ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

[NickK]

Have we asked assad if we are okay to drop bombs in his country and asked him which are the priority targets? Or are we just assuming he doesn't exist and doing our own thing?

That part I thought was humous.

Where I agree with Syrians being consulted on IS operations, Assad is one of antagonists in humans rights and the reason why the country destablised (as a function of population).

I don't think any external government (other than russia) supports Assad's position and even then I don't Russia supports Assad himself.

I don't believe it is right considering it's "Syrian 'sovereign' soil", however I think as assad is not in control of his country and the civil unrest is (other than ISIS) effectively to other throw his regime - I don't think Assad is the government of the people. As there's no opposition parties - there's nobody that represents the people other than the warring commanders in the field. I suspect they're very happy to have ISIS weakened.

 

[Rroff]

"You won't hear this in the mainstream media" said in the tone of a conspiracy is always a good start to one of those videos - great way to know the rest is going to be half baked garbage.

 

[Rroff]

Just listen to yourselves and think what your writing.

I don't tend to post on these topics without a reasonable amount of research and considering both sides of the perspective. I'd say I have a far more open minded perspective on this than you do by a long way.

Fact of the matter is this is no way going to be resolved through political channels any more than it is through bombing. There are going to be casualties and there is no way to avoid that so pragmatically we need to look at what does work for a long term solution.

Why would we care? He only controls 25% of the country and most of his population doesn't want him, he's a dictator not the head of a democratic government.

Unfortunately a lot of people don't understand this - or try to ascribe it to western meddling in a quest for gas reserves (which may or may not be true) but one thing is true - even taking ISIS out of the equation you don't get 10s of thousands of people joining up with rebel groups because of living under a benign government... I can't see this ever being resolved even with ISIS gone unless Assad either steps down or settles for Syria being carved up with him retaining one part of it only.

 

[NickK]

Firstly part of the ISIS inventory comes from over run.


However the question remains about ISIS in terms of who is providing both funds and tools (hardware and training).

However dropping leaflets is a good warning of what is to come.. I was also expecting some US aid within the warring factions to help overthrow Assad.

The funny thing is Turkey is Pro-ISIS because it supports killing the PKK (Kurds). Turkey buys and has US military hardware (lots of) including parachutes.. so these could be turkish drops, overruns or even a third party providing assistance (unlikely to be Saudi though).

Just because someone states on the ground that it is US manufacture - the path to that point could be through indirect means.

There will, naturally, be a "tell me the **** if that's us." request from the present through the US military if this is beyond asset overrun in the field...

They should also be able to track the serial numbers to where it has been sold. US do one thing - that's number everything.

 

[Devlish]

Unfortunately a lot of people don't understand this - or try to ascribe it to western meddling in a quest for gas reserves (which may or may not be true) but one thing is true - even taking ISIS out of the equation you don't get 10s of thousands of people joining up with rebel groups because of living under a benign government... I can't see this ever being resolved even with ISIS gone unless Assad either steps down or settles for Syria being carved up with him retaining one part of it only.

I personally think Russia will make him go. They face the option of wading into a civil war, fighting Turkey, sidestepping NATO, dealing with an ever increasingly p****d off Israel and losing troops left right and centre OR

Retire Assad to a Dacha, plonk another figurehead in his place (the generals will agree pretty quick, theyre living on crumbs at the moment) and carve up ISIS territory amongst the rebels and the 'government' forces and in exchange they get a permanent military presence in the region (their only one) consisting of a naval base and an airfield and Putin gets to play the big man.

Thats how I reckon Vienna will go.

 

[Danthus]

I personally think Russia will make him go. They face the option of wading into a civil war, fighting Turkey, sidestepping NATO, dealing with an ever increasingly p****d off Israel and losing troops left right and centre OR

Retire Assad to a Dacha, plonk another figurehead in his place (the generals will agree pretty quick, theyre living on crumbs at the moment) and carve up ISIS territory amongst the rebels and the 'government' forces and in exchange they get a permanent military presence in the region (their only one) consisting of a naval base and an airfield and Putin gets to play the big man.

Thats how I reckon Vienna will go.

Russia need Assad in place as he provides naval access to the Russians.

 

[Devlish]

Russia need Assad in place as he provides naval access to the Russians.

Nah the Generals who control Assad control Tarsus Naval Base. Bashar is not his father, before the war started he was meant to lead the modernising of Syria, after that started his job is to take the blame. Now the Alawites are indebted to Hezbollah and to the Iranians, but most of all to Russia.

If Russia says he goes, he goes. All that means is that one of the generals will take over and the rebels get the terms they need to negotiate.

 

[Danthus]

Nah the Generals who control Assad control Tarsus Naval Base. Bashar is not his father, before the war started he was meant to lead the modernising of Syria, after that started his job is to take the blame. Now the Alawites are indebted to Hezbollah and to the Iranians, but most of all to Russia.

If Russia says he goes, he goes. All that means is that one of the generals will take over and the rebels get the terms they need to negotiate.

Fair point but what Russia do not want is a western puppet in charge of Syria.

 

[Mr Jack]

It was stated by one of (if not the) senior commanders in Iraq on the news this morning that there hasn't been a single civilian death in Iraq attributed to our bombs.

It's one of the least credible statements I've ever seen from our military and a frankly worrying it one, it suggests that the RAF are simply denying the civilian cost of their actions instead of either aiming to properly minimise it or even account for the cost of their actions.

 

[gettothechopper]

When you shoot an Isis pickup truck in the middle of the desert with a high precision missile- you get 0 civilian casualties

 

[doodah]

^Except Toyota's brand image.......I will get my jacket

 

[Mickie]

When you shoot an Isis pickup truck in the middle of the desert with a high precision missile- you get 0 civilian casualties

Is that how all the bombs are dropped ? incredible

 

[Brookert]

It's one of the least credible statements I've ever seen from our military and a frankly worrying it one, it suggests that the RAF are simply denying the civilian cost of their actions instead of either aiming to properly minimise it or even account for the cost of their actions.

What evidence do you have to the contrary Mr armchair expert.

 

[:(Rhodri:)]

It's one of the least credible statements I've ever seen from our military and a frankly worrying it one, it suggests that the RAF are simply denying the civilian cost of their actions instead of either aiming to properly minimise it or even account for the cost of their actions.

I can see it's possible with the level of intelligence they'll be getting from the ground and air in Iraq, coupled with only using high precision weapons (and as gettothechopper points out if they're choosing to engage outside of populated areas).

They won't have the same level of intelligence from the ground in Syria which is concerning, however at least with Brimstone as an option it'll give the coalition a valid alternative to Hellfires (a smaller blast radius has to be a slight improvement).

 

[SPG]

I copied this to my Facebook it says what I want to say and makes sense.

It makes no sense,

"Granted it`s not going to solve the problem"

I have to question why the **** are we doing it then ?

The only solution is stop bombing the **** out of people, send in ground troops, secure the area, put back some form of security and start sending in teachers and educators and work on the next generation, effectively indoctrinating the young into a more civilised and polite world.

 

[Glaucus]

It's a completely different enemy to Nazi Germany. That really should not need pointing out.

Rofl, do you read?
What has what you said, got to do with what I said.

My point was you never bomb an ideology and you don't. we didn't go bomb Nazism and we wont bomb Muslim extremist views. You bomb the actual people, infrastructure etc.
So yeah.

And is it really that different both want to take over the world, well actually Nazis didn't want to take over the whole world IS does. Both commit genocide.

 

[StriderX]

Rofl, do you read?
What has what you said, got to do with what I said.

My point was you never bomb an ideology and you don't. we didn't go bomb Nazism and we wont bomb Muslim extremist views. You bomb the actual people, infrastructure etc.
So yeah.

And is it really that different both want to take over the world, well actually Nazis didn't want to take over the whole world IS does. Both commit genocide.

ISIS however desires us to attack them however, i doubt the Germans did.

 

[Glaucus]

ISIS however desires us to attack them however, i doubt the Germans did.

People keep saying that. Please provide some evidence or at least reason, as it's not working out very well for them in Iraq, and are getting pushed back. Seeing as they want to expand, everyone attacking them is not what they want as it kills them and destroys their resources and infrastructure. Making it harder for them to achieve their goals.

Locals are unlikely to side with them even with civilian casualties from bombs, when they are being mass executed and mass raped amongst other things. Much more likely just to hate everyone than join IS.

 

[StriderX]

People keep saying that. Please provide some evidence or at least reason, as it's not working out very well for them in Iraq and are getting pushed back. seeing as they want to expand, everyone attack them is not what they want as it kills them and destroys their resources and infrastructure. Amazing it harder for them to achieve their goals.

Locals are unlikely to side with them even with civilian casualties from bombs, when they are being mass executed and mass raped amongst other things.

I thought it was their "hallowed prophecy", that when the infidels fell down on them that almighty prophet would swoop down and give us a slap.

Maybe its bull, probably is frankly.

 

[Bluntwrapped]

The party line is to state that this would be the case until the conservatives are no longer leading the country

Political agenda aside, this is about doing morally the right thing and not purely opposing the Conservatives.