ISIS...Islamic State Victims

Not offended on this one. I think there's times when you have to hold your hands up and say we've made a complete mess of it. The tragedy is that you could see this one unfolding, and knew from very early doors this was a bad route to take.

I wouldn't discount the role played by William Hague in all this. It was his job to make the case and read the situation, and he's just left a trail of disaster and error everywhere he went. His performance in the key debate (which labour wanted to support) was so bad they were left with no choice. He basically ended up saying words to the effect; well I reckon it's Assad. It's gotta be hasn't it. OK I might not have any evidence, but you kinda know it is don't you. Let's go to war, Yahoo boo sucks, and last one in Damascus can be my SPAD

I'm reluctant to put too much credence in freelance independents that originate in America incidentally (as you never know what agenda they're pedalling or concealing), but this one is seemingly supported with sourced references and screenshots of what we would know as freedom of information requests. Personally I'm struggling to believe that anything as incendiary as this would be declassified so am sceptical, neither am I sure about the conclusions it draws. The only thing that chimes with me is the recollection that Hillary Clinton was expressing reservations about the true democratic nature of the Syrian arab spring from its very early days. She went to lengths to express the view that she wasn't convinced it harboured the same ambitions as some of the others

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015...-the-west-supported-the-creation-of-isis.html
 
Last edited:
Warbler said:
British military commanders seemingly going a little bit more public now over the inept political leadership. The BBC however remain loyal in failing to qualify that MP's rejected a motion to bomb Assad, not ISIL, and have left it implied that ISIL were the target when they weren't
Click to expand...
By about 11 votes, which sort of illustrates how close it was, and at that time it could be argued Assad was a legitimate problem.

He still is a problem but he's a problem that can't be solved for now, and the way things are going he may be invited to meet Cameron at number 10!

The irony is...even if Cameron had come along in 2013 and asked parliament to sanction bombing ISIL, they still wouldn't have voted for that, because not enough was known about them, Assad was dropping chemical weapons and in Diane Abbot's words 'there isn't an appetite for another military intervention abroad."

The only thing Diane Abbot has an appetite for of course is her next Kentucky bucket...
 
Last edited:
I think you're contradicting yourself a bit there Marb.

The government might have lost the vote by 11 or whatever it was? but this owed much more to

1: Gross incompetance in terms of managing the vote and allowing MP's a pass out to remain on holiday rather than recalling them
2: William Hague spectacularly failed to make the case. Even those who supported him, were left embatrassed doing so in recognition of his efforts and failure to produce evidence

I'm not sure that such a close vote, a defeat snatched from the jaws of victory, can therefore be presented as a lack of appetite

Some people certainly tried to argue that Assad was a problem at the time, but it was obvious even then that he was a sub optimal preference to ISIL. I think these people were frankly guilty of misjudgment or swallowing propaganda. I don't accept that anyone can plead ignorance to ISIL's existance or nature by 2013 either. They date back before then, and they were clearly in the ascendancy and would always prove to be a very potent threat until such time as they came up against someone with the capability and will to challenge them

I'm far from convinced that if Cameron had asked to for a mandate to target ISIL he wouldn't have got it either. I think the British public in particular and much more in tune to the idea of bombing terrorists than they are political opponents. I think Diane Abbot is wrong
 
Interesting stuff no doubt. I'd be seriously sceptical that parliament would have voted for action against ISIL in 2013.

Do we think anyone is going to put boots on the ground anytime soon against ISIL btw, Warbler?
 
Last edited:
marble said:
Interesting stuff no doubt. I'd be seriously sceptical that parliament would have voted for action against ISIL in 2013.
Click to expand...

They already had (in Iraq) they were left therefore with this strange position of targeting ISIL in Iraq and wishing to target Assad in Syria (to ISIL's benefit). It was (and still is) an incredibly muddled piece of policy. Personally I've never been able to divorce myself from the idea that Samantha Cameron has had more influence over Syrian policy then we'll ever be allowed to know
 
Last edited:
Warbler said:
They already had (in Iraq) they were left therefore with this strange position of targeting ISIL in Iraq and wishing to target Assad in Syria (to ISIL's benefit).
Click to expand...
You are wrong here. Airstrikes were sanctioned by parliament against ISIL in Iraq in September of 2014, (over a year since the vote on Assad), when a lot more was in the public domain about what ISIL had been doing.
 
Last edited:
Fair enough, I was trying to take it from memory but clearly time has lost me.

Mind you, they might have extended it to Syria then but chose not to (would have been a very embarassing climb down)
 
Last edited:
marble said:
Do we think anyone is going to put boots on the ground anytime soon against ISIL btw, Warbler?
Click to expand...

No western or Russian boots. I think it would be a mistake too

By far the most sensible thing to do, if we can affect it, is to work with the Syrian and Iraqi governments to recover their territory, with them taking the lead.

I think it's much harder for groups like ISIL to gain traction if the west haven't occupied their land, or put down their Islamic state. Basically our direct engagement presents them with their best prospects of expanding the conflict and exporting it to our streets. In that regard 'participation' is their strongest weapon, and we need to deny them that, rather than feed it them

Galloway was probably spot on the money when he kept calling them a death cult. They don't mind losing this first war/ battle. Indeed, I think the propehcy of Dabiq says they will? In their mind victory is already achieved the moment they suck us into fighting one. They're confident that the legacy of this action will sustain the global jihad for generations, as fires are lit all over the world and dispersed populations, as well as sleepers, answer the call.

If the Islamic State is destroyed by other Muslim nations though, then its legacy and potency is much diminished

We need to find proxys who are both willing and capable of performing this task, it's just that we're running out of options due in no small part to our ill advised removal of candidates for fight Islamofascism

I think another thing that is going to temper enthusiasm for occupation is the tensions between the US and Russia. Whereas the American's seem to be coming round to the idea that a victory for the Syrian government might not be so bad a thing after all, they still don't seem to have given up on finding some splinter groups in the FSA just yet.

I think the Russians must be equally wary that the American's have lost a lot of good kit in the last few years at the hands of the Iraqi army first, and various FSA units second, who have defected to Al Nusra and even ISIL. This is on top of anything that the Saudis and Qataris have supplied them. Basically there's some pretty good anti tank weapons flying about

It would be nice if we could have the Syrian army back to its 2011 strength!

My overall view is still dystopic. I think we probably are in the early skirmish stages of world war three, and that at some point in the future we will witness a shia/ sunni reproachment and the war will become christian/ muslim. This is probably two or three generations away though, so no one here will be around to say 'told you so' or 'no it wasn't'
 
Last edited:
This is a pro government website, that's not totally unsympathetic to some rebel groups, and clearly anti ISIL, so accord it due sceptism as appropriate, but I think the description of the war probably casts some light on how we should be interpreting the strategy that's unfolding

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/the-syrian-war-is-a-battle-for-roads-not-territory/

I said earlier that we needed to seal up the borders and control the supply lines, (easier said then done) but this is probably where it's going to be won or lost as eventually detached fighting units unable to replenish will degrade. I also suspect that ISIL fighters will exhibit a prepardness to endure hardship however, and ultimately it comes down to a sniping shoot out in the cities with civilians trapped inside becoming collateral damage or even hostages.

The picture I'm seeing at the moment is one of slow progress, with Russian intervention very slowly and intermitently turing the tide. It doesn't look decisive at this stage, but there are frankly so many conflicting reports, and a bewildering array of beligerent groups engaged it is very difficult to navigate
 
Grasshopper said:
There is an undercurrent through all of these types of discussions that the 'removal of dictators' is somehow a noble cause, and justifies the decisions in and of itself - and is therefore not open to question.

Well I'm telling you it is - especially when the consequences of such a 'noble cause' is even greater destruction, death and chaos than the 'evil dictator' could or would ever hoped to have wreaked in ten lifetimes.
Click to expand...

Not so much a noble removal of dictators, rather an apparent softening of hard line by the dictators themselves; but am I alone in thinking that these 'democratic' elections in Burma could lead to much blood, sweat and tears once the disparate tribes there are permitted the 'freedom' to exercise self-determination

I heard the term 'militant buddhists' on the news today which I'd like to believe is something of an oxymoron; but hey-ho they apparently hate their muslim neighbours in Burma...and so it goes...on and on

The peace-loving lady with flowers in her hair may yet discover first-hand that populations granted freedom after year's of dictatorial subjugation tend to abuse that freedom: do they not?
 
No they dont drone. This is nonsense

easteen europe
spain
portugal
almost every Latin american state
plenty of African ones
South Korea

list goes on

there were 35 democracies worldwide in 1970 and now there are around 120

there have not been 85 civil wars
 
Last edited:
Fantastic news. Punching the air this morning

he's been blown to bits. Only down side was that he wasn't tortured for days before being finished off. Having said that it's possible that he slowly burnt to death which would have been fabulous

some prick on he bbc regretting he "wasn't seen in court" go fck yourself

happy days
 
Last edited:
Appears that he was "evaporated" which is a little bit of a pity because its a bit instant but cant have everything and there will be nothing to bury or feed to the pigs
 
clivex said:
Fantastic news. Punching the air this morning
Click to expand...
Absolutely !
Wonderful news, indeed.
Only regret is that his death was too quick, too clean, for the likes of him.

Next up (hopefully) will be -- wassername -- that slag from Kent who was a punk rocker or summat back in the days when she had sense.


Great news too from ongoing offensive where the Pershmerga and their Yazidi volunteer comrades supported by coalition airpower look like taking back Sinjar.
 
Yes ice. the screams would have been priceless Keep picking them off

Of course Corbyns reaction will be interesting. He will have to say something whilst his media advisor is very much against attacks on Isis in any shape or form and certainly is sympathetic to islamic terrorism
 
Last edited:
icebreaker said:
Absolutely !
Wonderful news, indeed.
Only regret is that his death was too quick, too clean, for the likes of him.

Next up (hopefully) will be -- wassername -- that slag from Kent who was a punk rocker or summat back in the days when she had sense.


Great news too from ongoing offensive where the Pershmerga and their Yazidi volunteer comrades supported by coalition airpower look like taking back Sinjar.
Click to expand...

If they are targeting Slags from Kent.............they need more drones!
 
If one is targeting Fragrant Gentleladies from York...........one needs only one Drone :)

Good news if this 'jihadi john' monster has been blown to smithereens but unfortunately it is only one termite in a very large and odiferous dung heap; and for every termite squashed in a foreign heap one might expect it will encourage ten newborn British termites to crawl overland to bolster that repellant pile o'shite...yay or nay?
 
D'y'know who I believe is the really bad actor in all of this .................
TURKEY !

Bombing the Kurds under the pretence of "peacekeeping"; giving sanctuary to ISIS operatives; buying a million dollars a day of stolen oil from ISIS; and even actually contributing weapons and poison to Islamic State.




 
Last edited:
Drone said:
If one is targeting Fragrant Gentleladies from York...........one needs only one Drone :)

Good news if this 'jihadi john' monster has been blown to smithereens but unfortunately it is only one termite in a very large and odiferous dung heap; and for every termite squashed in a foreign heap one might expect it will encourage ten newborn British termites to crawl overland to bolster that repellant pile o'shite...yay or nay?
Click to expand...

but isn't that a good thing..if its attracting murderers away from here to be removed over there?

do we really want people with this intent here?

the main issue i have is that once gone..we let them back in..madness

it won't be long before someone blows themsleves and a shopping centre up here..and it transpires we had initially got rid by their own choice..and then let them back in..we can't be letting these people come back
 
Last edited:
Back
Top