Yes
No
It's kind of been touched on in other threads but I thought a thread of its own might be a good idea.
I really don't know. Everyone on social media and in the press seems to be a fucking military expert all of a sudden but I don't know. There seem to be pretty decent arguments for both sides.
I don't know either. Seems like it's just continuing the cycle, but then what's the alternative? Sit them down for a cup of tea and come to a gentlemanly agreement?
Or do nothing, I guess. That option depends on just how genuinely dangerous they are, which is hard to get an understanding of which isn't spun through the media.
Bombing alone is pointless, it's a token gesture so it looks like we're doing something. Even if it wipes out every IS soldier (it won't) it's not a solution to anything.
It's pointless us voting to 'bomb' Syria given that America are too cowardly to do anything meaningful as per. Obama has been an absolutely terrible President, one of the worst in history.
No. Cutting the head off a Hydra.
Unless Muslin countries will put boots on the ground, its a loss every time.
If we take miltary action it has to be more than bombing and any sort of land invasion would require proper planning for afterwards. There does seem to have been a reversal of IS gains since bombing started but it does fuck all to rid us of the people planning attacks overseas.
It's more complicated than yes/no.
As things stand, going and bombing ISIS is pointless. It might roll them back a bit in terms of territory, but it radicalises more people and it does so in the absence of any coherent strategy to bring stability.
There are about ten different conflicts going on inside Syria, involving the Russians, Turkey, Iran, the Arab states and the west, and a shitload of factions. There needs to be political agreement at an international level about what a settlement will look like. Maybe then bombing someone or other might be of use to achieve it.
No public poll
Bombing on its own, as parliament appear to be advocating? No, absolutely not.
Obviously. But you can't really capture the nuances in a poll. You have the thread to explain yourself though.Originally Posted by Henry
Yeah, I fucked that up. I only noticed that option wasn't ticked as I hit submit and then it was too late.No public poll
This is quite an interesting article despite its clickbait title - 7 Things I Learned Reading Every Issue Of ISIS's Magazine
I voted no.
If ISIS were wiped out, I'd genuinely miss their videos.
I'm a twit
I had a read through one edition of ISIS' magazine. It is a very well put together publication, which coupled with the production quality of the videos makes me wonder if they haven't missed their calling.
The BBC Journalist they're holding hostage and forcing to make reports is some proper weird stuff.
They might have some openings for graphic designers, Phonics?
Alright, Mert.
Where did you get hold of it?
That's a top article Boydy linked to. At the risk of sounding like Harold, with regard to cutting off their money, I told you so.
Jesus haha. Why the fuck should America be on tha vanguard of this? Obama's doing exactly what he should do (that is, limited strategic operations), and as for his presidency you're just ignorant. Stop trying to discuss American politics.
I just googled it and a found a pdf, which I think they put up there. If I remember rightly they translate the sodding thing as well.
Given their propensity for using the internet it can't be hard to get hold of.
Edit: In fact just googling ISIS magazine or Dabiq gets you there, as well as onto some watch lists probably, hi CIA!
Here's Issue 12 Henners, the "Paris Special".
https://azelin.files.wordpress.com/2...e-12e280b3.pdf
Probably because it caused a lot of this by making a complete tit of the previous war in the region, and then having absolutely no idea how to react to the Arab Spring, getting everything wrong then too.
But that's what happens when your internal politics veers between wets and neocons every decade.
I'm white and borderline middle class, it's fine.
No. There is plenty of other armed forces there in place without Britain. Don't get involved.
Don't get involved at all? Ever? No matter how bad things in Europe (and over here) might get?
Into seven languages. It's one of the best media operations going.
That not what Kiko is suggesting at all.
Yes. It's territory which is being used to train terrorists - flagrantly and openly.
Bombing in and of itself is not sufficient, but "stay out of it" isn't a strategy either. It needs to be dealt with, and wringing one's hands whilst expecting other countries to do the heavy lifting is pointless. We'd be bombing already if we hadn't decided to back Assad's enemies without understanding who the fuck they were.
Jim is right. Obama has been a disaster for the region.
I don't think it's going to get "that" bad. The Syrian conflict is either balls in or leave alone. I'd rather it be left alone. We've killed enough of the youth in far flung places recently.
It is.
Yevrah 1 John Arne 0
Links to all of them for anyone that's interested, have your islamic phrase book at the ready though and be prepared for most of it to be them ragging on other muslims.
NSFW obviously.
http://www.clarionproject.org/news/i...magazine-dabiq
I'm sure Kiko is saying based on the current situation, his answer would be no. Who on earth is talking about the future, and what it's and what about's?
Wanna take another run at that?
He still answered the question based on the current situation. You are the one who then talked about what happens in the future.
Regardless, enjoy your e-victory.
It's difficult to predict what will happen next in the world of international terrorism but I think the armed forces of Russia, Iran, Turkey and France can beat Isis.
No. We should bomb Qatar, Saudi and Turkey.
And I asked him another one. Three of them in fact.
I've known Kik's (on this board) for years and as a result it's pretty obvious to me where his opinion would fall.
I don't care how long you've known 'Kiks' for. He answered a question, and it appeared to me that you were being flippant - maybe I just read your tone wrong, which is entirely possible.
Problem is that Turkey is helping ISIS, and the others are basically just lobbing bombs in, and against different factions, some of which are also fighting ISIS.
Syria should be partitioned whenever the situation finally resolves itself, whether that's next year or in ten years' time. There's no future for it within a pre-war framework.
The West piling in and carving the place up with a ruler has a great history of working out.
Who said it should be the West? The issue is the original partition between French and British zones of influence which split communities and created aggrieved minorities in both countries who were subsequently oppressed. Partition it along religious grounds and manage the movement of peoples properly - not Germany post-WWII or India/Pakistan or Israel/Palestine.
Indeed.
I'd too be tempted to say leave it the fuck alone, but when your country already has more than enough ISIS supporters to carry out its aims then doing nothing could be a bit problematic.
Yeah, that'll happen. It'd be the same as happens every time. I got to this bit first so here's a bloke who likes me to lead you while I skim your oil profits, toodles.
You've got Kurds, Alawites, Turkmen, Shi'tes, Sunnis, and various factions within the latter in particular, all mixed in together. Partitioning it along religious/ethnic grounds doesn't sound like a runner to me.
The entire problem here is the nation state system, but it doesn't look like we're changing that any time soon either.
What's your solution? Recent history has seen the minorities in control 'persecuting' the majority. It's unworkable.
So given you recognise this great global ideal of no borders isn't happening - what's your solution?
Stay the fuck clear of the entire clusterfuck and let everyone else bomb each other until we end up having to back America in World War 3. Save some cash for a pwopa WAR!
To the entire Syrian war? I don't have one, other than to say that a negotiations should be progressed without every medium and large power with any influence in the region trying to achieve its own selfish ends.
To ISIS? Force the Turks and the Saudi's to seal the borders and stop the funding. Ensure that the Kurds in particular are freed up and given international support up to fight them on the ground. Stop pretending that Al-Nusra and other jihadis are moderates. Deal with the refugees properly.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote