ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

Freakbro said:
There may well be people who believe the Govt only act on a moral and alturistic basis.....I don't think there are any on here though are there? Like I posted earlier, by just pointing out our Govt isn't as bad as other muderous regimes isn't saying we are pure and just is it.
Click to expand...

And again, the point made was that we materially and politically support worse regimes. Millions are facing starvation in Yemen right now as a direct result of our support for Saudi Arabia. One cannot make a case that attacking Syria would be acting morally when demonstrably our motivation is not morality. Further, given that the situation in Syria is largely the fault of Western governments (including Saudi and Qatar as proxies), the case that we are "not as bad" is dubious at best.

Freakbro said:
It's a bit like you keep harping back to the WMD dossier as though that's the basis for disbelieving everything the Govt ever says again.
Click to expand...

And again, you've misunderstood the point of the government lying over Iraqi WMD. (And in Libya and Kuwait and in numerous other cases). None of those prove that it is lying now. They prove that the default position cannot be to assume our government isn't lying unless presented with overwhelming evidence that it isn't.
 
Evangelion said:
What lies were told about Libya?
Click to expand...

Active lies and lies of omission. That Gaddafi was sending in tanks to crush innocent protests. In fact, the tanks never entered the city and the rebels - who were backed by the West - attacked military bases to steal the armaments and seized airports. Can't imagine our government wouldn't respond if terrorists seized control of Heathrow. That Gaddafi was issuing Viagra and condoms to the Libyan army to better aid it in raping people. Hillary Clinton claimed Gaddafi was using rape as a tool of oppression and we instigated charges of this at the ICC. We claimed there were not French and UK Special Forces in operation in Libya when there were, actively assisting the rebels. For lies of omission (which are relevant as the subject is Western government honesty), we concealed that Gaddafi repeatedly requested peace negotiations, that Western oil companies (in particular, Heritage Oil) had been in negotiation with the rebel groups before they began to seize control, that many of the "uprising" were in fact the Qatar army which arrived in Libya in large numbers. And then various propaganda exercises like misrepresenting reactions when the rebels "liberated" (seized) towns. I was, at the time, trying to raise awareness of ethnic cleansing by the rebels in areas that they occupied (specifically they were rounding up Black people and bussing them off to be executed in at least two occupied towns that I am aware of). Opposition to talking about that was fierce. Today, we have some small coverage of the fact that Black people are being sold in actual slave markets in Libya due to Libya being something of a done deal now. So active lies to the question you asked, and obfuscation for the question you didn't ask but which is relevant.
 
The lie was more about the focus being regime change rather than saving the poor denizens of Libya, which frankly the US couldn't give a damn about, they just wanted Gaddafi gone.

Why they can't just be honest about it, i don't know, i'd respect them more.

You can see why they didn't care because Libya is a ******* hole now, while Iraq is a veritable garden of Eden in comparison to 2002-2010 because the focus was on how goody goody America can be (realising it cost way too much and didn't really work like they wanted it to, so they don't bother now).


It's all just an imperial power glossing over it's failures by killing it's former CIA funded allies, just like Britain did when it started losing what it had.
 
doodah said:
I have to actively Google Theresa May these days to see her in the news - she must be desperate for a bump in PR.
Click to expand...

True but she is so sickening that starting WW3 is not a PR exercise. And if it is against Russia & China, at best we going to lose the war, at worst destroy the planet so no human being left alive to hold our "western" governments to account....

We support with silence our governments, who have become the very evil our grandfathers fought 80 years ago. (and both mine fought. One the Italians at the Greek invasion, the other initially in Africa with the British forces and on the Greek civil war afterwards against the communists)
 
Andy_82 said:
At some point a line has to be drawn and EVERYONE stick to international law, with serious, meaningful consequences for those who dont and without exceptions.
Click to expand...

In an ideal world I agree, but we don't live in one unfortunately, I'd just like the hypocrisy and double standards to stop and also avoid being dragged into something I do not agree with like most of the populace, our leaders are supposed to serve our interests not us serve their own as has been the status quo for many many years.

Freakbro said:
Yea, but he does get a bit hysterically ranty and his point gets lost in an incoherent babble. Hell, he even had a go at yourself (who is firmly on side with his viewpoint) just because you pointed out the facts about WP....which went against his simplistic viewpoint.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry if you can't see the point that we as nation should not be taking any form of moral high ground in condemning other nations on their actions when our own actions are morally reprehensible
 
Macron now saying he has proof 'Russia did done it!' but not said what that proof is.

For the life of me, and I don't know why, but I'm getting a strong feeling of deja vu :p
 
Dr.Eddie said:
Macron now saying he has proof 'Russia did done it!' but not said what that proof is.

For the life of me, and I don't know why, but I'm getting a strong feeling of deja vu :p
Click to expand...

Macron is just puppet of the very system responsible of all issues. He was a damn banker for heaven sake
French people should have been better off with Marrie.
 
ubersonic said:
In fairness it was the right way to do the wrong thing, in that while it may not have turned out any better than Iraq/Afghanistan we lost a hell of a lot less equipment/men.
Click to expand...

I don't think out loss of men and equipment is a good measure of the success. Iraq started well, but we made stupid mistakes dismantling the old state and failed to properly commit to nation building. None of them are good examples.
 
The whole issue with Syria is the damn pipeline from SA and UAE passing through it, and then to Kastelorizo (Greece) then to Peloponese and from there to Italy to supply Europe.

Russia which controls 70% of the oil and gas supplies in mainland Europe doesn't want it to be built.

And also is the reason Turkey demands the whole area around Kastelorizo from Greece to gain access to the pipeline, and are already ready for war. (estimated up to 8 weeks from now)
Already the Greek army is on orange alert since last weekend, and today lost a Mirage 2000-5 (17th plane this century alone) and its pilot, while trying to intercept the Turks which were inside Greek air space (above Greek island) at close distance
(roughly that's happening 70-100 times a day for 22 years now)

Any other country should have fired missiles from the start but a war between the two would collapse NATO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom