Man of Honour
Close to this thread also being closed.
Behave please.
Behave please.
ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.
- Thread starter RoboCod
- Start date
I don't disagree with a lot of what you said (just cut short for quote reasons) - but the foreign policies you cite are ones of intervention based on humanitarian grounds - yes, we do actually do some of those too
And for sure we should have gone into Rwanda as well.But for as many humanitarian interventions we do we prop up the same number of despot dictators when it suits us.
So you have to acknowledge there are plenty of other foreign policies, that have nothing to do with humanitarian intervention or military invasion, that still cause as much disruption, especially in the ME.
One point in case is the last sentence I totally agree with you about, the Saudis are behind a lot of this, especially with funding, and our foreign policy is to prop them up and not tackle this issue at all.
Commissario
.
I believe there was a case last year where someone got put on the watchlist for researching terrorist groups. He was doing a thesis or something on them for a degree course at a respected university.
You can end up on the watchlist for all sorts of reasons, some fairly tenuous such as going to the wrong place of worship, or having a friend who turns out to be doing something (do you know exactly what your neighbour/friend/family member is doing all the time and what they think?).
It's one of the reasons they don't instantly pull everyone on a watchlist in, they know that out of the people they're watching a lot will likely turn out to not be doing anything wrong, but until they've been under observation they don't know.
I don't disagree with a lot of what you said (just cut short for quote reasons) - but the foreign policies you cite are ones of intervention based on humanitarian grounds - yes, we do actually do some of those too
But for as many humanitarian interventions we do we prop up the same number of despot dictators when it suits us.
So you have to acknowledge there are plenty of other foreign policies, that have nothing to do with humanitarian intervention or military invasion, that still cause as much disruption, especially in the ME.
One point in case is the last sentence I totally agree with you about, the Saudis are behind a lot of this, especially with funding, and our foreign policy is to prop them up and not tackle this issue at all.
I'm not saying all of our foreign policy is fine - I'm not fine with all of it. But I'm also not fine with people making excuses for Jihadis as a result of 'Western Imperialism' etc.. There is no excuse for what happened in Paris. Frankly our current intervention in Syria is on humanitarian grounds even if the Invasion of Iraq over a decade ago wasn't.
Yet facebook newsfeed has on one side ban the burqa and on the other a load of conspiraloon nonsense about ISIS being the puppet of the US, 'why doesn't ISIS attack Israel' etc..
They haven't done anything, they're just being watched, they might be British and you want to deport them without any idea of where to send them?
Yeah, that's a reasonable response
They're not on a watch list for no apparent reason. Resources are stretched within the intelligence services so they have to be selective about who they monitor. The men who killed all the people in France hadn't done anything prior to their killing spree so maybe we should carry on watching those in our country until something happens. Don't misunderstand me, I'm believe in a live and let live attitude but when it comes to potential acts of treason/terrorism we should make a pre-emptive strike. This is to benefit all in this country no matter what God you believe in and/or the colour of your skin.
Says the guy suggesting we bomb a democratically elected Western leader...
Maybe you missed the rest of the forum suggesting we nuke the ME?
That must be OK with you...
and it was strafe not bomb, hold down the Alt key first.
Soldato
Because either:
a) there was a tactical reason for doing it now (e.g. camp was busy or key personnel were there)
or
b) it was a chance to blow up a few tents as a morale booster with probably minimal impact on IS overall.
I'm going for b)
I thought the previous posts had highlighted how dumb that suggestion is
I don't have time right now to go back more than a few pages so I must have missed your posts. Why it's OK for France to bomb Syria when the terrorists are French and Belgian. Shouldn't these areas be targeted first?
or
c) They just let off a few rockets in to the sea because to keep the media/people happy.
Angela Merkel grew up in Communist East Germany. This photo is from her mandatory first aid and nuclear attack training.
I'm surprised you didn't do more research before posting the image.
Technically all locations are no go areas for the Police, and given such a failure of European policy there is no real reason to choose to bomb one and not the other (as it is risking civilians in both situations).
Caporegime
http://newsthump.com/2015/11/15/absolutely-everyone-suddenly-an-expert-on-how-to-defeat-isis/
re: bombing Raqqa - it was going to happen then anyway, but NATO/UN/whoever it is doing the planning let the French airforce be the ones to drop the munitions for morale reasons AND because I think the French govt. have committed more of their armed services to the cause because of Paris attacks. For the top brass it also makes sense because, frankly (hah!), France have some of the best pilots in the world.
re: bombing Raqqa - it was going to happen then anyway, but NATO/UN/whoever it is doing the planning let the French airforce be the ones to drop the munitions for morale reasons AND because I think the French govt. have committed more of their armed services to the cause because of Paris attacks. For the top brass it also makes sense because, frankly (hah!), France have some of the best pilots in the world.
Soldato
Research? That sounds like some fancy pants left-lib invention designed to distract us from the real issues.
We shouldn't be bombing Syria, we shouldn't have gone into Iraq and Afghanistan. Then we wouldn't be in this situation and thousands of army and civilian lives would not have bee wasted. The whole mess is a consequence of The U.S. and UKs foreign policy.
Might volunteer for the Mars mission for a bit of peace and quiet!
Soldato
MOST?
I think that most people live in the real world. They tell the truth.
If any of my children did this kind of thing(200% wouldn't) I'd shout to the world what a evil No disguised swearing - Gilly**** they was.
Soldato
Man of Honour
A pre-emptive strike against people that may never do anything and may never have any reason to, they just happen to know someone that might?
I understand that you are scared but that's not the right answer.
I'm surprised you didn't notice that I didn't actually comment on the picture
Even the picture isn't making a comment other than stating the facts.
You are just making something out of nothing to distract from the rest of the post.
The point was that she is a danger to European harmony and in my view she is deliberately creating a social time bomb that will drag Europe into violent chaos for generations to come.
The real threat to Europe isn't ISIS, it is her.
You can make your own mind up about what her actual loony political beliefs are, the picture was just a tongue in cheek suggestion
-
Last edited:
Associate
Tend to agree with you, if Hollande wants to strike back, it's not only Syria that he must send the army but also to the banlieues where the sympathising scum live.