D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
What do you think ?What border would that be?
You do know that UN forces are helping out against Boko Harum as well ?
It's not some sort of competition
What do you think ?What border would that be?
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
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.
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.
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.Because they don't want to? Wouldn't surprise me if Saudi were funding ISIS.
Exactly. So until the west changes their relationship with Saudi, this will be a series of never ending interventions all doomed to failure.
What do you think ?
You do know that UN forces are helping out against Boko Harum as well ?
It's not some sort of competition
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.
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?Exactly. So until the west changes their relationship with Saudi, this will be a series of never ending interventions all doomed to failure.
Not 100% correct is it, the rebels against Assad split in to 2 factions, one of them, IS, also then tried to create the IS State spreading through Iraq, which was just a tad over the Syrian border. So stating we were supporting IS is not factually correct.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.
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.
Perhaps we should send Jeremy Corbyn out to Syria/Iraq to reason with IS? :mmm:
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.
Not 100% correct is it
What's is the way forward?