ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

You really are playing the ignorant card. I've spelled it out multiple times already, as do both articles that I posted.

Calling the numbers laughable != discounting the numbers as laughable. You're making stuff up again. I've said they are an indication of our effectiveness and when we're supposedly blowing stuff up left and right with our "superior" missiles and bombs (chiefly the Brimstone missile), destroying target after target to great effect - having a body count of just seven is not a number you would expect to see. I don't expect any kind of quota and I don't expect any kind of death target. I do expect to see more casualties if we are so effectively destroying strongholds, factories, power stations, whatever else is deemed a strategic target.

We were told by MPs and other campaingers that other nations were begging us to use our Brimstone missile in Syria.

You quoted gettothechopper's post that says we don't even have Brimstones in Syria.

I said I want to know what the real reason for joining the fight is, as it clearly wasn't the Brimstone missile because we haven't even deployed it. I also want to know why they felt the need to lie.

Address that, please. Don't skirt around it again.
 
Ah I see, because it's something YOU didn't expect something must be afoot, right. I don't need to address anything nor am I skirting around anything. I'm addressing your initial post about numbers and why it's all meaningless BS in the context you thought you were making a point about. Now we're digging down into the matter it is indeed you who is skirting around the issue.

End of conversation though, I'm not interested in discussing the matter further, I think I've covered the points I needed and you're just going to chunter on regardless. So save tapping out a reply, this becomes boring very fast.
 
We were lied to. It's not something just I expected, as per articles. Ther articles themselves call out the lie, as did my post containing them. It has been all about the lie. You continue to dress it up for something it isn't and now call "end of conversation" because I keep asking you to stick to the topic. Kk mate.
 
Dj_Jestar said:
Ywe're supposedly blowing stuff up left and right with our "superior" missiles and bombs (chiefly the Brimstone missile), destroying target after target to great effect - having a body count of just seven is not a number you would expect to see. I don't expect any kind of quota and I don't expect any kind of death target. I do expect to see more casualties if we are so effectively destroying strongholds, factories, power stations, whatever else is deemed a strategic target.

We were told by MPs and other campaingers that other nations were begging us to use our Brimstone missile in Syria.

You quoted gettothechopper's post that says we don't even have Brimstones in Syria.

I said I want to know what the real reason for joining the fight is, as it clearly wasn't the Brimstone missile because we haven't even deployed it. I also want to know why they felt the need to lie.

Address that, please. Don't skirt around it again.
Click to expand...

Looks like they are pretty busy with the Tonkas in Iraq at the mo
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/update-air-strikes-against-daesh

Maybe the situation on the ground better requires them there?

We are just a part of a big operation with other countries also targeting Isis in Syria or Iraq
It might be that the "plan" has assigned our patch in Iraq rather than Syria at the moment?

Also you see to be of the impression that we are only joining in because we have Brimstone - I think perhaps thats not the only reason?

That article says Typhoons hit some targets in Syria on the 17th (they are not part of the "7" count)

Maybe the Typhoons are currently better for reaching targets in Syria and the Tornados Iraq?

I think you are a bit daft if you think we only increased the area of operation to Syria because we have alone have Brimstone

Its war - plans change all the time to reflect what is happening, or to get resources best used in the right places - to call that deceitful is just silly

I also dont see how being cautious in what is a massive mess of a conflict is a bad thing


David Camerons reason for hitting isis is syria was
"IS poses a terror threat to British people, and so the UK must strike IS in its "heartland" - Syria.
He argues the UK has a moral obligation to get involved, and should not be "content with outsourcing our security to allies"."
 
Last edited:
Dj_Jestar said:
We were lied to. It's not something just I expected, as per articles. Ther articles themselves call out the lie, as did my post containing them. It has been all about the lie. You continue to dress it up for something it isn't and now call "end of conversation" because I keep asking you to stick to the topic. Kk mate.
Click to expand...

No we weren't lied to. People questioned us joining due to the risk of hitting civilians and infrastructure.
The Brimstones were touted to show how accurate our weaponry is.

We're not using them at the moment because we don't require that accuracy. We're hitting things like oil refineries - that can be done with much less accurate weaponry.
 
This is the problem when people post crap articles along with just a guff comment "OH LOOK, LIES AND CONSPIRACY!!1" then run. Rather than posting concise and constructive input on what they really think. Then nobody really takes any of their posts seriously and any following retort is just side stepping and trying to one-up. Perhaps he hasn't any concise and constructive input though?

What's more infuriating than a troll though is someone who posts like they're an authority on a subject when quite clearly, to everyone else, they haven't a clue what they're talking about.

Now answer this and don't skirt around it again.... Lols
 
Dis86 said:
No we weren't lied to. People questioned us joining due to the risk of hitting civilians and infrastructure.
The Brimstones were touted to show how accurate our weaponry is.

We're not using them at the moment because we don't require that accuracy. We're hitting things like oil refineries - that can be done with much less accurate weaponry.
Click to expand...
"They want us to join and use our missiles"

"We haven't used our missiles, but we did join"

Lie.
 
RoboCod said:
This is the problem when people post crap articles along with just a guff comment "OH LOOK, LIES AND CONSPIRACY!!1" then run. Rather than posting concise and constructive input on what they really think. Then nobody really takes any of their posts seriously and any following retort is just side stepping and trying to one-up. Perhaps he hasn't any concise and constructive input though?

What's more infuriating than a troll though is someone who posts like they're an authority on a subject when quite clearly, to everyone else, they haven't a clue what they're talking about.

Now answer this and don't skirt around it again.... Lols
Click to expand...

You have a bizarre definition of run. Have you addressed the lie yet? No?
 
Hellfire != Brimstone. They specifically mentioned Brimstone in their campaigns. Read the article.

Americans have also had Hellfires for decades. They wanted is to join, allegedly, because we have munitions they don't. Do keep up.
 
Errr there was that action report posted ealier about 2 brinstone missiles used to wipe out machine gun posts in windows
 
Dj_Jestar said:
Hellfire != Brimstone. They specifically mentioned Brimstone in their campaigns. Read the article.

Americans have also had Hellfires for decades. They wanted is to join, allegedly, because we have munitions they don't. Do keep up.
Click to expand...

And read my previous post. They haven't yet been in a situation to use brimstone. You don't need to use a more expensive weapon when a cheaper one will do the job.

There you go then, they have used them!
 
Last edited:
SexyGreyFox said:
I stopped reading here -

Al Qaeda was not behind the 9/11 Attacks. September 11, 2001 provided a justification for waging a war against Afghanistan on the grounds that Afghanistan was a state sponsor of terrorism, supportive of Al Qaeda. The 9/11 attacks were instrumental in the formulation of the “Global War on Terrorism”.
Click to expand...

But this is closer to the truth though. You suffer from cognitive dissidence.
 
SexyGreyFox said:
I stopped reading here -

Al Qaeda was not behind the 9/11 Attacks. September 11, 2001 provided a justification for waging a war against Afghanistan on the grounds that Afghanistan was a state sponsor of terrorism, supportive of Al Qaeda. The 9/11 attacks were instrumental in the formulation of the “Global War on Terrorism”.
Click to expand...

edit: meant cognitive dissonance lol
 
Tefal said:
Errr there was that action report posted ealier about 2 brinstone missiles used to wipe out machine gun posts in windows
Click to expand...

Forget tactics, smoke flanking etc just use about 2 million pounds worth of delivery and missile systems to clear 2 guys and qn mg nest. No wonder we don't get any respectfrom these guys tbh
 
The Running Man said:
Forget tactics, smoke flanking etc just use about 2 million pounds worth of delivery and missile systems to clear 2 guys and qn mg nest. No wonder we don't get any respectfrom these guys tbh
Click to expand...

They aren't our ground forces.


And theyre only 100k per missile :p

But this isnt a video game you want to have men enter an urban area houses etc to get in and clear a ng post you have no idea if theres more fighters in the streets or allyways. So you want men to move in the open after being ambushed by an mg then to house to house fighting against an unknown nunber of enemy troops.

Its very likley you're going to have at least 1 guy wounded.

100k versus the cost of replacing a soldier isnt actually that much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom