ISIS...Islamic State Victims

[clivex]

As opposed to the textbook demonstration currently being laid on for the world to view with unbridled envy by the NATO countries of Europe you mean?

And I'm not sure that America is doing too sound a job when the front runner for the GOP nomination is making the building of a wall on the Mexcian border his first policy objective and it's clearly resonating

Your world view reminds me of a quote attributed to Tony Blair about Gordon Brown;

"The problem with Gordon is he thinks there's an economics solution to everything"

I think you'd also benefit if you could throw off some of your old way of thinking and look to the future and work out who will be best equipped to meet this challenge in a changing landscape. I wouldn't under estimate the value of manpower if I were you, and even if that means finding a bottom line to bring China in, then that pursuit needs to start

Look ... it isn't difficult to see which countries are placing orders for what militarily, and which countries are expanding thus. You can then start to overlay that on existing static dynamics like population, and you quickly come to realise that the balance of world military power will change in the next 20-30 years which is the sort of temporal horizon that is likely to play out here. Islamicfascism won't go away when the caliphate is defeated

In a decades time we should be starting to see the first produce from the Islamic States baby making factories. This is tantamount to harvesting people. They're putting women into breeding programmes basically to produce jihadis who are taught that this is their transitory existance before they go to paradise, but the only way they can complete that journey is to die a martyr fighting the infidels. It's pure evil, and how anyone can prioritise Assad or Gadaffi over this is beyond my comprehension.

you are living in fantasy land

A front runner for the gop is neither here nor there. So what if he's talking about Mexico?


of course the economics affect russia. They are not well placed to spend are they? War does cost you know

india has 200m Muslims and Pakistan twitching right next door. It's most certainly not going to risk getting involved against isis with taht scenario

china simply won't and certainly won't risk it's own insurgency

 

[Warbler]

War doesn't cost Russia so much to wage when their arms manufacturers are state owned. In any event, they have the hardware already, and the men under arms will be paid the same whether they fight or just attend ceremonial duties. They're also more inclined to fight differently rather than relying on expensive missiles to kill a subaru truck that costs a mere snippet of the price required to destroy it. They'll be more inclined to move armour and tanks in, as artillery shells aren't anything like as expensive

India has already suffered muslim terrorist attacks, as has Pakistan. If this continues to expand, India won't be untouched and will eventually have to respond. It's that straight forward. That they haven't done to date is because their potential role hasn't be countenanced, and like China, they're also taking the view that this is an American **** up, so they can feel the heat for it. It's little secret that India is looking to establish itself on the worlds stage as a player, albeit I'd happily agree that there are plenty of vehicles they'd rather use to announce their arrival.

If America can't put this back in its box though, then ultimately other countries will get sucked in

As regards the longer term future, as I believe we're looking at timeframes of 25 years here, you have to consider all possibilities. Just look at Afghnaistan.

In 1979 the Soviet Union moved in there and America boycotted the Moscow Olympics a year later. They then started funding the Mujahadin. If someone had told you that 25 years later it would be America invading Afghanistan after having been attacked by a Mujahadin mutation on their own soil and that Soviet Union longer existed, you might have been forgiven for once for using words like fantasy land etc

America might have contributed to a lot of this with their double dealing and strategically stupid decisions (much of which conceals commercial and other personal agendas) but the underlying tension of Islamofascist expansion won't go away unless it's successfully challenged. The likes of India and China need to realise that they aren't immune to its ambitions. They aren't about to join in any time soon of course, I'll grant you that observation, but the process to start involving them and preparing the ground needs to begin as ultimately they'll try and extract a price. The losers could well be Europe, and I suspect they've also been reluctant to invite new partners to the table for fear of having their own imaginary influence diluted

 

[Warbler]

Anyone seen the cruxification picture in the Sunday Express today?

How any government could support the Islamic State by priortising the very people fighting them as the greater enemy is beyond me. Let's not forget that only two years ago Cameron was trying to do just that.

Today the French have launched their first raids into Syria against ISIL

The American's are clearly coming to an accommodation with Russia

The British are finding themselves out in the cold again but at least they're looking in the right direction now for the first time in five years. That we finally have a Foreign Secretary who possesses both judgement and isn't weighed down by his own prejudiced dogma isn't a coincidence I suspect. I should qualify that by saying starting to look in the right direction because America is doing so

There is some ridiculous suggestion doing the rounds incidentally that Cameron is delaying a vote on the subject because he doesn't know which way the Labour will vote. Come on ...... I've heard some pathetic excuses, and realise that on the world stage he's a complete vacuum, but does he really expect anyone to believe this is the case when he's got an overall majority. Has he taken to prioritising the needs of the British Labour party above those of the Syrians being slaughtered by ISIL

The real tragedy though (and I believe this is unforgiveable) is that this outcome could have been foreseen 4 years ago, the death and displacement that's occurred in between has definitely been compunded by yet more appalling political leadership in the west

 

[Grasshopper]

Hard to argue with your final argument re the utterly-inept leadership on this matter, Warbler. The only politician to have displayed any strategic nous when it has come to Syria/IS, has been Vladimir Putin.

 

[icebreaker]

Watching RT News this morning .....................
Russia's Upper House has overnight authorised military action in Syria -- aerial bombing of ISIS in the country and sending 2,000 military personnel.
Go Vladimir, unleash the dogs of war on the filth. Putin rreally is setting the agenda now; hopefully this may be a turning point in the battle against Islamic State.

 

[icebreaker]

Yaaaay, and now the Chinese too !

"Meanwhile, an Israeli military news website, DEBKAfile, has cited military sources as saying that a Chinese aircraft carrier, the Liaoning-CV-16, has already been spotted at the Syrian port of Tartus on the Mediterranean coast. It was said to be accompanied by a guided missile cruiser".


[SUB][/SUB]
​

 

[harry]

Watching RT News this morning .....................
Russia's Upper House has overnight authorised military action in Syria -- aerial bombing of ISIS in the country and sending 2,000 military personnel.
Go Vladimir, unleash the dogs of war on the filth. Putin rreally is setting the agenda now; hopefully this may be a turning point in the battle against Islamic State.

watching on TV this morning, it was mentioned that the Russian Intel Drones were flying over anti Assad rebel areas backed by USA, Saudi etc.......they are nowhere near Islamic State areas.
This has caused Saudi to threaten to back these rebels even more if attacked by Russia.
Not as clear as it seems Ice?

 

[icebreaker]

Give it a few days, Harry. Putin is determined to take the war to ISIS.
And maybe, hopefully, if Saudi continues to back these jihadi rebels, it might get a black eye too.
I really think there has been enough already of pussyfooting around Saudi Arabia by the West. Time to tell them to "get onside", oil or no fckin' oil.

 

[clivex]

No hes not. Harry is right. This about keeping is chemical weapon client in place. Nothing more

Wish I could link Roger Boyes article in the Times today, who knows this stuff far better than anyone here. He makes the pertinent point that so long as Isis exists then Putins argument for keeping Assad in place holds more water. So why would the chemical brothers Putin and assad want to see isis defeated?

 

[icebreaker]

No hes not. Harry is right. This about keeping is chemical weapon client in place. Nothing more

I'm not sure if the chemical weapons allegations against Assad is universally accepted, Clive.
The UNHRC report on the matter did conclude that chemical weapons were used, but that report admitted that the investigation team couldn't be sure who used them ........ Assad or the rebels.
What is known for certain is that the al Nusra Front seized 200 tons of chlorine gas from the factory in Aleppo when they overran the city; and that another jihadi group was caught with 2 Kg of Sarin in their possession.
Seriously, if we accept that ISIS are willing to behead and crucify their opponents, it would be naive to think that they wouldn't use chemical agents.

On the other hand, having been conned once before with the sexed-up Iraqi dossier about non-existent WMD's I am reluctant to fully accept at face value similar claims from Obama and Cameron about Syria.

 

[marbler]

Shows you how far the world and specifically the middle east has moved on since 2003 (for the worst).

In 2003 there were huge doubts over claims of Saddam possessing these types of weapons.

Nowadays, a lot of us accept the likelihood of Assad using chemical weapons is high, but we're now in a position where we may need to work with him to tackle a greater strategic threat.

That looks like the state of play at present.

Perverse, real and ironic...all in one.

 

[clivex]

Use of chemical weapons in the Syrian Civil War has been confirmed by the United Nations. The deadliest attacks were the Ghouta attack in the suburbs of Damascus in August 2013 and the Khan al-Asal attack in the suburbs of Aleppo in March 2013. Several other attacks have been alleged, reported and/or investigated.

A U.N. fact-finding mission and a UNHRC Commission of Inquiry have simultaneously investigated the attacks. The U.N. mission found likely use of the nerve agent Sarin in the case of Khan Al-Asal (19 March 2013), Saraqib (29 April 2013), Ghouta (21 August 2013), Jobar (24 August 2013) and Ashrafiyat Sahnaya (25 August 2013). The UNHRC commission later confirmed the use of Sarin in the Khan al-Asal, Saraqib and Ghouta attacks, but did not mention the Jobar and the Ashrafiyat Sahnaya attacks.
The UNHRC commission also found that the Sarin used in the Khan al-Asal attack bore "the same unique hallmarks" as the Sarin used in the Ghouta attack and indicated that the perpetrators likely had access to chemicals from the Syrian Army's stockpile.

 

[Warbler]

Meanwhile back in the Islamic State, non-believers (especially christians) haven't been shown the same level of respect that the "butcher" Assad showed them.

Still, Obama knows best. I mean how we can seriosuly consider helping the only credible army on the ground fighting them? Are we not forgeting they were allied with the Soviet Union 20 years ago!

Actually, another sign of Obama's desperation this week was his description of Assad as someone "who drops barrells bombs on babies" - oh please ! If Obama wants to run a scoreboard on the use of proximity fragmentation devices and collateral deaths there is one country on this planet that would be well ahead at the top of the table, and it ain't Syria

 

[icebreaker]

A U.N. fact-finding mission and a UNHRC Commission of Inquiry have simultaneously investigated the attacks. The U.N. mission found likely use of the nerve agent Sarin in the case of Khan Al-Asal (19 March 2013), Saraqib (29 April 2013), Ghouta (21 August 2013), Jobar (24 August 2013) and Ashrafiyat Sahnaya (25 August 2013). The UNHRC commission later confirmed the use of Sarin in the Khan al-Asal, Saraqib and Ghouta attacks, but did not mention the Jobar and the Ashrafiyat Sahnaya attacks.
The UNHRC commission also found that the Sarin used in the Khan al-Asal attack bore "the same unique hallmarks" as the Sarin used in the Ghouta attack and indicated that the perpetrators likely had access to chemicals from the Syrian Army's stockpile.

As I said, there is not conclusive evidence in the UNHRC investigation -- nor did the UNHRC claim there to be -- that Assad had used the chemical agents.
What is knw is that al Nusra and others looted chemical agents from Army depots and installations; it is just as possible, even likely, that it was the jihadi's who used them.


"Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia".
http://www.globalresearch.ca/jabhat...nsibility-for-chemical-weapons-attack/5347485

 

[icebreaker]

Meanwhile back in the Islamic State, non-believers (especially christians) haven't been shown the same level of respect that the "butcher" Assad showed them.

That's for sure !
As well as the crucifixions, the beheadings, the ISIS animals seem to have found another gameplay as reported today:



ISIS cut out healthy captives' kidneys and corneas and drain their blood for transplants...

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-prisoner-escaped-clutches.html#ixzz3nE1UDdLV

 

[Warbler]

I always felt that chemical weapons attack in Damascus looked flimsy.

Anyone who possessed the slightest iota of a critical faculty would put the circumstantial evidence together for starters

1: The war wasn't going that badly for Assad at the time, he had little reason to resort to chemicals under the specific conditions that existed to this alleged use
2: The American's had already warned him that they'd regard their use as a line in the sand. Having watched what had happened in Iraq and Libya he had to take that seriously
3: The UN actually had weapons inspectors visiting and staying in Damascus at the time, why on earth would Assad release them there and then?
4: Within half an hour of their reported use, the most useless man on the planet who has never been right about anything (William Hague) was unequivocally pinning the blame on Assad and calling for war, a move that would only have benefited ISIS.

It was perhaps notable this week that as Obama continued to make an arse of himself on the world stage, he chose to cling to the idea of dropping barrell bombs on babies rather than trot out this largely discredited notion about chemical weapons (hence why I suggested he sounds increasingly desperate)

If you want an insight into the priorities of the British government, remember that about 4 months ago the Peshmurga first reported that they had come under attack on the battlefield from chemical weapons. Not a squeak from Cameron. Last month ISIL used mustard gas for the first time in Syria. Again, not a peep of concern. Contrast that with his behaviour when the merest possibility (however unlikely it was) that Assad might have used them. Why?

I also had to laugh at the notable swine fellatio enthusiast trying to tell the world that Assad "is a recruiting sergeant" for ISIL. I'd like him to answer these questions;

Q: Which country has proven to be the most fertile recruiting ground for overseas recruits to ISIL then?
A: Tunisia, the self styled cradle of the arab spring - some result there then!

There's a few others he might try and answer too

Q: What sort of presence did radical Islam and groups such as ISIL have in Iraq prior to 2003
A: hardly any

Q: Could you conclude therefore that American occupation and more importantly, the disenfranchisement of the country's most competant fighting men was a factor in recruiting members to both AQI and ISIS?
A: Almost certainly, these people lost income and status with the fall of the regime. ISIS gained in strength tremendously after Al Baghdadi reorganised them and gave prominance to former Saddamists. Indeed, the same thing happened in Tunisia, which is why they currently lead the league table in supplying recruits. It's half happened in Libya too. It's selective, wrong, and reckeless to conveniently look the other way when the evidence doesn't fit your own narrative. To do so will lead you into further misjudgements and error

Q: Would you need to be cuckoo to ignore this trend?
A: Yes, either that, or you clearly aren't learning the lessons of what's happening around you

I also detect however that personal vanity is starting to impact the decision making process of Obama and Peppa. Both are too proud to admit that they've made a pigs ear of this whole thing and that Putin possesses an infinitely better appreciation of what's going on then they do. Both need to be careful though, the mood across the west is changing. The people are increasingly seeing their own leaders as useless and fumbling fools unable or incapable of providing the lead because they're crippled by the climb down it would involve to say they've made spectacularly chronic misjudgements.

 

[clivex]

No one is denying that isis are animals but frankly putting Le pen's, farage's and corbyn's favourite, Putin and the butchering Assad on a pedestal because of infantile "enemies enemy" thinking as well as irrelevant "whatabouteries" is pretty dismal.

having said that it should be possible to deliver a decent SAM to the rebels to bring down a couple of Russian troop carriers "by accident" ,shouldnt it? Or even just an aeroflot flight . That would be happy days, for sure

 

[clivex]

Overall a childish post . Without being bothered to read it all, the first line is clearly... well you would wouldnt you

t was perhaps notable this week that as Obama continued to make an arse of himself on the world stage, he chose to cling to the idea of dropping barrell bombs on babies rather than trot out this largely discredited notion about chemical weapons (hence why I suggested he sounds increasingly desperate)

Discredited by who?You?Trying to convince posters you have disproved the UN are you?

Maybe we will get the truth again? Funny that russia, the idol of the far right and far left social inadequates, Wanted this blocked isnt it?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...s-after-russia-lifts-objections-say-diplomats

 

[icebreaker]

Oooh-er, this Syrian situation is moving and developing faster than a Sukhoi-25.
I see in the past hour that Russia has warned the U.S. to immediately halt any flying missions over Syrian territory. However, U.S. Centcom has told American news media that U.S. planes will not comply with the Russian demand.

The leader of the Russian Orthodox Church has praised Putin's intervention in Syria, calling it a "Holy War".


Interesting few days ahead, for sure.

 

[icebreaker]

I also had to laugh at the notable swine fellatio enthusiast trying to tell the world

Somewhat off-topic, but, last week I came across an article in a respected newspaper in which the journalist referred to Cameron as "the Bodil Joensen of European politics".
Not being familiar with the name, I had to google it. What I discovered both appalled me and amused me at the same time.
(I would advise anyone of a sensitive nature NOT to look it up, btw).

 

[Warbler]

Overall a childish post . Without being bothered to read it all, the first line is clearly... well you would wouldnt you

t was perhaps notable this week that as Obama continued to make an arse of himself on the world stage, he chose to cling to the idea of dropping barrell bombs on babies rather than trot out this largely discredited notion about chemical weapons (hence why I suggested he sounds increasingly desperate)

Discredited by who?You?Trying to convince posters you have disproved the UN are you?

Maybe we will get the truth again? Funny that russia, the idol of the far right and far left social inadequates, Wanted this blocked isnt it?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...s-after-russia-lifts-objections-say-diplomats

The boy stood on the burning deck, when all but he had fled

Last week you got all churlish when I suggested your whole approach to this was reckless, and here you are a week later seriosuly suggesting that the Americans shoot down Russian planes in defence of ISIL. No comment needed. But just for clarity, is the allegation of childish aimed at me, or an acknowledgement of your own post which immediately proceeded it? it isn't clear

The UN want an investigation and yet by the same token you tell us they've already reached a verdict. Make your mind up. You're arguing against yourself again. So far as I recall the UN said that the chemical weapons likely came from Syrian army stockpiles, but stopped short of categorically saying that they were deployed by the Syrian regime. It's an allegation you don't hear anything like as much anymore, and instead the focus has switched to helicopters dropping chlorine cannisters (less effective than ISIL's mustard gas incidentally). Why?

As regards your link, I just don't see what point you're making? Did you not read the first sentance?

It's quite normal in diplomatic circles for one side to want to ensure that any enquiry is fair, and given reasonable terms and references. America blocks all sorts of investigations and have used their veto at the UN more than any other permanent member of the security council.

You shouldn't infer anything from this at all other than the fact the Russians and Syrians are actually co-operating.

Perhaps you'd be so good as to remind us how some of our own enquiries into things have developed? Chilcot? or don't you count that one? Will you confirm it's an enquiry where those giving evidence aren't even required to do so under oath please? I'm sure you'd be denouncing this very heavily if such limp conditions were applied to an enquiry into Syria wouldn't you?

As a matter of interest, does the name Hans Blixt mean anything to you either? You might recall he was a genuine weapons inspector (not the United Nations High Commission for Refugees) who concluded there wasn't any WMD in Iraq any longer. I have a degree of sympathy for Russia here. It's perfectly clear that the US will only listen to UN reports if they like what they hear and hang the truth, that's always been expedient

 

[Warbler]

I see in the past hour that Russia has warned the U.S. to immediately halt any flying missions over Syrian territory. However, U.S. Centcom has told American news media that U.S. planes will not comply with the Russian demand.

Sounds like Clive will be happy, he wants to start a Russia versus America war by the sounds of things. Still, if Clive's happy, ISIL will be ecstatic by this turn of events

Why have we got such moronic politicians incapable of working out where the simple existential threat exists and doing something about it? This should be really easy. Russia sort out Syria, America sort out Iraq. Then lets have a proper honest debate and interrogation, bringing in some of the other countries who are contributing to this and being given a pass out because they have oil

Explain to me Clive, why Assad is a "butcher" for using barrell bombs and yet the Saudi's aren't for using the same types of weapons in Yemen?

 

[clivex]

Ridiculous comment. Where have I mentioned the Saudis in Yemen? Where did I say they weren't using such weapons?

 

[Warbler]

Ridiculous comment. Where have I mentioned the Saudis in Yemen? Where did I say they weren't using such weapons?

It's the western/ US line Clive.

48 hours ago Obama stood in front of the United Nations and described Assad as some who "drops barrell bombs on babies", this was being used as his primary evidential justification. Today the Saudi's are using very similar weapons in Yemen, and of course innocent people get killed, that happens in war, war is a bad thing. Why does Obama denounce Assad then, but never bats an eyelid at Saudi Arabia doing the same? Surely you can understand the inconsistency here

In some of these countries it's simply not possible to fight a clean war. They don't have the technologies. Even then, you need to remember that these technologies are bloody expensive. You mentioned the other day that Russia couldn't afford a war. At the moment the American's are firing miliion pound missiles at £200 Subarus. It's no wonder its expensive. War can be fought cheaper, and this is where the Russians will take things

Putin has an incentive to stop ISIL that the other western leaders don't. The last figures I saw suggested that Russia was the third biggest supplier of overseas fighters behind Tunisia and Saudi Arabia. Not only that, but these are largely hardened Chechens who are amongst the most capable fighters that ISIL have. I'd be getting nervous if I were him too. America is doing a pretty hamfisted job pursuing some frankly Alice in Wonderland idea that these fragmented so called moderate opposition that they can't even get to sit round a negotiating table, are going to overthrow Assad and then defeat ISIL. They won't. They'll lose. And then what have you achieved? ISIL are running Syria. How proud can you really be of that accomplishment?

It's equally foolish to be talking in terms of having free and open democratic elections and then excluding someone who will undoubtedly still command a huge amount of support (and critically amongst fighting men) from the process. Quite apart from the contradiction in being free and open, it's a receipe for further conflict, as we've seen elsewhere. It would be a grave mistake to think that everyone in Syria is anti Assad. The America's should have learnt that to their cost in Iraq when they drove in and weren't met with garlands of flowers. A variant of the same thing has happened in Libya. Regime loyalists have helpfed flesh up tribal militia

The sad thing is, they simply don't appear to be learning, and all the time they fanny about chasing non existant enemies, the real one grows in strength

 

[Warbler]

Admittedly it's a bit of a silly parlour game Clive, but who do you regard as the worst, Assad or ISIL?
Rolling out from that, who do you regard poses us the greatest threat, Assad or ISIL?