ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

ubersonic said:
At the time I thought it good that another ME conflict had been avoided, years later I'm not so sure as we seem to have just made things worse by inaction.
Click to expand...

Who'd have thought it eh? The West are damned if they do, damned if they don't anyway. Kind of moot really.
 
Washout said:
Reckon the main reason to give them a heads up was if the US suspected there were Russians on the base...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw political commentators picking up on that straight away first thing this morning, as if there had been Russian personal or assets on the base, it would have really escalated things.

If the supposed casualty count on the base is as low as it is being reported currently, that does seem to suggest there was enough time for Russia to warn Assad to get as many Syrians away from it as possible.
 
Nexus said:
If the supposed casualty count on the base is as low as it is being reported currently, that does seem to suggest there was enough time for Russia to warn Assad to get as many Syrians away from it as possible.
Click to expand...
There is also the fact it was done at night to minimize casualties and maximize aircraft hit.
 
gettothechopper said:
I hope it doesnt undermine whats happening in the east, with ISIS getting rolled back at last

As for Obama - I think it was our failure to get parlimentry backing to strike assad in 2013 that derailed the US plans, without anyone else backing them, Obamas would not have wanted to act unilaterally, then when it looked like they were giving up the weapons anyway it was moot
Click to expand...

Out of all the wars to get involved in THIS was the most deserving and we did absolutely nothing. Its seemingly increasingly likely to we will end up at war with Syria and I wouldnt be surprised if DT has regular troops on the ground there within a year, since there is already several marine Battalions there helping out the Iraqi forces it shouldn't exactly be difficult to pass through. I also wouldnt be surprised to see Russia flip on the issue, if the US gives them enough benefits.

As for ISIS, The Iraqi army are sorting them out , the YPG are of course helping and made amazing ground a few years back but them getting battered by Turkey (bc **** Turkey) isn't exactly helping as they can seriously move turf when they are not getting shelled by a wannabe EU member..
 
ubersonic said:
This is the problem with a three way fight, you can't attack one side without helping two others, so if you consider two of them the bad guys then anything you do is going to help the bad guys, catch 22.
Click to expand...

true tho fighting isis and jihadist like al nusra and hts should have been a higher priority
 
iamtheoneneo said:
Out of all the wars to get involved in THIS was the most deserving and we did absolutely nothing. Its seemingly increasingly likely to we will end up at war with Syria and I wouldnt be surprised if DT has regular troops on the ground there within a year, since there is already several marine Battalions there helping out the Iraqi forces it shouldn't exactly be difficult to pass through. I also wouldnt be surprised to see Russia flip on the issue, if the US gives them enough benefits.

As for ISIS, The Iraqi army are sorting them out , the YPG are of course helping and made amazing ground a few years back but them getting battered by Turkey (bc **** Turkey) isn't exactly helping as they can seriously move turf when they are not getting shelled by a wannabe EU member..
Click to expand...

Well thats a good argument for why you shouldnt go to war when you dont need to, (or going to war with good intentions, but having no plans of how to achieve the result you want) - it then causes problems for you when you really should be getting involved but everyone is jaded and doesnt believe what you are selling

And yes Turkey being bannanas towards the kurds doesnt help either
 
Hades said:
The US have just fired 50 cruise missiles against airfields in Syria in retaliation for the gas attacks.
Click to expand...

so when are these Americans going to fire 50 cruise missiles at Tel Aviv for dumping white phosprous all over Gazza........... guess they won't do that will they.
 
ubersonic said:
Probably because they use it themselves and don't class it as a chemical weapon.
Click to expand...

it's illegal to be deployed in civilian locations as laid out in the CCCW and the IDF do it with impunity. WP is only to be used against specific military targets and then cannot be used in the form of an anti personnel weapon. It's uses are limited to incendiary marking and battlefield smoke cover So no you are wrong, they have been used illegally by the IDF but the US are too busy fellating Israeli genitals to actually see that one through
 
wildman said:
it's illegal to be deployed in civilian locations as laid out in the CCCW and the IDF do it with impunity. WP is only to be used against specific military targets and then cannot be used in the form of an anti personnel weapon. It's uses are limited to incendiary marking and battlefield smoke cover So no you are wrong, they have been used illegally by the IDF but the US are too busy fellating Israeli genitals to actually see that one through
Click to expand...

The bold bit is the loophole that let USA/etc do it.
 
wildman said:
it's illegal to be deployed in civilian locations as laid out in the CCCW and the IDF do it with impunity. WP is only to be used against specific military targets and then cannot be used in the form of an anti personnel weapon. It's uses are limited to incendiary marking and battlefield smoke cover So no you are wrong, they have been used illegally by the IDF but the US are too busy fellating Israeli genitals to actually see that one through
Click to expand...

Create your own thread...

I'm glad there was some sort of comeback after this event - anyone know how many cruise missiles are in the area? I assume this could be repeated a number of times if further chemical attacks occur?
 
I'm no expert but could someone tell me what the logic of Assad would be in using the chemical weapons at this stage? It just doesn't make sense to me so far.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom