ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.
- Thread starter RoboCod
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2005
- Posts
- 3,331
- Location
- Orpington.
Let me guess, facepalm?
Last edited:
Some of that is BS - while I don't have the information to have a position on external influences, etc. the cracks were starting to show in Syria due to internal issues none the less - over recent history they'd taken in a lot of people from different areas i.e. fleeing trouble in surrounding countries like Iraq bringing problems with them and while those aligned with Assad tribally, etc. might have enjoyed some of the stuff talked about there were plenty who didn't.
But we are and have been bombing them for quite some time already, why will it make a difference that currently it's over the border in Iraq and not in Syria?
The only reason we didn't bomb in Syria before is nothing to do with ISIS, but the politics of us wanting to depose Assad
not really
there was this thing called the arab spring, perhaps read up about how the protests started in Syria for some background
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Spring
which is more likely - the Syrian uprising by the majority Sunni population was triggered as a result of the arab spring or because of some conspiracy involving a pipe line
hmm
Not sure about Iraq but I'm just going by what happened with Russia and France. AFAIK only the US, France and Russia are bombing them in Syria and so far those are the countries where ISIS have attacked and have stated the reasons why. If the strikes commence, the UK will be a prime target from next week I reckon.
they already hate us and want to kill us
bombing them isn't going to change much in that respect
Yeah, I think that to enter into civil war needs the population to mobilise and I think that's more likely due to this - the a commercial oil/gas is just another timber on the fire.
I think the problem is that there is so much demand in the first place. This comes at a direct result of the wests far too rapid expansion and advancement and pressure for the rest of the world to catch up.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2004
- Posts
- 9,086
- Location
- Berkland
This is why i don't understand what the big deal is about us now fly an extra bit further to drop bombs in Syria.
It's complicated, not because of ISIS, but because of Assad.
Probably an over simplistic summary but it's something like :
We want Assad out, Russia wants him in.
ISIS are attacking Assad in Syria, so helping us by proxy. Killing them in Iraq is fine as it doesn't harm our goals, but in Syria it helps the Assad regime.
The FSA are attacking Assad and ISIS, so directly helping us and we directly support them.
Russia, under the pre-text of bombing ISIS, is bombing the FSA as well to support Assad.
We want to get into a coalition to bomb ISIS in Syria, which is complicated when your current 'allies' have a different end game than you do.
Those who support the bombing will be responsible when something happens soon? What utter dross.
You're already a prime target. They want you to die.
Furthermore, by bombing key members in Syria already, we have averted threats.
cowardly nonsense.
Is it cowardly to think of the innocent lives that will be lost on both sides? You must feel so brave sitting there typing that rubbish.
You provoke someone and you will get a response. ISIS and other groups don't do what they are doing for the fun of it. Invading and interfering with the politics of the middle east is why we are where we are.
Last edited:
Do you really think that the UK is not already seen as a target by ISIS? Bombing them in Syria won't make the slightest bit of difference, especially as we're bombing them in Iraq.
I'm undecided if I'm honest.
Yes Daesh need destroying & if it were that simple then I'd be all for it.
BUT....
While the RAF are dropping bombs our government are in a formal military alliance with Turkey who are (allegedly
) buying oil from Daesh, & another of our allies Saudi Arabia are the largest supporters of IS. So with one hand we're bombing them but with the other we are supporting enablers & funders of Daesh.
Also some of the so called moderates are supporting have swapped sides are are now working with Al Queada & Daesh, the moderates were also supposed to be trained in the UK but the program was cancelled after members the 1st group raped a drunk man & sexually assaulted women in the town near where they were being trained. Does anyone think that people like this are very moderate at all and will be more tolerant & democratic than Assad(who isn't).
It's not just a case of tally ho! bombs away! it seems far more complex to me & I don't think bombing Daesh should be considered until we've made a concrete effort to stop enabling it's supporters & in turn minimised the risk to our servicemen/women.
Yes Daesh need destroying & if it were that simple then I'd be all for it.
BUT....
While the RAF are dropping bombs our government are in a formal military alliance with Turkey who are (allegedly
) buying oil from Daesh, & another of our allies Saudi Arabia are the largest supporters of IS. So with one hand we're bombing them but with the other we are supporting enablers & funders of Daesh. Also some of the so called moderates are supporting have swapped sides are are now working with Al Queada & Daesh, the moderates were also supposed to be trained in the UK but the program was cancelled after members the 1st group raped a drunk man & sexually assaulted women in the town near where they were being trained. Does anyone think that people like this are very moderate at all and will be more tolerant & democratic than Assad(who isn't).
It's not just a case of tally ho! bombs away! it seems far more complex to me & I don't think bombing Daesh should be considered until we've made a concrete effort to stop enabling it's supporters & in turn minimised the risk to our servicemen/women.