How should the UK government deal with IS?

[patricks148]

It goes back further than recent dictators. The US and UK sponsored a coup to overthrow Mossadegh in Iran in 50s. It was over oil, funnily enough. That led to the Shah, and in response an islamic theocracy overthrew the Shah in the 70s. Meantime, the US backed the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, because islamic freedom fighters were better than Ruskie Commies. They became Al Qaeda. Then the US best friend in the region, Saddam gets wrongly blamed for 9/11, but only after the US got all the Saudi royals safely out of the US, even though he was a foe of Al Qaeda, and non-existent WMDs, so a war is started which kills tens of thousand of people and destabilises the precarious balance with Iran even further. Now Saddam was undoubtedly an evil tyrant, but there have been quite a few of those around that the US did not start wars with. So Iran starts to develop nukes, in response to their perception of the threat from Israel, and everyone goes crazy. Not about Israel's nukes, of course, because we all pretend those don't exist. Oh, and the UK and US were instrumental in the foundation of Israel too, and who would have thought a Jewish state in the area would cause problems?

The west seems to cause a bigger problem every time it gets involved, so it should step out. Let other local states which have the capability, do the heavy lifting this time. Give them diplomatic and strategic support, but otherwise leave this as a regional issue. If the wets is really concerned about beheadings of innocent people, Saudi does far more of those, so when does that invasion begin?

yep, Oils has a big part in this as you say.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

not in any of the counties in my post.

Suggest possibly you read up about Saddams treatment of the Kurds

Then you have Libya extremists bombings various places around UK including an Airline

Extrenists have been operating and active for decades upon decades

If we are looking to start the blame game we might as well go all the way back to the Crusades

 

[Foxholer]

TBH, the UK and US Governments have to take some responsibility for what's happened in the likes of Iraq, Libya and now Syria. All had strict dictatorships that kept a lid on these extremists, if we had stayed out of it the region would still be pretty stable, we might not agree with how these country's were run, but none of these extremists were allowed to operate.

It goes back further than recent dictators. The US and UK sponsored a coup to overthrow Mossadegh in Iran in 50s. It was over oil, funnily enough. That led to the Shah, and in response an islamic theocracy overthrew the Shah in the 70s. Meantime, the US backed the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, because islamic freedom fighters were better than Ruskie Commies. They became Al Qaeda. Then the US best friend in the region, Saddam gets wrongly blamed for 9/11, but only after the US got all the Saudi royals safely out of the US, even though he was a foe of Al Qaeda, and non-existent WMDs, so a war is started which kills tens of thousand of people and destabilises the precarious balance with Iran even further. Now Saddam was undoubtedly an evil tyrant, but there have been quite a few of those around that the US did not start wars with. So Iran starts to develop nukes, in response to their perception of the threat from Israel, and everyone goes crazy. Not about Israel's nukes, of course, because we all pretend those don't exist. Oh, and the UK and US were instrumental in the foundation of Israel too, and who would have thought a Jewish state in the area would cause problems?

The west seems to cause a bigger problem every time it gets involved, so it should step out. Let other local states which have the capability, do the heavy lifting this time. Give them diplomatic and strategic support, but otherwise leave this as a regional issue. If the wets is really concerned about beheadings of innocent people, Saudi does far more of those, so when does that invasion begin?

You forgot the disaster in waiting (and already happening) caused by using over 1000 tons of Depleted Uranium ammunition during Gulf 2! A huge increase in the number of serious birth defects and a 20 fold increase in Cancers - including many of the clean-up team! - in spite of it being only 'mildly' radioactive.

Of course, the West is not going to simply withdraw from the region because of the huge reserves of Oil it has. And that has been a major factor in it's dealings with the region for decades - back to T E Lawrence's exploits! And it also seems to have an obsession of imposing it's view of democracy wherever it can too!

 

[JamPal]

Bore off :thup:

Obvious troll is obvious

 

[patricks148]

Suggest possibly you read up about Saddams treatment of the Kurds

Then you have Libya extremists bombings various places around UK including an Airline

Extrenists have been operating and active for decades upon decades

If we are looking to start the blame game we might as well go all the way back to the Crusades

I didn't say they were good guys, just they kept the lid on most of it the extremism now rife in the region.

The Libyans Allegedly blew up one plane in 40 years how may have Al Qaeda ?

We got involved because of oil not Sadams treatment of anyone else. Plus the US were happy to bank role and arm Iraq in its war with Iran.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I didn't say they were good guys, just they kept the lid on most of it the extremism now rife in the region.

The Libyans Allegedly blew up one plane in 40 years how may have Al Qaeda ?

We got involved because of oil not Sadams treatment of anyone else.

No lid was kept on anything

Al Qaeda causing 9/11 happened before Gulf War 2 or the U.S. etc going into Afghan - did a great job of keeping a lid on it then

I'm not going to get into the reasons for going to Gulf War 2 and Afghan etc

Just clearly pointing out that suggesting dictators kept extremists down is a false statement

 

[woody69]

Obvious troll is obvious

I'm confused by this post? Are you saying I'm a troll or our genocide loving resident Dave?

 

[patricks148]

No lid was kept on anything

Al Qaeda causing 9/11 happened before Gulf War 2 or the U.S. etc going into Afghan - did a great job of keeping a lid on it then

I'm not going to get into the reasons for going to Gulf War 2 and Afghan etc

Just clearly pointing out that suggesting dictators kept extremists down is a false statement

were there Muslim fundamentalist running riot though Syria, Libya and Iraq while it this had its dictators?

I don't think so

I didn't mention Afghanistan, but as you did what about the US arming funding and training Al Qaeda?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

were there Muslim fundamentalist running riot though Syria, Libya and Iraq while it this had its dictators?

I don't think so

I didn't mention Afghanistan, but as you did what about the US arming funding and training Al Qaeda?

Yes fundamentalists and extremists have been running around those countries for decades and decades

A lot of the time they have been the government themselves

The U.S. armed the Taliban during the Soviet campaign - don't confuse them with Al Qaeda

 

[patricks148]

Yes fundamentalists and extremists have been running around those countries for decades and decades

A lot of the time they have been the government themselves

The U.S. armed the Taliban during the Soviet campaign - don't confuse them with Al Qaeda

did you get that from Google?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

did you get that from Google?

I got that from being in those various countries and seeing the effects of years of dictatorships :thup:

 

[Fish]

did you get that from Google?

I'd bet he didn't, I have had many chats with Phil as we have both served over there and know quite a bit more than what you read or need to know!

[edit] her beat me to it :smirk:

 

[Foxholer]

were there Muslim fundamentalist running riot though Syria, Libya and Iraq while it this had its dictators?

I don't think so
...

Would you describe Syria currently as anything but a Dictatorship? The Daily Mail certainly describes Assad as a dictator. The fact that there is also a civil war occurring does not change that description.

And it was in Syria that this latest atrocity was carried out!

 

[c1973]

I thought the US armed Bin Laden and his cohorts during the Afghan war with Russia. No? (Genuine question btw, not stirring the pot).

Bin Laden was Al Qaeda (not literally). Taliban may have been the name on the scoreboard at the time, but no way am I believing US/European armaments were not supplied (directly or indirectly) to Al Qaeda. Part of the reason Bin Laden waged war/terror on the west was because we left them to it against the ruskies after arming/training them. I realise that's quite a simplistic view, but I'd be confident it's not far off the mark.

Anyone that thinks oil and/or the protection of gas pipelines is not the main (lets face it,probably only) reason the West have been meddling in the middle east for as long as they have is, imo, sadly deluded.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I thought the US armed Bin Laden and his cohorts during the Afghan war with Russia. No? (Genuine question btw, not stirring the pot).

Bin Laden was Al Qaeda (not literally). Taliban may have been the name on the scoreboard at the time, but no way am I believing US/European armaments were not supplied (directly or indirectly) to Al Qaeda. Part of the reason Bin Laden waged war/terror on the west was because we left them to it against the ruskies after arming/training them. I realise that's quite a simplistic view, but I'd be confident it's not far off the mark.

Anyone that thinks oil and/or the protection of gas pipelines is not the main (lets face it,probably only) reason the West have been meddling in the middle east for as long as they have is, imo, sadly deluded.

There has been many rumours and allegations that the CIA armed Bin Laden etc but been dismissed

The U.S. did arm members of the Taliban and Afghan army during the Soviet Wars

The arming off Al Qaeda was even dismissed by them

This is from a CNN reported who interviews Bin Laden back in the 90's

The story about bin Laden and the CIA — that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden — is simply a folk myth. There's no evidence of this. In fact, there are very few things that bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the U.S. government agree on. They all agree that they didn't have a relationship in the 1980s. And they wouldn't have needed to. Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently. The real story here is the CIA did not understand who Osama was until 1996, when they set up a unit to really start tracking him.

 

[c1973]

There has been many rumours and allegations that the CIA armed Bin Laden etc but been dismissed

The U.S. did arm members of the Taliban and Afghan army during the Soviet Wars

The arming off Al Qaeda was even dismissed by them

This is from a CNN reported who interviews Bin Laden back in the 90's

The story about bin Laden and the CIA — that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden — is simply a folk myth. There's no evidence of this. In fact, there are very few things that bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the U.S. government agree on. They all agree that they didn't have a relationship in the 1980s. And they wouldn't have needed to. Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently. The real story here is the CIA did not understand who Osama was until 1996, when they set up a unit to really start tracking him.

Cheers for the info.

I've got a healthy mistrust of the CIA (and most government bodies tbf) and I'll freely admit I always thought there was a degree of hypocrisy regards the US and Bin Laden, good possibility I've been wrong. Having said that, would it not have been in the interests of both parties to keep any deals on the QT though?
Also, It does beg the question of where did he get his armaments.

My comment regards oil and gas still stand.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Cheers for the info.

I've got a healthy mistrust of the CIA (and most government bodies tbf) and I'll freely admit I always thought there was a degree of hypocrisy regards the US and Bin Laden, good possibility I've been wrong. Having said that, would it not have been in the interests of both parties to keep any deals on the QT though?
Also, It does beg the question of where did he get his armaments.

My comment regards oil and gas still stand.

There are a great deal amount of comments and quotes all saying the same thing in regards the CIA and Al Qaeda - the U.S. will always confirm that they armed the locals in Afghan but always deny arming Bin Laden - as you say it could easily be on the QT but so far no actual evidence has been found

As for where they get their weapons from - black market , rogue arms dealers - as sterotypical as it sounds the weapon of choice was regulary the same AK-47 enhanced plus the same type of explosives and RPG etc - arms bought on the black market more than likely via Pakistan also South Africa and ex Soviet States.

And yes as with most wars - an element of financial gain is always hiding in the background

 

[MadAdey]

I'd bet he didn't, I have had many chats with Phil as we have both served over there and know quite a bit more than what you read or need to know!

[edit] her beat me to it :smirk:

Will always be the case Robin, what the papers print is what is released to them to print by the MOD. What they write keeps people happy and that is what is needed. But the old 'need to know' does happen all the time. Having served in these places with reconnaissance aircraft I have been privileged to information regarding what is really happening, not what the papers are writing from the little bit of factual evidence they recieve.

Regarding oil, people are correct IMO and going into the middle eastern countries to 'sort them out' to keep the supply of world oil going is critical. Everything in this modern is relying on crude oil and it's by-products. Oil just doesn't power cars, it's used to make all kinds of man made materials. The oil has to be protected or we are all screwed, but I do also believe that we have to go in to protect the innocent people of these countries from their aggressive governments that does not think twice about committing genocide.

 

[MadAdey]

There are a great deal amount of comments and quotes all saying the same thing in regards the CIA and Al Qaeda - the U.S. will always confirm that they armed the locals in Afghan but always deny arming Bin Laden - as you say it could easily be on the QT but so far no actual evidence has been found

As for where they get their weapons from - black market , rogue arms dealers - as sterotypical as it sounds the weapon of choice was regulary the same AK-47 enhanced plus the same type of explosives and RPG etc - arms bought on the black market more than likely via Pakistan also South Africa and ex Soviet States.

And yes as with most wars - an element of financial gain is always hiding in the background

A lot of the weapons and explosives in used in afghan are left over from the war with Russia. They have stockpiles of Chinese rockets that they like to use for explosives. The rifles are black market like Phil said, how do you think any criminals get their weapons, you can get many things on the high street but I haven't seen AK-47s in a TESCO extra yet so not very easy to target the people supplying them. Regarding ammunition, it is not that bigger job to get empty cases and recycle them back into live rounds again.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

A lot of the weapons and explosives in used in afghan are left over from the war with Russia. They have stockpiles of Chinese rockets that they like to use for explosives. The rifles are black market like Phil said, how do you think any criminals get their weapons, you can get many things on the high street but I haven't seen AK-47s in a TESCO extra yet so not very easy to target the people supplying them. Regarding ammunition, it is not that bigger job to get empty cases and recycle them back into live rounds again.

With the amount of money they had ( from opium amongst other stuff ) they could buy whatever they wanted

Certainly plenty of places people find to purchase weapons

The stock piles found in Afghan I couldn't believe the amount of weapons they have