Well said Andrew Neil

Great post this ..

Im possibly gona upset a few now , not my intention ..

WMD were possibly a myth maybe there were some , I don't know .

IS are very real , whether people like it or believe it they are fighting for & defending what they believe , misguided or not someone who is willing to die for what they believe is a dangerous foe ..


Two options for the west for me now .
They can stop upsetting the bad people & hopefully they will go away eventually and stop bombing & shooting the innocents of allied countries & go back to their original battles .. slaughtering & killing people on the news, not our streets .. distance is a numbing agent

They now can with the backing of the western world align with their allies and go and destroy these people , & I don't just mean in Syria with guns , they gota deal with the enemy within ,
Political correctness has gone to far , we must not swing the full pendulum the opposite way & do a Guantanamo bay on it but time for the people who don't want live by the rules to upsticks & away with ya or face the consequences ..

I don't have any answers , but all the speaches in the world mean nothing unless its backed up

Indeed, and I assume that applies to your speech too. In this case, backed up with a coherent plan.

Some people have compared IS to the Nazis. Not a good companion. The Nazis wore uniforms and marched together a lot. IS are a guerrilla band who can melt away into the population. Not so easy to target. Lots of potential for collateral damage.

If the Middle East conflicts have taught us anything it is that the old refrain that things couldn't possibly be any worse if [these guys] were removed is often wrong. Things have shown a nasty habit of getting much worse with each well (or not)-intentioned blunder. The worst of all may be Iran and their nuclear ambitions precipitating Israel to do something reckless.

I haven't been keeping up with all the thread, so has anyone answered the question of why Saudi, with a military bigger and better funded than the UK, and a Sunni Muslim ideology, can't sort out these Sunni IS guys themselves?
 
I haven't been keeping up with all the thread, so has anyone answered the question of why Saudi, with a military bigger and better funded than the UK, and a Sunni Muslim ideology, can't sort out these Sunni IS guys themselves?

Because they don't want to? Wouldn't surprise me if Saudi were funding ISIS.
 
Well for one they don't have the skills or expirence

They maybe more equipped and bigger but that doesn't make them capable of tackling IS

IS should be tackled by both western nations , Middle East nations , Russia and even China - they effect of IS is more than just jn the Middle East now and they will continue to damage and cause terror all over the world

IS are an enemy not seen before and it will need clever tactics and cooperation between many countries but they need to be tackled and it needs to be by force

Sit back and their reign of terror will increase
 
Lets see what the BBC think......

http://wingsoverscotland.com/a-small-revision-of-history/#more-78909

Can't say that I have not warned you about their 'selective' reporting.

Is that really the most important factor in all this

Forget innocent lives being lost all over the world

Let's have some bitter Scottish Anti English Website concentrate on a BBC reporter saying the wrong thing

How pathetic is that website - even more so when someone treats it as gospel
 
Because they don't want to? Wouldn't surprise me if Saudi were funding ISIS.
Their Royal family is strongly linked to Religious leaders, there are plenty of reports of Saudi Arabia arresting IS supporters(whether correct or not I don't know). The religious fanaticism is similar though.
 
Exactly. So until the west changes their relationship with Saudi, this will be a series of never ending interventions all doomed to failure.

What relationship is that ?

The one where UK forces are trainjng Saudi forces to improve their ability as a fighting force ?
 
Lets see what the BBC think......

http://wingsoverscotland.com/a-small-revision-of-history/#more-78909

Can't say that I have not warned you about their 'selective' reporting.

So our enemy's enemy is also our enemy?

This was also the problem in Afghanistan in the 80s. The west covertly supported the Mujahideen against the Russians. OK, the Mujahideen were a bunch of Islamic nutcase, but the Russians were commies, so that's all right then. What could go wrong with that plan? The Taliban, that's what. And that leads directly to Al Qaeda and IS too.
 
Exactly. So until the west changes their relationship with Saudi, this will be a series of never ending interventions all doomed to failure.
Seems convenient not to have caught up on the thread and responded to answers you have been given and single out the one point you believe hasn't, maybe Saudi don't see IS as a threat so why should they get involved?
Why single out Saudi Arabia when there are other Middle East countries not involved?
 
So our enemy's enemy is also our enemy?

This was also the problem in Afghanistan in the 80s. The west covertly supported the Mujahideen against the Russians. OK, the Mujahideen were a bunch of Islamic nutcase, but the Russians were commies, so that's all right then. What could go wrong with that plan? The Taliban, that's what. And that leads directly to Al Qaeda and IS too.

Shall we go all the way back to the crusades as well ? Or even further to possible fights between cavemen ?
 
So our enemy's enemy is also our enemy?

This was also the problem in Afghanistan in the 80s. The west covertly supported the Mujahideen against the Russians. OK, the Mujahideen were a bunch of Islamic nutcase, but the Russians were commies, so that's all right then. What could go wrong with that plan? The Taliban, that's what. And that leads directly to Al Qaeda and IS too.
You asked for sensible debate, but you keep reminding us of past mistakes but offer nothing about the question, how do we learn from history and withdraw at the same time? And do you seriously believe if the west withdraws IS will settle down?
 
So our enemy's enemy is also our enemy?

This was also the problem in Afghanistan in the 80s. The west covertly supported the Mujahideen against the Russians. OK, the Mujahideen were a bunch of Islamic nutcase, but the Russians were commies, so that's all right then. What could go wrong with that plan? The Taliban, that's what. And that leads directly to Al Qaeda and IS too.

Read an excellent book called ghost force by a guy called " lofty large" ex glorious glosters and SAS. He talks about all the conflicts he has served in, the governments stance and why the SAS went in.
The last conflict he served in was the Afghan war. He finished the afghan conflict by saying " only time will tell whether the Taliban government installed with help from the west is better than the government installed by the Russians".
 
What's is the way forward?

Now there's the million dollar question. To be honest I've no idea but do think IS needs to be eliminated as much as possible and for it to be made as hard as possible for them to work effectively and to recruit new members. I don't know how you go about that, other than through the ways being employed, increased and shared intelligence and a lot of co-operation
 
Top