ISIS...Islamic State Victims
- Thread starter harry
- Start date
EC1
On a break
a nuclear device going off could cover a large area though..and if the blame can be laid at their door..and no one can show it wouldn't be them afterwards..it could be got away with...type of thing i can see playing through the minds of certain people
then again..i'm probably being a bit fanciful..watched too many films etc
then again..i'm probably being a bit fanciful..watched too many films etc
Chemical weapons, yes, nuclear weapons, no
You're cover story would last about 5 minutes before it fell apart
There are kind of precendents though, as you might recall the supposed chemical weapon attack in the middle of Damascus conducted by Assad right under the noses of a UN weapons inspection team who were visiting at the time. You knew that clearly wasn't Assad within 10 minutes as that's all it took for William (never been right about anything) Hague to tell the world it clearly was him
You're cover story would last about 5 minutes before it fell apart
There are kind of precendents though, as you might recall the supposed chemical weapon attack in the middle of Damascus conducted by Assad right under the noses of a UN weapons inspection team who were visiting at the time. You knew that clearly wasn't Assad within 10 minutes as that's all it took for William (never been right about anything) Hague to tell the world it clearly was him
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
It's too late; that particular train has left the platform.
Islamic State are winning, and they will triumph in the end. They are an unstoppable force now; the world has prevaricated too long in tackling them.
They rule vast swathes of North Africa and the Middle East; they are embedded in countries as far-flung as the Philippines to Malaysia and Afghanistan. They have sleepers resolute and waiting in Europe and the U.S.A.; they have a global propaganda machine that has succeeded in manipulating the mindset of a significant percentage of the world's Muslim population. Islamic State is a dynamic that is in the ascendant.
The only hope for those countries who have not yet collapsed to I.S. authority ( i.e., us), is to erect walls and try to defend themselves from the enemy within. Those other countries where Islamic State have a foothold are already lost.
If a U.S.-led coalition of over a dozen countries with the most technologically advanced weaponry and air-power cannot defeat them in Iraq, how is the removal of Bashar Assad going to be a catalyst for defeating them in Syria?
Enemy identification hasn't exactly been a strong suit of the west since about 2000
Your dictators were your first line of defence, but the morons have removed them
Your second line is possibly the corrupt shiekdoms, but there's only one with the military might who could stand half a chance of holding IS, and it's far from clear which direction their population would dive anyway
Your third line of defence is Israel, but by now of course global Jihad has spread, and North Africa will be the next front
The latter is a worry, and this one lands squarely on the doorstep of Sarkozy and Cameron who've been nothing short of absolutely abysmal the way they opened the door for the conservative reactionaries
Your dictators were your first line of defence, but the morons have removed them
Your second line is possibly the corrupt shiekdoms, but there's only one with the military might who could stand half a chance of holding IS, and it's far from clear which direction their population would dive anyway
Your third line of defence is Israel, but by now of course global Jihad has spread, and North Africa will be the next front
The latter is a worry, and this one lands squarely on the doorstep of Sarkozy and Cameron who've been nothing short of absolutely abysmal the way they opened the door for the conservative reactionaries
Last edited:
M
marbler
Guest
I was referring to The Telegraph article, that said Putin was potentially willing to allow the removal of Assad to launch a campaign against ISIS. I've no idea if the story is credible, but I live in hope.
I don't think there are any easy options or quick fixes really.
Last edited:
Are they really trying to beat them in Iraq though?
or does it suit some to have this area forever de-stabilised?
Israel must be quite happy to be out of the headlines since ISIS have come along?
Last edited:
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
I think they ( the U.S.) have reluctantly -- and privately -- accepted that beating them is now not a reality. (That woman -- Maire Harf from the State Dept -- admitted as much in a rare moment of honesty in February saying " America can't win against Islamic State").
Perhaps the U.S. is hoping at best to limit their growth; to this end they have already spent almost $3 Billion in the fight against I.S. -- $9 Million per day -- as revealed this week in response to a Freedom of Information request.
http://www.ibtimes.com/war-against-isis-cost-us-27b-or-over-9m-day-last-august-pentagon-1963947
So, yes, they are "really trying", but in the end I fear it will be to no avail.
The other cost to factor in of course is how much they've spent training and equipping the Iraqi army since 2004. That particular experiment was the largest single commitment in military history, making Iraq's the most expensively rapidly assembled military ever. And what did they get? Well they ran away and handed their equipment over to the Islamist conservatives. America it seems is increasingly being reduced to turning to the Shia militas of Iranian extraction to fight for them. How humiliating is that for the west? The bottom line is you struggle to build an army out of radical middle class professionals. The same thing happened in Iran in 1978 when the radicals were quickly swamped by the conservatives and the country gave birth to the Islamic revolution. Cameron still occasionally blubs on about so called 'moderate muslims' (without any understanding that they're actually radical in context and most certainly not moderate) but the bottom line is teachers, doctors, and lawyers will lose a shooting match, as they're showing in Iraq and Libya, and would have done in Syria too had Ed Miliband not saved him from himself
Don't think it stops there. If or when Syria falls who do you think stands between IS and Israel? Hezbollah that's who. Syria needs propping up if anything. Clearly the great western strategists have learnt nothing from Iraq.
As regards the UK, well we're increasingly a spectator reduced to hand wringing and telling everyone else what to do but incapable of doing anything ourselves. This morning the Sunday T is carrying an open letter from ex heads of staff describing the British military as "feeble" since it started being hollowed out in 2010. The American's had started getting increasingly exasperated with us in Afghanistan accusing us of cowardice in refusing to engage in Sanguin because it was felt to be too dangerous.
IS are two steps ahead of the UK and western strategists. Their strategy follows similar plans from centuries ago and is neatly laid out for us to study. One of their primary tactics is to coincide a rapid advance into a territory they inflame with a co-ordinated insurection. This involves planting sleepers into communities to fight from within at the moment of notice. That's why our own military will ultimately be at full stretch was the third world war cranks up defending our own streets.
Western politicians, not for the first time, are completely over estimating the seduction of democracy and western lifetsyles in the face of an irrational religious conseravtive calling. Rome was a once mighty empire destorying similarly and sent Europe into about 500 years of dark ages
Don't think it stops there. If or when Syria falls who do you think stands between IS and Israel? Hezbollah that's who. Syria needs propping up if anything. Clearly the great western strategists have learnt nothing from Iraq.
As regards the UK, well we're increasingly a spectator reduced to hand wringing and telling everyone else what to do but incapable of doing anything ourselves. This morning the Sunday T is carrying an open letter from ex heads of staff describing the British military as "feeble" since it started being hollowed out in 2010. The American's had started getting increasingly exasperated with us in Afghanistan accusing us of cowardice in refusing to engage in Sanguin because it was felt to be too dangerous.
IS are two steps ahead of the UK and western strategists. Their strategy follows similar plans from centuries ago and is neatly laid out for us to study. One of their primary tactics is to coincide a rapid advance into a territory they inflame with a co-ordinated insurection. This involves planting sleepers into communities to fight from within at the moment of notice. That's why our own military will ultimately be at full stretch was the third world war cranks up defending our own streets.
Western politicians, not for the first time, are completely over estimating the seduction of democracy and western lifetsyles in the face of an irrational religious conseravtive calling. Rome was a once mighty empire destorying similarly and sent Europe into about 500 years of dark ages
EC1
On a break
at what point will Isis take over Germany Italy France etc do you think Warb or Ice?..shouldn't be much longer if they are such a mighty fighting force would think. Or will we have a nuclear/germ accident before then.
Last edited:
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
Not quite sure if I said that Germany, Italy, France falling to I.S. in the near future was a fait accompli.
Rather that western states might in the coming years have to fight them on our own streets; and that those foreign states where they are already in effective authority can be written off as already lost.
But if pushed to it, I'll forecast that at least one mainland European country will have implemented full sharia law within 20 years.
Any possible outcome is not so far-fetched. As Warbler refers, Rome with its colossal military might fell to the barbarians. I'll add imperial China -- at the time the world's most culturally, artistically and technologically advanced society -- which was overwhelmed by a force of Mongol horsemen whose strategy was based on ruthlessness and terror.
Any notion that Europe as an entity is somehow impregnable and is permanently immutable in its current form is untenable.
Rather that western states might in the coming years have to fight them on our own streets; and that those foreign states where they are already in effective authority can be written off as already lost.
But if pushed to it, I'll forecast that at least one mainland European country will have implemented full sharia law within 20 years.
Any possible outcome is not so far-fetched. As Warbler refers, Rome with its colossal military might fell to the barbarians. I'll add imperial China -- at the time the world's most culturally, artistically and technologically advanced society -- which was overwhelmed by a force of Mongol horsemen whose strategy was based on ruthlessness and terror.
Any notion that Europe as an entity is somehow impregnable and is permanently immutable in its current form is untenable.
The difference now Ice, compared to the falling of Rome etc is that the threat can be seen the world over, due to media and communications. I agree with you about on our streets. I'm sure there was a politician back in the day called Enoch Powell who made a speech about rivers of blood?
I think if Israel (If indeed they are a target) come under any kind of threat, they would turn ISIS into dust.
I think if Israel (If indeed they are a target) come under any kind of threat, they would turn ISIS into dust.
I'm not great on timescales, but I could easily see them over running France, Italy and Spain in the future (and Greece next week!!!).
In the first case they'll be making up about 20% of the population of southern Europe by then, I suspect 'then' will be about 2040 to 2050. Now it's palpable rubbish to suggest that every muslim male under the age of 30 is some kind of subversive, but you probably only need about 1% of the population to be radicalised to the point where they're capable.
Let's use Italy as an example. A country of about 58M isn't it?. 20% = 11.6M and 1% of that = 116,000. That gives them a manpower approximately 35,000 greater then the British army at it's current level of strength (and we're one of the bigger ones in Europe). Imagine how potent they'd be with 2%. The threat will be embeded in our country and communities and living within us. If it were co-ordinated well, they could strike us down before we even had time to realise what was happening. Think how much a challenge the IRA proved to be with an active membership of about 400 at any given time.
What do I think will happen?
I think we'll see a second Caliphate declared across north Africa, stretching from Morocco where the French and Spanish will be desperately engaged in trying to prevent a crossing into Europe, all the way to Egypt which will be sucked into a civil war by then.
Ultimately though an armada of small ships and rib boats can ferry fighters across the Mediterranean. It's a threat that the Royal Navy are accutely aware of at the moment in the name of asymmetrical warfare. We don't at present have a ship bound weapon capable of hitting multiple small fast moving targets at sea. A lot of our destroyers and frigates are hopelessly ill equipped to deal with a swarm attack, and especially if they have a few suicide boats in there. The best we probably have drones and attack helicopters, the latter of which a horribly vulnerable to shoulder launched missiles. ISIS already have plenty of stinger missiles we believe as a result of the Iraqi's handing them over.
I think we'll see other things too like malicious infections of contagious diseases being transported into the country. Indeed, this is almost a variant of poisoning the wells which of course the prophet justified
I think we'll see all of these things and you can see the blueprint in Iraq today. This exactly how they've advanced. They send refugees on ahead of the advance to embed themselves in a target community, and then launch a conventional assault on the front, and an internal attack from within. The other major thing they have is supply of soldiers on tap, the product of what I can only describe as an aggressive breeding programme that becomes a duty to women of child bearing age.
Last edited:
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/jan/28/muslim-population-country-projection-2030
projected Muslim populations 2030
france 10%
spain. 5%
italy 3%
none of these states will be sharia or Isis governed in 2040. This is nuts
projected Muslim populations 2030
france 10%
spain. 5%
italy 3%
none of these states will be sharia or Isis governed in 2040. This is nuts
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
re: Sharia ......... I was more in mind of countries like Bosnia, Macedonia, Serbia, when making the 20-year prognosis, rather than Spain, Italy, France etc.
Providing forecasts is a far from precise science.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...of-European-Union-will-be-Muslim-by-2005.html
Pew's sample period doesn't take into account the post Libya or Syria scenarios. Italy has a 2% muslim population today. I suspect they're being very conservative to suggest it will grow by just 1% in the next 20 years, and reach just 3% (could be that within a year at this rate unless they start sinking boats in the Med!). Indeed Clive, there is a related story linked to the bottom of your link to the galant Guardian that says that the UK's muslim population has doubled in just 10 years (4.8% in total). This kind of shows the problems in this area in terms of getting hold of reliabel data. When they break that down by age cohort it's very clear that it's forecast to grow further unless you can persuade them not to engage in baby making. Even the same paper is pedaling two different scenarios.
The problem with forecasting in this area is that it carries a strong political nuance and this affects who reports what. The EU have so far proven pitiful in their forecasts, but even if we work on 10% for ourselves and the French, we're still going to be facing a potentially very serious threat, as the UK's population is forecast to be a bout 78M by then.
10% = 7.8M and 1% radicalised = 78,000
That's a formidable sized army to have inside your own castle!
Now obviosuly there's 1001 variables and unknowns that we'll encounter en-route, going forward, and we simply can't know
1: Will we see 'white flight' increase
2: Will the situation in north Africa and the middle east deteriorate to the extent where we get a wholesale trans continental relocation of millions on the move
3: What is the true level of 'illegals'
4: Will there continue to be global flashpoints around the world capable of radicalising vulnerable members of the population
For all these bad influences of course, there are correpsonding converse alternatives
The bottom line is that there is a hell of a lot of known unknowns, albeit I'll happily accept that we have to make a forecast in the name of trying to do something, but any long range forecast is usually vulnerable
Last edited:
Powell invoked an old Roman poem 'Aeneid' and Sybil's prophecy that the Tiber would foam with blood. Whether it constituted incitement or his own fear has been a bit of a moot point. What he did do however was strongly criticise America and suggest that if Britain continued accepting immigration on the scale that it was doing (it's increased massively since) then the UK would end up experiencing the same problems that were contemporary to the United States (1968). There was no appreciation at the time that Islam and religious affiliations were the slightest threat. Indeed, what little stirrings that did exist in that direction were largely confined to pan Arab nationalism. It would be a full decade later before the radicals (pro democracy campaigners) lost to the conservatives (Islamic state supporters) and the world had it's first Islamic revolution in Iran, of modern times.
That period in itself is worth remembering as the Shi'ites were seen as the problem and the Sunni's as the more moderate. You might equally recall that one of the first leaders to recognise the threat posed by ultra conservative islam was Saddam Hussein who went to war with Iran in an attempt to topple it. After eight years of the US trying to manage instability to two sides made peace, but the economic costs to Iraq set in train disasterous set of events that George W Bush irresponsibly personalised and which we're now paying the price for
As regards the similarity with the fall of Rome, I don't regard global reporting as being the biggest issue but the way that Rome subsumed the predominantly gothic tribes into their society. They were undoubtedly given menial tasks and were treated as an under class which led to the build up of grievance. Perhaps more tellingly though was that they decided to subsume them into the army. Well it made sense they figured to train them how to fight, that way the immigrants could go out and fight the wars of Rome for them whilst a rich and privleged class took the fruits of those battles. Basically Rome had become decadant on a diet of strictly come chariot racing, or Skyus Sportus (popularly called bread and circuses).
You don't need to be a genius to see what the dangers are of training an immigrant army with grievances to do your fighting for you though. Ultimately they became an enemy within who were less inclined to fight the germanic tribes, and what was left of the indigenous Romans were too useless to make up the shortfall by now
If some kind of historical replay of this is at foot, then the only body of people capable of checking this advance is going to be a weaponsied and trained civilian population. The only country in the west that could probably resist it at the moment is the United States by virtue of having so many of their civilians weapons trained and already loosely organised into neighbourhood watch units and other private security affiliations
Long way to go, and many things that can (and will) happen in between, but this the broad dystopic future I'm kind of foreseeing.
I had thought that ISIS would peak about 6 months ago, and that perhaps Iraq might start reclaiming ground after Tikrit was recaptured. But since then of course ISIS have captured Ramadi and the much heralded spring offensive that the Iraqis had promised us hasn't really happened. What has happened only occurred because of Shia militas with Iran pulling the strings. ISIS seem to be genuinely talking in terms of making Jordan their next target (not that one!)
Last edited:
If Jordan is under threat, then we will see how seriously ISIS are taken.
They are bullies in their own ring fenced playground. Beheading innocents, throwing Gays off tower blocks and attacking hopeless targets (Iraqi "army" included) mean nothing in world terms. If they approach Saudi, Turkey, Jordan, Iran or proper Assad Syria.......then we will see?
No boots on the ground from Western forces too!
They are bullies in their own ring fenced playground. Beheading innocents, throwing Gays off tower blocks and attacking hopeless targets (Iraqi "army" included) mean nothing in world terms. If they approach Saudi, Turkey, Jordan, Iran or proper Assad Syria.......then we will see?
No boots on the ground from Western forces too!
Last edited:
Filth. I can see an attack tipping things over the edge in a western country and revenge on the agenda. Totally wrong and exactly what they want of course but the Muslim community is isolated like no other, despite its size. Not just isolated from evil White pople and Jews as the hand wringing guardian wankers would have us believe but everyone. Absolutely everyone
I doNot buy into the Wild West future scenario some suggest but when you see more and more Muslims adopting the uniform of extreme views (and it's very very prevalent in some parts of London) then many are going to take a certain view about what they do believe in. They are not exactly sending out a message of integration and tolerance are they?
as an aside there is a piece in the economist today reporting that Shias are being intimidated by Sunnis in Bradford. That seems to be their next front in the west and I suspect there will be a sectarian mass attack somewhere
I doNot buy into the Wild West future scenario some suggest but when you see more and more Muslims adopting the uniform of extreme views (and it's very very prevalent in some parts of London) then many are going to take a certain view about what they do believe in. They are not exactly sending out a message of integration and tolerance are they?
as an aside there is a piece in the economist today reporting that Shias are being intimidated by Sunnis in Bradford. That seems to be their next front in the west and I suspect there will be a sectarian mass attack somewhere
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
You're not wrong, there !
Today's acts and others previously have turned me from someone who was completely nonchalant about Islam into someone who is now bordering on being a "hater"
It's probably wrong, but that's the situation.
I feel much the same on days such as this, but it is an emotional response.
A war is inevitable. The only questions left for me really are when and where, and perhaps from a technical point of view, how
Incidentally Clive let's just applaud the gallant Guardian again for being the only paper in 'Fleet Street' that had the balls to publish cartoons, not like the hand wringing wankers of the cowardly Daily Mail, they just incite everyone else to hate but when they get the chance to back their own rhetoric up with a gesture of defiance their true colours shone through, yellow
Was brushing up the reasons, and the sequence of events behind the Fall of Rome again recently, and my God, you'd have to be incredibly stupid (or David Cameron) not see the similarities
Incidentally Clive let's just applaud the gallant Guardian again for being the only paper in 'Fleet Street' that had the balls to publish cartoons, not like the hand wringing wankers of the cowardly Daily Mail, they just incite everyone else to hate but when they get the chance to back their own rhetoric up with a gesture of defiance their true colours shone through, yellow
Was brushing up the reasons, and the sequence of events behind the Fall of Rome again recently, and my God, you'd have to be incredibly stupid (or David Cameron) not see the similarities
Last edited: