals being shot etc, but also countless innocents.
 
Conscript said:
Even if that were true, it would still be more valid that most of the conclusions jumped to by people here who have no first hand experience whatsoever.

But it's okay, you've successfully and fully discredited the source by using the rolleyes smiley. I humbly accept the article is utterly worthless as a source, and shall instead revert to the opinion that more air strikes are effective because everyone here said they are definitely having a net detrimental effect on ISIS. Carry on.
Click to expand...

Rofl, what it shows is you have absolutely zero critical thinking.
That you even think like that shows you are biased . Did not talk to people rofl, no idea what was happening in the region etc.
You were happy with what the source said, and that was that.
 
Originally Posted by B&W View Post
Bombing will strengthen them, just watch you'll see.

What have we achieved in fifteen years of the war on terror? We've gone from a few groups of small terrorists hiding in the mountains to terrorists controlling whole swaths of land big enough to be a country.

Hundreds of thousands of civilians have been killed, do you think when a bomb kills a family that there relatives will care it was a accident?

That's where all the terrorists are coming from.

And were just creating tonnes more, unlike the poor folk in them countries we actually have great education systems and strong justice with economic stability.

What's our response to Paris attacks, more bombing?!

Our politicians really are pathetic, stupid and impotent. We're just heading for more bloodshed.

When the bombings don't work we'll end up sending armies and walk into the trap isis has set.
spot on
 
7) Ask yourself, prior to 9/11 - perhaps the 90's iraq war, was there any 'muslim nutjobs
Click to expand...

You are a bit light on the History old boy.

There probably hasn't been any time in the last 1400 years where there hasn't been a "Muslim Nutjob" rallying the troops and fighting Jihad against the infidel in the name of Allah somewhere!

(And mostly "we" have been losing!)
 
they're going to die if its not bombed too, in fact they're already dying in far greater numbers than any western bombing campaign will produce
 
dowie said:
they're going to die if its not bombed too, in fact they're already dying in far greater numbers than any western bombing campaign will produce
Click to expand...

No no no, it's all peacful. Isis isn't carrying out mass executions to anyone they don't like the look off, aren't raping women in huge quantities, aren't coercing innocent people to give over large amounts of money under fear of death.

But it's ok, Corbyn doesn't want to increase the risk of UK terrorist attacks and wants to find a political solution. Utterly disgusting and should be allowed anywhere near parliament let alone leader of the opposition.
 
the RAF has had a pretty good record so far in Iraq, why would Syria be too different? They can be reasonably sure - just because the Russians are bombing everyone rebelling against Assad doesn't mean we would.
 
hurfdurf said:
You do no that Canada's PM Justin Trudeau is one of the most Liberal Western leaders on the planet? Makes you look a bit silly when you accuse opponents of being liberal retards, when its the liberals doing it.
Click to expand...

Yes I know he's a big SJW moron but it's liberals who say refugees are nothing to be scared of so why are they refusing Syrian men???
 
OldCoals said:
But bombing them doesn't do anything to kill their beliefs.
Click to expand...

No, but it does hamper them, it kills them, it destroys resources and finances. It drastically slows down their spread.
So that's a non point you have there. No one believes it's going ti be won with airstrikes. But it certainly dies slow them down a large amount and with a coordinated world response can push them back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom