ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

The Running Man said:
I look at this in two ways. Will us bombing them make a significant impact? Do we have more or better bombs than the US, France, Russia?

In the other hand, it shows terrorists that an attack on any EU state is an attack on all of the EU and that we will stand together and strike back as a unit.
Click to expand...

I think you're correct to ask - will it make a difference.

Reducing the financial stability of ISIS is key- without weapons and vehicle collateral, or a dependable supply chain of these is the target.

If you look at the cost of a vehicle - say £8K (Toyota pickup) vs expending 100K to neutralise it.. that seems dumb. However once you target the cargo of arms that surpasses a region then the cost is justified.
Using a 100K missile to pinpoint kill an extremist when a 50cal apache chain gun can do an safe area..

All depends on circumstances.

Brimstone is simply an intelligent anti-tank weapon. Taking out unarmored Toyota pickup with cargo is a little simple for it - better have a cheaper accurate alternative at 5K a pop, lighter and can have more available in the field at the time..
 
Freakbro said:
And jeez, £100,000 a pop....going to be an expensive business knocking them off 1 at a time :D
Click to expand...

Cheaper than deporting Abu Qatada, that cost £1.7million and took 8 years.
£100K and an 8 second flight time, much better.

Although the idea is not to let them into the country in the first place, I wish Merkel and the ******** could get that in their head.
 
awaybreaktoday said:
So how come that did not work in the 7/7 bombings in London, please explain to me please?
Click to expand...

no one managed to shoot them in time?


its worked dozens of times in Israel.


but you havnt explained how a nuke is going to be more effective than conventional weapons?


Especially as you're going to have to airburst them (if you ground burst them to attack tunnels and bunkers then you're handing isis material to make dirty weapons)
 
It's getting heated in parliament today..

Out of curiosity - who here supports military strikes against terrorists in Syria? I'm totally undecided, I know lots of people are against strikes - who's for them and why? :)
 
awaybreaktoday said:
Utter nonsense, ISIS is not a nation state with the resources that go with being a nation state.

ISIS believes that the forces bombing are weak in their will and their ideology. They see us as utter cowards, and they are right we are cowards, we simply do not have the will or strength to defeat their ideology.

Let me put this in a different prospective for you all. The might of the USSR army could not defeat Al-Qaeda ("the Mujahideen") during the Afghan war. What makes you all think that a few planes in the sky will defeat a group with a far more stronger will and more ruthless ideology than Al-Qaeda, also they have far greater support, far larger networks, and a far greater amount of wealth than Al-Qaeda ever did.


And you lot just want to send a few planes with bombs in. Get real people, these ISIS people have a far greater will and purpose than any western government.


P.S. And a man who is willing to blow himself up as a weapon cannot be defeated.
Click to expand...

Nurse! Nurse! NURSE!
 
Screeeech said:
Out of curiosity - who here supports military strikes against terrorists in Syria? I'm totally undecided, I know lots of people are against strikes - who's for them and why? :)
Click to expand...

I'm in favour of them in order to weaken IS and allow space for a negotiated settlement to the Syrian civil war. Only then, through a collective effort of all the Syrian people, will IS be defeated in Syria.
 
Screeeech said:
It's getting heated in parliament today..

Out of curiosity - who here supports military strikes against terrorists in Syria? I'm totally undecided, I know lots of people are against strikes - who's for them and why? :)
Click to expand...

Military strikes are not working in Iraq and will not work in Syria, so why waste public money and make london a target at the same time.
 
awaybreaktoday said:
And you lot just want to send a few planes with bombs in. Get real people, these ISIS people have a far greater will and purpose than any western government.

P.S. And a man who is willing to blow himself up as a weapon cannot be defeated.
Click to expand...

If the ideology dies with the person. It is example of desperation to demonstrate their conviction in a hope to inspire.

They have conviction born out of believe - an idea.

Ideas remain that unless you have something to act to bring it into reality.

Removing the ability to enforce those ideas weakens. Pinpoint attacks on large silos or logistics channels works to a point when they are then actively fighting.

However to kill an idea you need to demonstrate it's invalidity, it's propaganda is false with irrefutable evidence in the same form that supports the belief.

For an extremist - their face to other extremists to demonstrate their worth to their leader is key.

Systematically kill the leadership - preferably in one "shock and awe" event.
1. Demonstrate the leader is not the true caleph - because their death is the will of the deity.
2. Demonstrate their actions linked to the leader are therefore not the true word and will of the deity. Thus to save face in front of the deity they need to re-evaluate.
3. Where the leadership void exists, target to create infighting and segmentation
4. Reduce the financial and military reserves reduces the capability to defend and increases stresses - especially if their enemies are told to attack at the same time as the shock and awe event.
5. fragmentation occurs - small pockets will reassemble, or attempt to go under the radar.

The main thing is an extremist is their own army, so there will always be a chain of attacks and random bombings.. if they suicide then that simplifies things.. if they perform attacks - systematically neutralise.

The ISIS fighters are war vets. It is unlikely they will be able to simply 'blend in' for sustained time - both psychologically and the need to uphold what they have been fighting for.
It is likely that any "underground' will pop up attempting to recruit or commit continue to mastermind terrorists attacks.
 
Screeeech said:
It's getting heated in parliament today..

Out of curiosity - who here supports military strikes against terrorists in Syria? I'm totally undecided, I know lots of people are against strikes - who's for them and why? :)
Click to expand...

I support the air strikes, I just hope they're precise and intelligence led. Hitting targets like Jihadi John rather than aiming at what they believe are weapon caches etc, potentially killing civilians. So far, I've not heard anything negative about the bombing in Iraq (although I don't follow it too closely).
 
Tefal said:
http://www.mintpressnews.com/isis-attacks-in-saudi-arabia-test-security-of-hajj/209403/

ISIS hate saudi as they're American backed and allies.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...dan-Kuwait-response-threat-invasion-ISIS.html

the wall.

Isis and Al-Qaeda have both been attacking Saudi for years the death toll is in the thousands now from terror attacks there.
Click to expand...

Some how I think it's more like that ISIS know that Saudi = Saudi royal family and the religious leaders that are effectively part of that family. Therefore there cannot be a belief that their caleph is the true word of Allah.. equates to Saudi = infidels.

However Saudi oil has a long (very syrian) story where the saudi's didn't have the money or tech to extract the oil.. in comes the US and there's the layering but there's a strong link between Saudi and US. The majority of saudi royals are western educated.

They prefer to pay the allies to be the sword further afield but they still need to protect their borders..
 
b0otneck said:
I support the air strikes, I just hope they're precise and intelligence led. Hitting targets like Jihadi John rather than aiming at what they believe are weapon caches etc, potentially killing civilians. So far, I've not heard anything negative about the bombing in Iraq (although I don't follow it too closely).
Click to expand...
Dat sig!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom