ISIS...Islamic State Victims
- Thread starter harry
- Start date
EC1
On a break
some patronishing sh1t in your previous post Warbler
no need for it
i personally don't want to feel better by bombing someone..i don't want us at war with anyone..unfortunately..unless you missed it..someone has declared war on us...and many of them...are our own people
i also don't want an organisation building up to the point that they could attain world domination..yes..i mention the 2nd world war..yes i know its over...but a man that ignores lessons from the past..is an idiot imo
if you can't see the comparison between the rise of the Nazi'z and this situation then you missing a lot of similarities..as then you have people ignoring a situation..hoping it wouldn't affect them...took no action..until they had too.
you talk like we have got no weapons..want to put some figures on what we have got?..its irrelevant anyway what we have or have not...its not a competition to see how many bombs each country can drop..then giving them a score out of 5 to see if its worthwhile them being there
and..no matter what we have got...we have a responsibility to take part..many of the enemy..are British ...you seem to be ignoring that..in fact you ignore any question you don't want to answer from what i can see.
would you like to say what you think would happen if no one takes any action..what is your prediction about the future if these people are left unchecked?
no need for it
i personally don't want to feel better by bombing someone..i don't want us at war with anyone..unfortunately..unless you missed it..someone has declared war on us...and many of them...are our own people
i also don't want an organisation building up to the point that they could attain world domination..yes..i mention the 2nd world war..yes i know its over...but a man that ignores lessons from the past..is an idiot imo
if you can't see the comparison between the rise of the Nazi'z and this situation then you missing a lot of similarities..as then you have people ignoring a situation..hoping it wouldn't affect them...took no action..until they had too.
you talk like we have got no weapons..want to put some figures on what we have got?..its irrelevant anyway what we have or have not...its not a competition to see how many bombs each country can drop..then giving them a score out of 5 to see if its worthwhile them being there
and..no matter what we have got...we have a responsibility to take part..many of the enemy..are British ...you seem to be ignoring that..in fact you ignore any question you don't want to answer from what i can see.
would you like to say what you think would happen if no one takes any action..what is your prediction about the future if these people are left unchecked?
Last edited:
Warbler
The threat against Italy was made because it a infidel Christian centre.
Belgium has a Jewish museum? How disgraceful
And Sweden? The list goes on. Now it's Germans in the phillipnes
This is a genuinely evil cult spun out of a religion that has to take much responsibility because of it's attitude towards other religions and nations. As I have said before, when London mayors promote a "moderate imam" who calls for the execution of gays, the mutilaition of women, the killing of apostates and declares the nazis as a gift from god, I think it's not exactly a big step from that to isis ?
These people will find any excuse or reason for so called provocation. Just as the nazis did against the jews.
The threat against Italy was made because it a infidel Christian centre.
Belgium has a Jewish museum? How disgraceful
And Sweden? The list goes on. Now it's Germans in the phillipnes
This is a genuinely evil cult spun out of a religion that has to take much responsibility because of it's attitude towards other religions and nations. As I have said before, when London mayors promote a "moderate imam" who calls for the execution of gays, the mutilaition of women, the killing of apostates and declares the nazis as a gift from god, I think it's not exactly a big step from that to isis ?
These people will find any excuse or reason for so called provocation. Just as the nazis did against the jews.
EC1
On a break
its not wild..its only wild because of how you have twisted it
no..i wasn't saying that the Nazi's are like them as in identcal beliefs...i'm talking about THREAT level offered long term.... they can grow and offer the same threat AS them
you obviously feel they aren't a threat..so where do you see IS in 5 years time..unchecked
i bet you ignore that question
EC1
On a break
no..you answer some questions..instead of sitting back with nothing but "clever" snipes..lets see some proper answers to what i have asked you..its all one sided this..lets see your world where people do nothing..paint us a picture of where we will be by letting evil grow.
The logistics are simply not the point warbler. It's the difference between doing something and doing nothing. You suggest doing nothing on the very spurious basis that we are "no good"
That's just complete nonsense. Save it for the so called neutral countries
That's just complete nonsense. Save it for the so called neutral countries
What a moron you are
So you refuse to answer a question because I hadn't answered inside 2 minutes between your two posts
The answer is the threat is regional in the first case, and if the region can't sort it out (which they could do if they were motivated to) then the 'real' powers of the world will need to. The UK isn't one. We don't have the military capability
So how about you answer now?
So you refuse to answer a question because I hadn't answered inside 2 minutes between your two posts
The answer is the threat is regional in the first case, and if the region can't sort it out (which they could do if they were motivated to) then the 'real' powers of the world will need to. The UK isn't one. We don't have the military capability
So how about you answer now?
Last edited:
That's even bigger nonsense Clive
Do you join battle to win? or do you do so to make yourself feel better about yourself?
It's why I'm asking the question about what's going to be required, or do you adopt some namby pamby liberal Guardian positon of flying a few 'feel good' Tornados about?
Ground troops, a full response and an invasion or not? And are you then going to come to a sensibel accommodation with some of the dictators who could police the region for you (those that you haven't stupidly removed) and are you equally going to invite the military capable countries in an incentivise them by agreeing their price?
EC1
On a break
if you ever said that to my face you'd find out what a moron i am that is for sure.
my dialogue with you is done for good on here after that
Last edited:
Yawn
Right, so I answer a question and you disappear. Why am I not surprised? Let's look at your previosu that provoked such outrage when I hadn't bee able to repsondinside the 2 minutes.
"no..you answer some questions..instead of sitting back with nothing but "clever" snipes..lets see some proper answers to what i have asked you..its all one sided this..lets see your world where people do nothing..paint us a picture of where we will be by letting evil grow."
Right so I answered and you still refuse to right? "One sided" - yep that's right, me against everyone else
Right, so I answer a question and you disappear. Why am I not surprised? Let's look at your previosu that provoked such outrage when I hadn't bee able to repsondinside the 2 minutes.
"no..you answer some questions..instead of sitting back with nothing but "clever" snipes..lets see some proper answers to what i have asked you..its all one sided this..lets see your world where people do nothing..paint us a picture of where we will be by letting evil grow."
Right so I answered and you still refuse to right? "One sided" - yep that's right, me against everyone else
Last edited:
EC1
On a break
don't reply Clive..he's trolling
Last edited:
Not at all Clive.
I'd have Saddam policing the region tomorrow if I could turn the clock back.
I don't think any of you John Bull fantasists have got the remotest idea of what would be involved to make a substantive and game changing contribution. You think that sending a squadron of crappy Tornado's down there will make any difference? Look, the Saudis have got more of these aircraft than we have, why don't they do it?
You don't mind grandstanding for the benefit of your own egos and feel good, that's exactly what the UK is doing. The best thing the UK could do if you aren't prepared to commit upward of 20,000 troops, is retreat to Europe, settle for a defensive role of policing our own countries and borders (made harder now that you've stupidly removed Gadaffi) and let those countries who can win this war for you, take the fight
You aren't coming out with a strategy to win this war that you're variously trying portray as the next apocalypse. To suggest that IS have the industrial mite and population of 1930's Germany is admittedly laughable, but they're still going to need defeating. You don't defeat an enemy in war with PR and feel good gestures. That's all you're coming up with
They're a disparate collection of motivated fighters and former Saddamists, sprinkled with Syrian opposition (the same people who you were calling democratic freedom fighters 12 months ago) that's how confused you are
So let me ask again,
who amongst you is prepared to get commit 20,000+ troops on the ground to fight and be killed in the process? At least have the balls to say you are
I'd have Saddam policing the region tomorrow if I could turn the clock back.
I don't think any of you John Bull fantasists have got the remotest idea of what would be involved to make a substantive and game changing contribution. You think that sending a squadron of crappy Tornado's down there will make any difference? Look, the Saudis have got more of these aircraft than we have, why don't they do it?
You don't mind grandstanding for the benefit of your own egos and feel good, that's exactly what the UK is doing. The best thing the UK could do if you aren't prepared to commit upward of 20,000 troops, is retreat to Europe, settle for a defensive role of policing our own countries and borders (made harder now that you've stupidly removed Gadaffi) and let those countries who can win this war for you, take the fight
You aren't coming out with a strategy to win this war that you're variously trying portray as the next apocalypse. To suggest that IS have the industrial mite and population of 1930's Germany is admittedly laughable, but they're still going to need defeating. You don't defeat an enemy in war with PR and feel good gestures. That's all you're coming up with
They're a disparate collection of motivated fighters and former Saddamists, sprinkled with Syrian opposition (the same people who you were calling democratic freedom fighters 12 months ago) that's how confused you are
So let me ask again,
who amongst you is prepared to get commit 20,000+ troops on the ground to fight and be killed in the process? At least have the balls to say you are
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
I see far greater similarities between IS and the Nazi's than with the Khmer Rouge, tbh.
Other than IS sharing a propensity towards butchery with the Khmer, the likeness is hard to find.
The Khmer Rouge were an insular isolated grouping focussed solely upon domination of their own patch. On the other hand, IS -- like the Nazi's -- is driven towards expansionism. For the Nazi's it was a aspiration to dominate Europe at the very least; equivalently, IS is motivated towards establishing an intranational Caliphate. Both ideologies are/were structured on a hunger for world supremacy on their own terms. Both of them tyrannies and both despotisms with a global slant. Conversely, the Khmer Rouge was nationalistic and xenophobic in its outlook.
Then there is the issue of cult-worship in the style of a mediaeval belief-system -- a dated interpretation of Islam on one hand and the Teutonic paganism of the Nazi's.
Both Nazi's and IS also compel the ritualistic idolization of a single figure -- Hitler in one case and al-Baghdadi in the other. Any hint of dissent to the autocrat or the theocrat is ruthlessly eliminated. Oppositely, the Khmer Rouge was organisational and institutional in its architecture.
The most glaring similarlity between Nazism and its Islamofascist brother IS is an absolute hatred for Jews.
Of course, there is also the matter that whereas Nazism was extremist Right Wing, the Khmer's were extremist Left Wing in philosophy.
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
And that isn't very nice, now, is it? :nono:
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjMX4_4faX4&list=PLk1Sqn_f33KuS7ZSVMJqzFaqOyyl-esmG
Well worth a watch, especially from a round 1hr 40mins in regarding American and British foreign policy.
Well worth a watch, especially from a round 1hr 40mins in regarding American and British foreign policy.
We do not come out with a "strategy for winning this war" because we do not have the full intelligence to know what is required. And nor do you
Secondly it is pretty obvious that as a first step you knock back the expansion of isis by attacking them with air strikes. It is hardly difficult to understand that they are far less able to expand whilst under attack than if not
That is one strategy I do understand
Secondly it is pretty obvious that as a first step you knock back the expansion of isis by attacking them with air strikes. It is hardly difficult to understand that they are far less able to expand whilst under attack than if not
That is one strategy I do understand
I see far greater similarities between IS and the Nazi's than with the Khmer Rouge, tbh.
Other than IS sharing a propensity towards butchery with the Khmer, the likeness is hard to find.
The Khmer Rouge were an insular isolated grouping focussed solely upon domination of their own patch. On the other hand, IS -- like the Nazi's -- is driven towards expansionism. For the Nazi's it was a aspiration to dominate Europe at the very least; equivalently, IS is motivated towards establishing an intranational Caliphate. Both ideologies are/were structured on a hunger for world supremacy on their own terms. Both of them tyrannies and both despotisms with a global slant. Conversely, the Khmer Rouge was nationalistic and xenophobic in its outlook.
Then there is the issue of cult-worship in the style of a mediaeval belief-system -- a dated interpretation of Islam on one hand and the Teutonic paganism of the Nazi's.
Both Nazi's and IS also compel the ritualistic idolization of a single figure -- Hitler in one case and al-Baghdadi in the other. Any hint of dissent to the autocrat or the theocrat is ruthlessly eliminated. Oppositely, the Khmer Rouge was organisational and institutional in its architecture.
The most glaring similarlity between Nazism and its Islamofascist brother IS is an absolute hatred for Jews.
Of course, there is also the matter that whereas Nazism was extremist Right Wing, the Khmer's were extremist Left Wing in philosophy.
I would agree with that. But never forget that the difference between the extreme right and left is minimal, despite the rhetoric.
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
No, I just went for the scummiest sets of supporters.