Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

The Middle East...where Are Events Taking Us?


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: St rads Dover
  • Weather Preferences: Snow, T Storms.
  • Location: St rads Dover

    Why’s The US Hanging Turkey Out To Dry?

    http://orientalreview.org/2015/11/25/whys-the-us-hanging-turkey-out-to-dry/

    attachicon.gifnato-bases-in-turkey.jpg

    NATO bases in Turkey

    Why = because turkey messed up, pretty sure it was supposed to look like russia messed up so NATO could use article 5, now that's not posible, so trying to distance yourself from turkey would be the best option, although not many seem to be doing that publicly. 

    Edited by alexisj9
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Spotted a post you think may be an issue? Please help the team by reporting it.
    • Replies 4.4k
    • Created
    • Last Reply

    Top Posters In This Topic

    Top Posters In This Topic

    Popular Posts

    There is no other description for what is happening other than war crime and genocide.   Israel is technically the occupying force on Gaza and as such is duty bound to protect civilians.   Complet

    The scenes in Gaza look like the aftermath of a nuclear bomb, utter devastation. The Israelis telling people to go back to their homes in northern Gaza as its "safe", what are they supposed to go back

    Reported on the BBC too... An air strike on an army camp has killed three soldiers, the Syrian government says, blaming the US-led coalition for the attack. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-

    Posted Images

    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    A very good 5 min video from Vox on how things developed and how they stand in Syria.

     

    Highlights how ridiculous, to the point of insanity, the idea that bombing Syria more will solve the problem is.

     

    • Like 4
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: St rads Dover
  • Weather Preferences: Snow, T Storms.
  • Location: St rads Dover

    A very good 5 min video from Vox on how things developed and how they stand in Syria.

     

    Highlights how ridiculous, to the point of insanity, the idea that bombing Syria more will solve the problem is.

     

    My one question after watching that, a lot of stuff is already going on before the chemical attack, how do we know assad was not set up by one of the other groups in the fight?

     

    We all know what the press said but how do they know, how does anyone except the people who did it know, too much was happening to know for sure. Yet everyone seems to know for sure.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon

    A very good 5 min video from Vox on how things developed and how they stand in Syria.

     

    Highlights how ridiculous, to the point of insanity, the idea that bombing Syria more will solve the problem is.

     

    If people don't agree with a certain POV's they're nearly insane? C'mon! You win people over by argument not insult.

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    If people don't agree with a certain POV's they're nearly insane? C'mon! You win people over by argument not insult.

     

    No, I said the idea that more bombing alone is going to solve the problem is crazy. This a view held by sections of all the main political parties.

     

    Do you think that more bombing alone will solve the problem? If so, please expand and provide evidence.

     

    If you support bombing, are you willing to take personal responsibility for any innocent civilians killed? You must if you support it. Only a coward would not.

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Horley, Surrey
  • Location: Horley, Surrey

    If I may interject - for those who disagree with bombing and eradicating ISIS I ask, will you take responsibility for the innocent deaths by terrorism that will continue around the world by ISiS if we don't take action?

    There may be civilian deaths in Syria, however there have been hundreds of civilians killed in Paris and all the other ISIS terrorist targets in the past

    There is no simple solution however appeasement and not taking action against those attaching our way of life is not an option.

    I have had enough of the liberalist approach to this issue. The world has sat back and tolerated Islamic branded terrorism for too long.

    The 'Corbyn' and Michael Mansfield alternative will produce no solutions.

    There is only one way to deal with force and aggression and that is to hit back harder - that is the unpalatable truth of the position we are rightly or wrongly in.

    Once we deal with ISIS we then need to deal with other groups - Al Shabaab, Boko Haram et al - the world IS at war and has been for a while - it is only now that people and some politicians are waking up to the truth.

    Edited by davidpage66
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    If I may interject - for those who disagree with bombing and eradicating ISIS I ask, will you take responsibility for the innocent deaths by terrorism that will continue around the world by ISiS if we don't take action?

     

     

    Yes, I take full responsibility for my views anyway.

     

    However...

     

    If you bomb and kill a civilian accidentally, it is clear your support for bombing killed a civilian. Those that support must take personal responsibility for civilian deaths. If ISIS can take that personal responsibility, then armchair soldiers in the UK can, or are the latter cowards by comparison?

     

    If you don't support bombing and a terrorist attack happens, there is no direct link. It is impossible to say whether the bombing would have stopped the terrorist attack.

     

    If someone can prove that bombing in Syria would definitely and without doubt avoided a civilian death in e.g. Paris, then there is a case. Good luck with that.

     

    Problem is, nobody with any sense is disagreeing with the fact that UK bombing of the middle east has of course resulted in more civilian deaths in the UK due to terrorism. Poke the hornets nest etc...

     

    I am not against UN backed military intervention with a 'long term plan'. I am against 'vengeance' and dick waving to maintain face with no thought nor plan. That is what Dave has put on the table and why even many Tory MPs won't back him.

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon

    If I support car driving and drive a car and someone else kills someone, by accident, using a car am I personally responsible for that civilian death?

    Edited by Devonian
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon

    No, I said the idea that more bombing alone is going to solve the problem is crazy. This a view held by sections of all the main political parties.

     

    Do you think that more bombing alone will solve the problem? If so, please expand and provide evidence.

     

    If you support bombing, are you willing to take personal responsibility for any innocent civilians killed? You must if you support it. Only a coward would not.

    One minute it's insane the next we're cowards. I've answered your point in my previous post.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Horley, Surrey
  • Location: Horley, Surrey

    No-one can guarantee no civilian deaths especially as ISIS use them as shields. However as I said we are at war. Our civilians are being killed - we are all under threat.

    This is war people get killed, have been killed and are being killed

    You don't want to kill civilians in Syria - I understand that but you have no other way of destroying ISIS to stop other innocents being killed by them. To me that is saying the Syrian civilians are more important than the innocent victims of terrorism such as those in Paris.

    I can't accept that.

    No one who has come out against bombing ISIS has come up with a credible way of destroying the organisation.

    No one against action has come up with a way of decreasing the threat of ISIS coordinating attacks against me, my family, my friends or the family and friends of anyone else.

    If there is a credible alternative solution that will neutralise ISIS I will listen to it. However what I will not accept is my government not taking action to protect its citizens.

    Edited by davidpage66
    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: St rads Dover
  • Weather Preferences: Snow, T Storms.
  • Location: St rads Dover

    If I may interject - for those who disagree with bombing and eradicating ISIS I ask, will you take responsibility for the innocent deaths by terrorism that will continue around the world by ISiS if we don't take action?

    There may be civilian deaths in Syria, however there have been hundreds of civilians killed in Paris and all the other ISIS terrorist targets in the past

    There is no simple solution however appeasement and not taking action against those attaching our way of life is not an option.

    I have had enough of the liberalist approach to this issue. The world has sat back and tolerated Islamic branded terrorism for too long.

    The 'Corbyn' and Michael Mansfield alternative will produce no solutions.

    There is only one way to deal with force and aggression and that is to hit back harder - that is the unpalatable truth of the position we are rightly or wrongly in.

    Once we deal with ISIS we then need to deal with other groups - Al Shabaab, Boko Haram et al - the world IS at war and has been for a while - it is only now that people and some politicians are waking up to the truth.

    They will still happen regardless, in fact more likely to happen as the isis people likely to do it are already here, and will get annoyed. Bombing syria will not help in the slightest. 

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Peterborough
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and frost in the winter. Hot and sunny, thunderstorms in the summer.
  • Location: Peterborough

    No-one can guarantee no civilian deaths especially as ISIS use them as shields. However as I said we are at war. Our civilians are being killed - we are all under threat.

    This is war people get killed, have been killed and are being killed

    You don't want to kill civilians in Syria - I understand that but you have no other way of destroying ISIS to stop other innocents being killed by them. To me that is saying the Syrian civilians are more important than the innocent victims of terrorism such as those in Paris.

    I can't accept that.

    No one who has come out against bombing ISIS has come up with a credible way of destroying the organisation.

    No one against action has come up with a way of decreasing the threat of ISIS coordinating attacks against me, my family, my friends or the family and friends of anyone else.

    If there is a credible alternative solution that will neutralise ISIS I will listen to it. However what I will not accept is my government not taking action to protect its citizens.

    The big question is how did ISIS come into existence?

    One of the biggest factors is the very action you are currently supporting. As for other actions, surely education and surgical strikes using special forces on the ring leaders is the best way of trying to tear apart and defeat the group. Bombing the hell out of Syria will do nothing apart from likely give more support to the group and increase instability in the region like we did in Libya.

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon

    The big question is how did ISIS come into existence?

    One of the biggest factors is the very action you are currently supporting. As for other actions, surely education and surgical strikes using special forces on the ring leaders is the best way of trying to tear apart and defeat the group. Bombing the hell out of Syria will do nothing apart from likely give more support to the group and increase instability in the region like we did in Libya.

    I doubt any govt will risk special forces, the thought of a soldier being executed (horribly) via video link will be enough to stop that. I suspect govts hope is that the same 'surgical strikes' can be done via the smartest bombs. That is our govts claim at least. Edited by Devonian
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Horley, Surrey
  • Location: Horley, Surrey

    No-one has ever spoken about 'bombing the hell out of Syria' carpet bombing style so let's keep it factual. Targeted strikes has always been what's has been proposed and is what I support. The fact that we know locations to hit was discussed on BBC News this morning. As for creating more instability, given the current mess I don't think that's possible and yes I agree the west is not innocent in the creation of the mess however we have to deal with where we are now.

    Again I ask, if you don't agree with bombing, and I respect your right to hold that view, give me a workable alternative to eradicate the command and infrastructure of ISIS. It's no good disagreeing with one course of action if no one can come up with another viable option.

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Boar's Hill, Oxon
  • Weather Preferences: Interesting weather
  • Location: Boar's Hill, Oxon

    Is UK/USA policy to keep the current Syrian and Turkish governments in place, or do they want to change regimes as they did in the past? Is current gov in Syria not a threat any longer because the threat of ISIS is bigger? Bigger to whom?

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Romford Essex.
  • Location: Near Romford Essex.

    Is UK/USA policy to keep the current Syrian and Turkish governments in place, or do they want to change regimes as they did in the past? Is current gov in Syria not a threat any longer because the threat of ISIS is bigger? Bigger to whom?

     

    Regime change again! This will get a lot worse before it gets better ... Hopefully!  ( but with the caveat that its hard to break away from 'mans' desire for self destruction)

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    If I support car driving and drive a car and someone else kills someone, by accident, using a car am I personally responsible for that civilian death?

     

    What a ridiculous analogy; cars are not designed and used with the intent to kill people. Bombs on the other hand...

     

    Still, we all do all accept a risk with cars (hence all the investment in road safety), so your analogy falls flat on both points.

     

    And why don't you attack people like the below?

     

    https://archive.is/JIHVl

     

    Nato general Sir Richard Shirreff warns air strikes on Syria are useless
     
    A SENIOR military figure has warned UK air strikes on Syria will not defeat Daesh and could be the first step towards Britain being involved into a “bloody†and protracted war.
     
    General Sir Richard Shirreff, former Nato deputy supreme allied commander Europe, said a large number of western forces would eventually be needed to fight alongside local groups in order to recapture Raqqa, the extremist movement’s self-proclaimed capital. He spoke out after David Cameron last week ruled out the deployment of British ground troops when he pressed the case for bombing missions over Syria, saying the proposed air attacks would be coordinated with ground attacks by some of the 70,000 local troops in Syria linked to “moderate†groups opposed to Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
     
    But yesterday Shirreff told a national newspaper such a military strategy would not defeat Daesh or recapture Raqqa...

     

     
    Even Tories are saying that bombing for the sake of it is a bad idea, e.g. below attached article pic.
     
    EDIT, also, the entire Scottish Labour group in Westminster have a similar position to mine.
     
     
    Shadow Scottish Secretary Ian Murray opposes air strikes
     
    The shadow Scottish secretary has said he would vote against the UK carrying out air strikes against the Islamic State terror group in Syria.

    post-9421-0-83328300-1448883600_thumb.jp

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: The Garden of England
  • Weather Preferences: A large kack of heavy cloud
  • Location: The Garden of England

    Organised chaos.

    The anti-ISIS coalition if it were a Hong Kong action film

    CU9xfpsU8AAPmLz.jpg

    CU6D9rYWEAETJSV.jpg

    Putin's moobs!😀😀😀 Edited by Dougal
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Devizes Wiltshire
  • Location: Devizes Wiltshire

    URGENT: Russia sends Su-34 jets with air-to-air missiles for mission in Syria for 1st time http://on.rt.com/6xzs 


     


     


    Russian SU-34 over Syria will now be armed with Air-To-Air missiles for self defense reasons


    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: St rads Dover
  • Weather Preferences: Snow, T Storms.
  • Location: St rads Dover

     

    URGENT: Russia sends Su-34 jets with air-to-air missiles for mission in Syria for 1st time http://on.rt.com/6xzs 

     

     

    Russian SU-34 over Syria will now be armed with Air-To-Air missiles for self defense reasons

     

    No surprise really, they do not want another plane shot down.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Devizes Wiltshire
  • Location: Devizes Wiltshire

    2EEC39C800000578-3338844-image-a-1_14488

     

     

     

    http://news.yahoo.com/uae-says-ready-commit-troops-fight-syria-jihadists-145913099.html

     

    UAE says ready to commit troops to fight Syria jihadists

     

    The United Arab Emirates has said it is ready to commit ground troops against militants in Syria and described Russian air strikes in the country as attacks on a "common enemy".

     

    Quoted by the official WAM news agency on Monday, Emirati State Minister for Foreign Affairs Anwar Gargash said the UAE would "participate in any international effort demanding a ground intervention to fight terrorism".

    "Regional countries must bear part of the burden" of such an intervention, he said during a Sunday discussion on Syria.

    Edited by lfcdude
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

    A true story of a group of British soldiers' experiences in Helmand Province. I just a wish a few more people were anti-war:

     

    http://www.netflix.com/watch/80071907?trackId=14171105&tctx=0%2C0%2C0dcb06d7-6d71-46b2-a1ca-9e32f99045cf-89172265

    Edited by Ed Stone
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    Lets just say every country currently bombing Syria had never started, so there was no military action taking place. Effectively IS was left to its own devices, how would this turn out?

     

    It seems IMO that theres a certain let someone else do the dirty work attitude going on. So I'd ask those anti-bombing would you be happy if there was no action being taken at all? If you're anti military action by the UK then by extension you're effectively saying leave IS to it.

     

    Its very easy for people to be against the UK going into Syria when others are there already. Personally I think the situation needs ground troops as its clear by the successes of the Kurdish Peshmerga that this approach has worked. People have to move on from Iraq, you can't view everything with that lurking in the background.

     

    Although I was completely against both Iraq and Afghanistan my views on Syria are different, I do feel though that the west won 't succeed unless they accept that some ground forces would be needed.

    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...