Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: Filo on September 14, 2014, 10:38:18 am
-
I think it's time we took a lead out of Israel's book and strike back in an instant, totally obliterate the animals with our airpower, stop dithering and go for the throat!
-
I wonder if these poor men were even alive in the last few weeks or whether in truth they were all executed long before the footage was released. Either way it is a moot point I guess.
Wicked monsters who in truth as always care little for faith or cause, devoid of humanity.
-
What they are doing goes against everything in the written in the kuran.
I'm with Filo.
"I love the smell of napalm in the morning!!"
-
Crusades should have done more
-
I think it will give Cameron the green light to actively support any military actions the US are taking. On balance I think it needs doing, just as we needed to flush Al Quaeda out of Afghanistan, but it must be a limited campaign with clear objectives.
-
Filo
By all accounts, there are 20-50,000 active IS fighters spread over an area about the size of England, and intermingled with innocent civilians.
How exactly do you propose that we obliterate them from the air without killing a quarter of a million innocent people?
-
There's no doubt innocents will be caught in the crossfire, but how else are these animals going to be stopped?
-
So the response to three Westerners being murdered is to throw your hands up at the prospect of thousands of innocents being killed?
-
What would your response be Billy Bob?
-
How many innocents were killed in WW2 when the allies blanket bombed cities such as Dresden, or the bombing of the Dams in the Rhur Valley? without that kind of action we could have been living in a totally different world today
-
I dunno spadger. If I had the solution I'd win the Nobel Prize.
What I DO know is that wading in and massacring thousands of civilians as collateral damage does f*** all to keep any of us safe and secure in the long run (aside from the fact that it is utterly disproportionate and morally reprehensible).
I suspect that the least bad "solution" involves long-term containment and degradation of IS. And it involved a degree of acceptance that they will do some very bad things back to Westerners in the meantime. But that blindly lashing out in retribution is EXACTLY what they want, because it will radicalise the next generation.
What's YOUR solution?
-
Filo. It's about proportionality. In late WWII, we were dealing with an enemy that had already killed something like 10 million people. How many Westerners has IS killed?
(And even accepting the proportionality of action in WWII, Dresden was still a horrific and bestial war crime that should never have been allowed to occur.)
-
they should attack the IS either by air or on the ground or both from Irak side
of boarder,and at same time as IS back track into Syria attack the fcukers from that side too.
also parliment should pass a Law that any person in the uk seen flying that black
IS flag or have it on their possesion at any time or in their homes they will be a
bog standard 20years behind bars.
anyone caught With owt related to IS that is claiming benafits should have them stopped for max amount of time too,also the rest of the Family as they will know
what is what within their own 4walls.this will make the muslims be far more self
policing as if they want to keepliving on easy street they should inform Powers that be of any IS material or membership and not claim they knew fcuk all once
front door is getting kicked in
and fcuk all your human rights idiots
-
We need Kenny Everett to sort them out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGMWZJlA0QA
-
Reading the headlines again this morning is just so disturbing.
Thanks Rob, at least I had a giggle over 'Debbie Reynolds movies'. My mom loved them! Haha.
But seriously, it appears to me that these beheadings were all done at the same time - same background, same jumpsuits, no indication of the passage of time and just released at different times to us. So it seems that they are baiting us. But why? New recruits? To start WWIII so they will have died for the cause and be martyred? To show our disproportional reaction as Billy says and radicalize the next generation? Even in olden times 'an eye for an eye' was a massive step forward from the kill my brother and I'll wipe out your entire village, type of mentality. But isn't that what war is?
The Pope this week had, I thought, a good assessment of the world situation when he made a statement that it was like a piecemeal WWIII, with the massacres, crimes and destruction. Very very sad and scary times we are living in.
-
Reading the headlines again this morning is just so disturbing.
Thanks Rob, at least I had a giggle over 'Debbie Reynolds movies'. My mom loved them! Haha.
But seriously, it appears to me that these beheadings were all done at the same time - same background, same jumpsuits, no indication of the passage of time and just released at different times to us. So it seems that they are baiting us. But why? New recruits? To start WWIII so they will have died for the cause and be martyred? To show our disproportional reaction as Billy says and radicalize the next generation? Even in olden times 'an eye for an eye' was a massive step forward from the kill my brother and I'll wipe out your entire village, type of mentality. But isn't that what war is?
The Pope this week had, I thought, a good assessment of the world situation when he made a statement that it was like a piecemeal WWIII, with the massacres, crimes and destruction. Very very sad and scary times we are living in.
They weren't done at the same time, James Foley was beheaded sometime in mid August when the footage was released. This latest Beheading's footage mentions the airstrikes on the Haditha dam which were carried out on 7th September
-
(And even accepting the proportionality of action in WWII, Dresden was still a horrific and bestial war crime that should never have been allowed to occur.)
Was Dresden any worse than any form of area bombing though? And if you count that as a war crime, what do you make of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
-
Filo. It's about proportionality. In late WWII, we were dealing with an enemy that had already killed something like 10 million people. How many Westerners has IS killed?
(And even accepting the proportionality of action in WWII, Dresden was still a horrific and bestial war crime that should never have been allowed to occur.)
I was just about to post the same. There was no need for Dresden and it shouldn't have happened. Equally though, I agree that both the bombs dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima were crimes against humanity, casualties and injuries still occurring to this day due to aftermath.
... Can't we all just get along!!
-
I think carpet bombing is the best solution at the moment. It is the lesser of the 2 evils. Sure, innocent civilians will be killed, but that is a price well worth paying to eradicate ISIS.
It will also make Muslims realise that they need to dump their religion because it has brought them nothing but suffering and pain. Carpet bombing on a huge scale will also make Muslims less likely to try it on again as they will know what the consequences will be.
Similar tactics were used in WW2 and because of this the war was brought to an earlier end saving more lives than were lost. Unfortunately that is the cost benefit analysis that needs to be made.
Once the Muslims realise that we are not going to stand for any nonsense they will soon start towing the line. It needs to start in our own backyard. Banning the Muslim faith
would be a good starting point.
-
Filo. It's about proportionality. In late WWII, we were dealing with an enemy that had already killed something like 10 million people. How many Westerners has IS killed?
(And even accepting the proportionality of action in WWII, Dresden was still a horrific and bestial war crime that should never have been allowed to occur.)
I was just about to post the same. There was no need for Dresden and it shouldn't have happened. Equally though, I agree that both the bombs dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima were crimes against humanity, casualties and injuries still occurring to this day due to aftermath.
... Can't we all just get along!!
Both attacks brought an abrupt end to the war in the Pacific theatre, innocent casualties are a sad by product of war
-
The first thing I would do is for every Western hostage beheaded, is to get ten Muslim political prisoners and kill them live on air to send the message to IS that everything they do will be replicated tenfold until they either stop or are wiped out. For the good of world future, they need wiping out ASAP
-
Aye. That's the western culture we are trying to defend.
-
BST
You cannot reason or try to educate a group that doesn't possess the ability to listen to an alternative moralistic viewpoint. Their dangerous fanaticism will only be stopped in a language they understand.
You can stand there forever preaching about morals, culture and decency and the 'right' thing to do and I strongly agree with you in theory, but this world doesn't function on theory, it functions on harsh reality.
If we don't stand together as a world against these fanatics, they will destroy us while we pontificate.
We need to stamp them out now.
-
RR
You think that executing dozens of unconvicted people will make IS change their approach? Good luck. Organisations like this are like a Hydra. They feed on the sort of reaction that you suggest. They NEED that sort of reaction to be able to justify their claims that the West is the Great Satan.
You don't EVER defeat terrorism by stooping to the same moral level. Not ever. Look at the early days of the IRA. The British Army responded to the initial IRA bombings and shootings by mass rounding up of young Catholic men, imprisoning with out trial, beatings and torture. The result? Massive increase in IRA volunteers and levels of violence.
You execute 10 Muslim prisoners and that is it for the next century. You have given them their legend that they need to keep the hatred burning. It is why Netanyahu's approach is so f**king stupid in the long run. In the SHORT term, he gets a political boost by wading into Gaza and killing 2000 civilians, because he's seen to be playing the hard man. In the long term, the result is depressingly obvious. If Israel keeps the Palestinians living as second class citizens, and launches ridiculously disproportionate raids on them on a regular basis, they will have to live with terrorism for another century if not more. They will not defeat that sort of hatred by violence. Neither will we. Although they'll satisfy some people's blood lust by doing so.
-
BST
Doing nothing but putting up with their hatred and fanaticism is the worst thing to do and is NOT an option. They are effectively taunting us to react. We ought to do what they don't expect us to do.
If we don't they will keep chipping away, each thing they do will be more slightly outrageous than the last. Where do we draw the line ?
As I said, you cannot negotiate with these fanatics. It's kill or be killed. It's that simple.
There is no viable alternative.
-
The only language these fanatics understand is overwhelming force. We need to teach them a damn good lesson. We need to send in the troops from as many nations as possible to finish them off. This would be after a massive carpet bombing campaign.
Resistance on their part would be futile. Any future uprisings should be stamped on immediately until they get the message.
-
Mick, I hardly ever agree with some of the wind up rubbish you put on here. However, worryingly, I'm finding I agree with you on this one. Where will it end if we don't show our hand with force.
-
Exactly. The fact that Obama has tried to keep out of things as much as possible has made things much worse than they should have been. Any sign of weakness is pounced upon. We need to be strong at all times. It's not like we don't have the armies and superior hardware to be able to do it.
Unfortunately the likes of BST with their political correctness hold sway at the moment. Well I've got news for all these do gooders. The public are getting fed up with it. It's time to harden up and get on with sorting it out.
-
RR
There are MANY alternatives.
Take them on on the battelfield by all means. Wipe them out. But for Christ's sake, don't go giving them what they crave by stooping to their moral level and getting involved in indiscriminate reprisals. Every innocent kid that is killed in the battle against IS is another 1000 jihadis recruited. Executing unconvicted jihadis would put 10,000 on the numbers.
What do you want? A solution, or blood-letting for retribution?
-
BST
But therein lies the problem. IS have no interest in fighting us on a level playing field.
Like so many other terrorist groups they posture, strike, and run away like the cowardly sewer rats they are. They daren't challenge us in open warfare as they know we would wipe them out instantly.
I'll ask again. Where will it end ? I've often wondered what we would do if a major member of the Royal family or the Prime Minister (whoever it was) was killed by a terrorist.
At some point, you just have to draw a line in the sand and stand up to them.
-
RR.
So how do you "stand up to them"?
By engaging in the sort of acts that you and I find disgusting and reprehensible when they do it? By lashing out and shrugging your shoulders if 2000 innocent kids and mothers get killed in the process like Israel does (or if 250,000 innocent people get killed in the process, like happened as a result on the Bush/Blair madness)?
Get a sense of perspective. They have killed THREE westerners. In the age before TV, you'd never have heard of that action. They prey on the fact that we liberal Westerners are disgusted and revulsed by what they have done. They want to turn us into the sort of people who crave bestial retribution. So the cycle will go on.
The lest bad solution is to slowly strangle them. Off the news. Off the TV screens. In quiet. Using politics to throttle their supply lines and SF to take out their leaders. It'll not do the politicians any good, because nobody thanks anyone when a problem slowly and imperceptibly evaporates. But it'll be a f**k sight better for my kids than the alternative of wading in with hob-nail boots and killing any f**ker who looks like they were born east of Athens.
-
BST
I appreciate the obvious danger to the world axis by undertaking something as major as that, and not withstanding the civilian casualties that will inevitably occur. But in warfare, rules don't exist and there will be collateral damage. Don't get me wrong.
I just happen to think that these fanatics are the biggest danger to the world existence since Hitler and if we don't stop it, some day soon it will be too late.
-
RR
You need a bit of perspective pal.
Since Hitler, we've had Mao, Stalin, the Viet Kong, Pol Pot, Ronald Reagan and Donald Rumsfeld. We've had India and Pakistan come to the verge of nuclear war. We've had Berlin, Korea, Cuba and Able Archer. We've had Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Poland. We've had 6 million people butchered in central Africa with no Kitson in the West so much as batting an eyelid. And you reckon this lot are the biggest threat to peace?
You're shiting it because a bunch of jihadis have beheaded three people. And in getting so hysterical, you are doing EXACTLY what they want you to do. They are playing you along. They want this sort of irrational response.
-
BST
As a matter of fact, I'm far from shitting it. I'm just a typical 'Westerner' that has had enough of every two-bit religious fanatical freak trying to make a name for themself in the name of religion. They're just the latest in a long line.
What they're doing is trying to provoke a response, I agree whole-heartedly with you.
But how many more political and religious acts of terror followed by countless empty rhetoric by Cameron, Obama, and many leaders before them. Instead of talking the talk, just f....ing sort it out properly to persuade any other world crackpots to think twice before they try and disrupt world karma.
And as for your other list, the Jihaddi I think are the most dangerous of the lot because to repeat a well publicised theory. The next and possibly last world war will be based on the biggest danger of all. Religion. Not power, greed or a crazy megalomaniac. Religion. Which by and large incorporates the whole of the worlds population.
-
BST
How many Iraqi Christians, Yazidi and Shia Muslims have ISIS killed?
Their treatment of these easy targets is particularly brutal, beheadings, heads on spikes and crucifications.
It is a bit more than three westerners.
It was the attempted genocide of the Yazidi that finally drew Obama into military action in Northern Iraq. Not the murdered hostages.
-
we need to ensure that any fanatic from these shores are never allowed back again, also send their entire family over to the land they want to defend
-
What the powers that be should do is inforce a shot to KILL policy When ever up against the IS
Dont take Prisoners and keep them under lock and Key as sooner or later
Down the line somebody will Get taken hostage by IS and used as a tool to Bargin for his life on release Of untold IS held Prisoners
Iran let most Of these IS fighters out Of prison with sole purpose to
Cause havoc in parts Of middle East.
No way should anyone that stands for IS today and is fighting Their cause
Out in Syria should be allowed back into any western society they camel from.when This happens it will be unsafe on any capitals streets for the joe Public.
You have to fight fire with fire against the IS and stick with the shot to KILL policy .saying This will not Get rid Of them 100% as they will next
Surface in africa
-
we need to ensure that any fanatic from these shores are never allowed back again, also send their entire family over to the land they want to defend
Iam with that ,if a say father in a family is Across in Syria fighting for the
IS cause and is found out ship his whole household out there too .
Wife and kids that all live under same Roof as they will know that he will be getting his hands dirty for the IS cause .if a son or daughter is found doing the same ,ship mum and dad out with brother or sisters .
More has to be done to make the muslim culture to Police Its self.
If a parent suspects a family member Of IS involvement addvice local Police station ,or if a son Or daughter thinks same Of mum dad or uncle
Or aunt.
Wont happen because Of too many soft kunts in todays society will
Block Such strong tatics with human fights .what about Your human right
To feal safe walking down Oxford street or round bull ring etc etc
-
Oslo
If you think Iran supports IS, that just shows how little comprehension you have of this issue.
-
RD
I'm well aware of what IS has been doing. They are repellent, bestial and must be defeated. The point is that there is a hysterical response which is entirely down to their media spectaculars in the last few weeks. How many people here really gave a shit when they were massacring Shias? How many people really cared when they forced the Yazidis out of Sinjar (incidentally, whilst Obama used that as a humanitarian case to justify air strikes against IS that was never the main reason - America was concerned about the possible collapse of Kurdistan and wanted to degrade IS to prevent the fall of Irbil.)
Be honest. No more than a tiny percentage of people in the West cared about those atrocities. But a few gruesome murders on YouTube and suddenly it's WWIII and we should carpet bomb the whole region.
-
BST
I think it was the plight of the Yazidi dying up on that mountain that really shifted western public opinion.
Obama had one big achievement, getting the US out of Iraq. It forced him to return.
Just one year before the US and UK were advocating backing Syrian rebels including IS then just 'extremists' who they assured everyone could be controlled. IS have forced a complete U turn in western foreign policy, making both the US and UK governments look total chumps.
They didn't want to intervene in this, not at all but they have been forced to because as you say the threat to Irbil, Baghdad and the oil fields but also because of the atrocities happening within Northern Iraq.
It is only since US air power has begun to turn the tide on IS allowing Kurdish and Iraqi forces on the ground to win back Mosul damn and other territory that IS have begun their terror spectacular videos aimed at the west.
I don't see how the west can possibly allow the creation of a hard line, Wahhabist terror state on the border of Turkey and the doorstep of Europe.
It would have oil wealth and become a magnate for every jihadist loon on the globe. If we thought terror training camps in Afghanistan were a problem it would be a minor compared with this new 'caliphate'.
I doubt the tactic of sending in black ops to lop the heads off their leaders would work. The problem with Islamist terror is it has leadership and no leadership at the same time. It's like a game of whack a mole, bang one on the head and another appears. The Islamic fighters are all indoctrinated into this belief with an ancient book of holy writings to reinforce their conviction. There's always more waiting in the wings.
To be honest I don't think there is any answer, or any good strategy. We're just forced to confront it wherever it emerges.
-
Oslo
If you think Iran supports IS, that just shows how little comprehension you have of this issue.
Maybe iam getting my middle East countrys mixed up
But one country out there released shit Loads Of terrorists from Its Prisons
Who later became IS fighters
Iam sure it was Iran or was it Irak ,it was some fcukers
-
Oslo
If you think Iran supports IS, that just shows how little comprehension you have of this issue.
Maybe iam getting my middle East countrys mixed up
But one country out there released shit Loads Of terrorists from Its Prisons
Who later became IS fighters
Iam sure it was Iran or was it Irak ,it was some fcukers
I think it was our close friends and allies in Saudi Arabia, Oslo.
-
There are claims that Syria released lots of Saffist prisoners who went on to join IS. But the claims are made by one of the other groups fighting against Assad, so they are hardly impartial.
-
Oslo
The fact that you're getting mixed up is kind of the point I was making. The Middle East situation is highly complex with different groups of Muslims at each other's throats.
Imagine Northern Ireland 20 years ago. Imagine if the IRA had decided for some reason to behead a Japanese reporter. And imagine if, as a result of that, Japan said that they should clamp down hard on all British people. That, because the IRA had committed this atrocity, Ian Paisley was equally responsible.
That's roughly what your position is on the current issue.
Except that the IS/Iraq/Syria problem makes Northern Ireland in the 1980s look like a playground game in terms of relative complexity. I have a friend and ex-colleague who is Syrian. One of the most intelligent and decent human beings I have ever met. When we first waded into the Arab Spring with our blind stupidity, he predicted exactly what would happen. He is a Muslim (and therefore, no friend of Assad). But he said that he would infinitely prefer Assad to remain in power, with all his brutal ways, to the hornets' nest being smashed by the West encouraging an uprising. He said that if we DID encourage anti-Assad uprisings, we had better be prepared to get in there quick, finish him off and get a moderate Muslim Govt in power. Because if we didn't, Syria would be a fertile breeding ground for Sunni fundamentalists. And the result would be that EVERYONE in that region would hate us.
Bang on the money, as he is with most things he talks about.
-
Your friend thinks like me. These countries need brutal dictators in place to keep all the religious nutters in check.
Unfortunately we can't turn the clock back now. We helped cause the problem but most of the blame should go to those involved in the uprisings. It is unfair to pin all the blame on the West.
We need to get stuck in and impose brutal dictators on all these countries. Only then will we have a solution to the problem.
-
Ironically all in the name of religion that was originally made up to control masses through fear.
-
Your friend thinks like me. These countries need brutal dictators in place to keep all the religious nutters in check.
Unfortunately we can't turn the clock back now. We helped cause the problem but most of the blame should go to those involved in the uprisings. It is unfair to pin all the blame on the West.
We need to get stuck in and impose brutal dictators on all these countries. Only then will we have a solution to the problem.
In a way it is the fault of the west, since it was the global financial crisis sparked by the collapse in the subprime property market in the US that lead to coordinated action by Central banks that created all that hot money, that lead to inflation, particularly noticeable in food. That in turn created the black swan event of the Arab spring as food inflation disproportionately hit poor communities in areas of North Africa and the middle east that lead to the uprising against the incumbent dictators.
-
Mick
My friend is learned, astute, thoughtful and modest. He was a brilliant academic and now he's a highly successful businessman. I'm not sure I've ever met anyone who thinks less like you.
-
BST
But in warfare, rules don't exist and there will be collateral damage. Don't get me wrong.
Rules do exists, the Geneva convention lay out the rules of war. However IS are not a nation state or a signature to the convention, but just because they haven't signed does not give us the right to ignore the rule of war. If we go into this not caring about collateral damage to civilians then for every "innocent" civilian we kill we will generate for IS 10 or more new fighters.
-
BST
But in warfare, rules don't exist and there will be collateral damage. Don't get me wrong.
Rules do exists, the Geneva convention lay out the rules of war. However IS are not a nation state or a signature to the convention, but just because they haven't signed does not give us the right to ignore the rule of war. If we go into this not caring about collateral damage to civilians then for every "innocent" civilian we kill we will generate for IS 10 or more new fighters.
GLOSTER
I'm well aware of the Geneva Convention. Unfortunately, IS aren't. And that's what relevant.
-
RR
No. It isn't. What is relevant is what values you hold. We despise IS for their immorality. You employ the same tactics and you are as big a bas**rd as they are.
I keep hearing that people hate Islam because it doesn't share Western values. Then I hear people advocating actions that would make me disgusted to be associated with them.
Are we morally superior to people who behead innocents, or are we down in the same gutter as them?
THAT is the point.
-
for a start westerners should avoid travelling to or near the countries where IS are based.
the coalition have made the right choice to ban any british muslims from returning if found to be travelling to join or help IS.
Going in all guns blazing and killing thousands of civilians is NOT the thing to do; if anything all it would achieve is to help with their recruitment campaign.
The likes of IS cannot be compared to any army during the world wars either.
The first thing to do is properly support the armies in the respective countries in the middle east who are opposing IS, which I believe is what we are starting to do now.
-
Oslo
The fact that you're getting mixed up is kind of the point I was making. The Middle East situation is highly complex with different groups of Muslims at each other's throats.
Imagine Northern Ireland 20 years ago. Imagine if the IRA had decided for some reason to behead a Japanese reporter. And imagine if, as a result of that, Japan said that they should clamp down hard on all British people. That, because the IRA had committed this atrocity, Ian Paisley was equally responsible.
That's roughly what your position is on the current issue.
Except that the IS/Iraq/Syria problem makes Northern Ireland in the 1980s look like a playground game in terms of relative complexity. I have a friend and ex-colleague who is Syrian. One of the most intelligent and decent human beings I have ever met. When we first waded into the Arab Spring with our blind stupidity, he predicted exactly what would happen. He is a Muslim (and therefore, no friend of Assad). But he said that he would infinitely prefer Assad to remain in power, with all his brutal ways, to the hornets' nest being smashed by the West encouraging an uprising. He said that if we DID encourage anti-Assad uprisings, we had better be prepared to get in there quick, finish him off and get a moderate Muslim Govt in power. Because if we didn't, Syria would be a fertile breeding ground for Sunni fundamentalists. And the result would be that EVERYONE in that region would hate us.
Bang on the money, as he is with most things he talks about.
i cant keep up With the fcukers out there ,who is good who is bad and who
is playing both sides
the Whole muslim world is backwards out middle east
just think about it,they was way infront of the west many many many moons ago on the mathamtics front when we was still running round clubbing each other
With lumps of Wood
but them the ideal muslim got a foothold out in middle east and first thing they
threw out of the window the backward divs was all what they had learnt by
them sens on the mathamatic front
-
RR
No. It isn't. What is relevant is what values you hold. We despise IS for their immorality. You employ the same tactics and you are as big a b*****d as they are.
I keep hearing that people hate Islam because it doesn't share Western values. Then I hear people advocating actions that would make me disgusted to be associated with them.
Are we morally superior to people who behead innocents, or are we down in the same gutter as them?
THAT is the point.
BST
You just don't get it do you ?
It really doesn't matter one jot how morally superior you are stuck in your ivory tower. While you and your ilk are promoting and preaching your morals, the jihadi assassin will be running a sword across your neck. Fat lot of good your morals will help you then.
You won't be surprised one of my favourite films is the Alan Ladd classic 'Shane'
Sometimes, just sometimes, that's what you have to do...
-
BST
But in warfare, rules don't exist and there will be collateral damage. Don't get me wrong.
Rules do exists, the Geneva convention lay out the rules of war. However IS are not a nation state or a signature to the convention, but just because they haven't signed does not give us the right to ignore the rule of war. If we go into this not caring about collateral damage to civilians then for every "innocent" civilian we kill we will generate for IS 10 or more new fighters.
GLOSTER
I'm well aware of the Geneva Convention. Unfortunately, IS aren't. And that's what relevant.
RR unfortunately what's relevant is that we are signatories it is irrelevant whether your opponents are or are not we have to stick by the "rules" otherwise half our troops would be coming back to face war crime charges.
And it is no defence to turn round and say "I was following orders" the onus is on you and you alone
-
Oslo
The fact that you're getting mixed up is kind of the point I was making. The Middle East situation is highly complex with different groups of Muslims at each other's throats.
Imagine Northern Ireland 20 years ago. Imagine if the IRA had decided for some reason to behead a Japanese reporter. And imagine if, as a result of that, Japan said that they should clamp down hard on all British people. That, because the IRA had committed this atrocity, Ian Paisley was equally responsible.
That's roughly what your position is on the current issue.
Except that the IS/Iraq/Syria problem makes Northern Ireland in the 1980s look like a playground game in terms of relative complexity. I have a friend and ex-colleague who is Syrian. One of the most intelligent and decent human beings I have ever met. When we first waded into the Arab Spring with our blind stupidity, he predicted exactly what would happen. He is a Muslim (and therefore, no friend of Assad). But he said that he would infinitely prefer Assad to remain in power, with all his brutal ways, to the hornets' nest being smashed by the West encouraging an uprising. He said that if we DID encourage anti-Assad uprisings, we had better be prepared to get in there quick, finish him off and get a moderate Muslim Govt in power. Because if we didn't, Syria would be a fertile breeding ground for Sunni fundamentalists. And the result would be that EVERYONE in that region would hate us.
Bang on the money, as he is with most things he talks about.
i cant keep up With the fcukers out there ,who is good who is bad and who
is playing both sides
the Whole muslim world is backwards out middle east
just think about it,they was way infront of the west many many many moons ago on the mathamtics front when we was still running round clubbing each other
With lumps of Wood
but them the ideal muslim got a foothold out in middle east and first thing they
threw out of the window the backward divs was all what they had learnt by
them sens on the mathamatic front
Oslo
It's very simple.
The Sunni and Shia have been in dispute since the death of Muhammed. It's a long time that and in it, they've learned to despise each other.
There's a proxy war going on between the Sunnis of Saudi and the Shia of Iran.
Assad is from an alawite background which is a Shia sect. In Syria the alawite are a minority but rule over a largely Sunni majority. Assad doesn't like to talk about religion.
Over the border in Turkey they are mainly hafanite sunni but their big concern is Northern Iraq. Southern Turkey has a difficult Kurdish group, who along with Kurds in Northern Iraq have been angling for a Turkish state for years. The Kurds like all people in the area are ancient and follow different religions including Islam.
Now the Saudis and qataris (Sunni) want Assad out because they want to run oil and gas pipelines up through Syria to Turkey to sell hydrocarbons to Europe. The west are in favour of this, which is why they backed the Sunni uprising in Syria.
Are you keeping up?
...but it turns out the Sunnis in Syria weren't all moderate and nice as promised and their struggle brought in thousands of vicious Wahhabist terrorists. Wahhabism is an extreme sect of the Sunni religion. They hate everyone who doesn't believe in their strict version of Islam including other Sunnis who aren't Islamic enough.
Now Assad has his own agenda. He has close links with Russia and the Russians do not want gulf oil and gas competing with them to sell hydrocarbons to Europe. Their game is to prevent that from happening.
Assad also has links with Iran (both Shia) and they would like to run some pipelines through Iraq and Syria to supply oil to the west. This would take some negotiation with the Russians.
Now what happened was, the battle for Syria became a bit difficult and the Wahhabist fighters in Syria thought, sod this Northern Iraq is much easier let's invade their instead and set up a caliphate. So they did.
The west thought sh1t! Didn't see that coming, they're going to cause havoc and nick the oil in Iraq.
So the west do a U turn and began to back the Kurds, who have started to build their own state in the area.
But Turkey, who are an ally of the west think, sh1t the west are backing the Kurds. Don't like that. So while trying to look like they support the west they keep the border open to foreign terrorists who want to fight for ISIs and ask no questions.
Now the west realise that the terrorists are Sunni b@stards, so they start to wonder if Assad is all that bad really but they still think he is. So they begin to wonder if actually Iran is all that bad really. They've been claiming it's an evil state for years but maybe now we can do a deal with them for oil.
But the Saudis and Qatari think sh1t the west might start doing a deal with those b@stards in Iran.
So that's roughly where were at. Simple. I think, unless anyone wants to put me right on any of this.
-
So that's roughly where were at. Simple. I think, unless anyone wants to put me right on any of this.
Just that the Kurds are probably angling for a Kurdish state, rather than a Turkish one ;)
-
Muttley
Yes, yes, a Kurdish state! I got a bit muddled somehow, I don't know how that could've happened.
I also forgot to mention Baghdad is mainly Shia and until recently they had a pro Shia government but the west said look you've got to represent everyone so kick out your democratically elected bloke and get someone else.
The Iraqis are still struggling after the gulf war, so realise they need some help so they ask Shia Iran if they wouldn't mind lending some republican guard to help defeat the ISIS b*****ds in the north.
Iran think ok, Iraq is alright now since they got rid of Saddam and have those Sunni b@stards under control. We can forget all about that unfortunate massive war we had that cost thousands of lives.
And the west think, it can't do any harm, we think Iran might be alright now, despite all the terrorism they used to do to us and them having vowed to destroy our ally Israel despite us knowing they are developing nuclear weapons to do it.
On top of all of this, we should remember they all hate the Israelis to varying degrees even the Saudis who only tolerate them because they understand they are close allies of the US, who buy all their oil.
Meanwhile ISIS bump into members of Saddams old band (Sunni) based around Tikrit. They're still sore about losing control of Iraq and have decided ISIS can help them regain control of the country, so they're fighting alongside them and ISIS have probably agreed to overlook the fact the Baathists (Saddams old lot) probably aren't Islamic enough since they like Assad didn't used to like to talk about religion. They probably think they can sort that out later.
And the thing to remember is the West, strangely, seems to have difficulty understanding all this and tends to think the Sunni and Shia split isn't that much of a big deal really. We just want to deal with the nations states involved like in the old conflicts we used to have.
Hope this makes things clearer.
-
Aye, there were none of this on Saddam's watch
-
Armageddon Days are here again - The The
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6wa-qOb8eI
-
Well put RD. I could have written every word.
In a nutshell it's all about oil. The US hasn't been getting involved as much as it used to because it is now less dependent on oil.
Unfortunately because of the Sunni/Shia split in Islam they are never going to be reconciled. That's why we need to impose brutal secular dictators on all these countries. We probably need to draw up some new boundaries for a lot of these countries and ship various religions into the state that supports their religion. However we still need brutal dictators in place to prevent any uprisings. Democracy is totally not the solution.
-
BST
But in warfare, rules don't exist and there will be collateral damage. Don't get me wrong.
Rules do exists, the Geneva convention lay out the rules of war. However IS are not a nation state or a signature to the convention, but just because they haven't signed does not give us the right to ignore the rule of war. If we go into this not caring about collateral damage to civilians then for every "innocent" civilian we kill we will generate for IS 10 or more new fighters.
GLOSTER
I'm well aware of the Geneva Convention. Unfortunately, IS aren't. And that's what relevant.
What is relevant is that we have to follow the Geneva Convention, we cannot ignore it just because IS do - if we do not follow the conventions then you will find our soldiers, airman in court and serving time for War Crimes. No matter who we fight in this day and age we, the signatures of the Geneva Convention, have to abide by its rules. We cannot pick and choose when we apply those rules
-
BST
But in warfare, rules don't exist and there will be collateral damage. Don't get me wrong.
Rules do exists, the Geneva convention lay out the rules of war. However IS are not a nation state or a signature to the convention, but just because they haven't signed does not give us the right to ignore the rule of war. If we go into this not caring about collateral damage to civilians then for every "innocent" civilian we kill we will generate for IS 10 or more new fighters.
GLOSTER
I'm well aware of the Geneva Convention. Unfortunately, IS aren't. And that's what relevant.
What is relevant is that we have to follow the Geneva Convention, we cannot ignore it just because IS do - if we do not follow the conventions then you will find our soldiers, airman in court and serving time for War Crimes. No matter who we fight in this day and age we, the signatures of the Geneva Convention, have to abide by its rules. We cannot pick and choose when we apply those rules
America, Guantanamo Bay?
-
BST
But in warfare, rules don't exist and there will be collateral damage. Don't get me wrong.
Rules do exists, the Geneva convention lay out the rules of war. However IS are not a nation state or a signature to the convention, but just because they haven't signed does not give us the right to ignore the rule of war. If we go into this not caring about collateral damage to civilians then for every "innocent" civilian we kill we will generate for IS 10 or more new fighters.
GLOSTER
I'm well aware of the Geneva Convention. Unfortunately, IS aren't. And that's what relevant.
What is relevant is that we have to follow the Geneva Convention, we cannot ignore it just because IS do - if we do not follow the conventions then you will find our soldiers, airman in court and serving time for War Crimes. No matter who we fight in this day and age we, the signatures of the Geneva Convention, have to abide by its rules. We cannot pick and choose when we apply those rules
America, Guantanamo Bay?
If you ask the Americans they are prisoners of war, which means they can keep them there until the war is over. Also unlike us the US did not sign up to allowing there troops to be tried in the court of law at The Hague as we did.
-
... And so it begins!
-
And another person gets beheaded in the name of Islam, these t**ts need wiping from the face of the earth, get those airstrikes stepped up and hit the hard!
-
It will need more than air strikes Filo
What a set of horrible bas*ards they and similar require obliterating from the face of the earth
-
I notice the EDL are very quiet about this.
But then again, it was them that wanted the British radicals to get out of the country..!
-
Any one seen the front page of the independent on Sunday. Vile act but that's how to report it. ( craps at putting pics I here )
-
Coventry
Is this the one you mean?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/alan-henning-beheading-british-muslims-warn-aid-workers-death-marks-the-beginning-of-the-end-for-isis-9774528.html
We frequently hear people complaining that the Muslim community in this country doesn't condemn the barbaric acts committed by SOME Islamists. They've been doing it loud and clear over ISIS. I assume that those who have complained in the past are taking note.
-
Whatever we do in the west, we can't alter the fact that the two main islam groups (the Sunni and the Shia) hate each over and have done for centuries. I hate to have to say this but I feel Al Quaida could have a very important say in how this pans out because they don't like what IS are doing. Goes against the grain but, how many times in history have the biggest enemies become the biggest allies. Also agree with BST, carpet bombing brings us down to their level, we take thousands of lives to their few be headings.....they'd have a field day against the western world.
-
I'm all for carpet bombing at the very least. I think it's now time to use nuclear weapons. That would sort em out.
-
Coventry
Is this the one you mean?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/alan-henning-beheading-british-muslims-warn-aid-workers-death-marks-the-beginning-of-the-end-for-isis-9774528.html
We frequently hear people complaining that the Muslim community in this country doesn't condemn the barbaric acts committed by SOME Islamists. They've been doing it loud and clear over ISIS. I assume that those who have complained in the past are taking note.
this this is it Billy
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/the-independent-6143121.html
-
The Independent's front page shows how these terrible acts should be reported. Every time the awful photographs of these poor man kneeling in front of a cowardly monster who dare not even show his face are used by the media it serves their agenda of propaganda. That HAS to stop.
I totally respect and admire this front page. It is far more effective for it's decency and simplicity.
-
Got an idea on how to KILL many IS members
What so all muslims do on fridays ? They all go to a mosque to pray.
Uncle sam should spend time finding out what mosques the IS members use in Their new state
And 10 mins to prays while Their heads are all down and arse ends all
Pointing upwards ,hit whatever mosque is Been used by IS via multi drone Strikes.
Lbh everyone inside said mosque will be associated with IS no matter
Their age
-
Oslo
f**king genius!
I don't mean the idea. I've not got a Scooby what you're on about.
But you've invented a code that CCHQ will take a decade to decypher.
-
Oslo
f***ing genius!
I don't mean the idea. I've not got a Scooby what you're on about.
But you've invented a code that CCHQ will take a decade to decypher.
I need glasses and thinner fingers
Have fixed my mistakes
-
Cant we release a load of Ebola carriers with bad headcolds into Syria?
-
Cant we release a load of Ebola carriers with bad headcolds into Syria?
Think it will be IS muslims that will do that act to the west rob
Their are not too fussed about strapping a bomb to them sens are Blowing
Them sens to bits for the cause.
-
Why should the UK alone be involved.Surely its an international issue affecting the whole world.I thought we were skint
Why dont we get involved in other conficts round he world if we are going to take the moral highground on human rights
Why are some idiots calling for the banning of islam when its only a minority of extremists causing this mayham.Its like calling for the banning of catholisism for thee IRAI