It's War

British planes are out of the traps and bombing the feck out of the evil daesh.

Not a big deal, we have been bombing them in Iraq for ages already and supplying logistical support and intelligence in Syria both in the air and on the ground, all this does is make it strictly legal.

Do you go to the dogs ?

I do laugh when people make a point of naming isis/isil daesh like it suddenly makes them cute and cuddly.

watch the lapdogs in Westminster start pushing for ground troops to move in the new year starting yet another long and drawn out war that achieves very little

Sir John Hawkins wrote:

Do you go to the dogs ?

we did years ago replies the exeter fan

The whole business is a mess, cant even decide what their to be called, Isis, Isil, Daesh or Islamic State.

pepsipete wrote:

The whole business is a mess,  cant even decide what their to be called,  Isis, Isil, Daesh or Islamic State.

there are far more important matters at hand than freating over what to call them i feel. its a tomato tomato situation

Lord Tisdale wrote:

British planes are out of the traps and bombing the feck out of the evil daesh.

Not a big deal, we have been bombing them in Iraq for ages already and supplying logistical support and intelligence in Syria both in the air and on the ground, all this does is make it strictly legal.

'Intelligence', I didn't realise we had that now.

Is it the same intelligence the Israelis were using to bomb Palestinian hospitals and kids playing on the beach, and not exactly apologise about either.

"We had intelligence confirming it, we bombed it, what exactly is the problem?"

pepsipete wrote:

The whole business is a mess,  cant even decide what their to be called,  Isis, Isil, Daesh or Islamic State.

ISIS is the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

Then Obama one day referred to ISIL, and everyone started using that - the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

Someone made a point on Question Time that to call them an islamic state is giving legitimacy to their warped ideas of the Muslim religion. Around that time 'Daesh' came into fashion, which is the arabic translation of what the jihadist controlled areas are being called.

So in summary I don't know either.

The thing is we (the West) appear to have no clear objective as to who we want to end up running the country Assad the Kurds, Iran, somebody else.

Angry wrote:

I do laugh when people make a point of naming isis/isil daesh like it suddenly makes them cute and cuddly.

watch the lapdogs in Westminster start pushing for ground troops to move in the new year starting yet another long and drawn out war that achieves very little

I have good friends in the Kurdish community many of whom have lost friends and family fighting daesh. They are Sunni Muslims like daesh and have a good case for calling their little bit of Northern Iraq the State of Kurdistan, daesh are not genuine followers of Islam and the are not now and will never be a state. The Kurds are on the ground fighting the evil that is daesh, they don't want the world to be thinking that daesh in any way represent Islam or that are a state, it's important to them.

I do not wish to be considered cute or cuddly.

The Kurds do not want Western ground troops, they want some better kit to fight with, a few spotters to make sure the bad people get bombed and the filthy scum Turks off their backs. Not too much to ask imho.

Oh, ps. If you think the name thing is not important you are more of clueless tw@ than I previously thought, difficult to imagine I know. Perception is everything, the Islamic State is a huge draw to intellectually challenged jihadis, the murdering scum daesh, reviled by every media source, is mush less inviting. For every Jihadi John there are dozens of poor saps that really don't deserve the fate they are going to. Knocking down the ideology is every bit as important than killing the ring leaders, maybe more so.

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Angry wrote:

I do laugh when people make a point of naming isis/isil daesh like it suddenly makes them cute and cuddly.

watch the lapdogs in Westminster start pushing for ground troops to move in the new year starting yet another long and drawn out war that achieves very little

I have good friends in the Kurdish community many of whom have lost friends and family fighting daesh. They are Sunni Muslims like daesh and have a good case for calling their little bit of Northern Iraq the State of Kurdistan, daesh are not genuine followers of Islam and the are not now and will never be a state. The Kurds are on the ground fighting the evil that is daesh, they don't want the world to be thinking that daesh in any way represent Islam or that are a state, it's important to them.

I do not wish to be considered cute or cuddly.

The Kurds do not want Western ground troops, they want some better kit to fight with, a few spotters to make sure the bad people get bombed and the filthy scum Turks off their backs. Not too much to ask imho.

Oh, ps. If you think the name thing is not important you are more of clueless tw@ than I previously thought, difficult to imagine I know. Perception is everything, the Islamic State is a huge draw to intellectually challenged jihadis, the murdering scum daesh, reviled by every media source, is mush less inviting. For every Jihadi John there are dozens of poor saps that really don't deserve the fate they are going to. Knocking down the ideology is every bit as important than killing the ring leaders, maybe more so.

Bang on the money this. Same shit in Palestine. Everyone in the civilized world has roughly agreed, including the majority of Arabs and Jews and the international community, that there should be enough room for two states for two peoples in the same land, I think there is a rough agreement on that. Why can't we get it? The UN can't get it, the US can't get it, the Quartet couldn't get it, the PLO can't get it, the Israeli parliament can't get it, why can't they get it? Because the parties of God have a veto on it, and everybody knows that this is true. Because of the divine promises made about this territory, there will never be peace there will never be compromise. There will instead be misery, shame and tyranny and people will kill each others' children for ancient books and caves and relics.

Religion poisons everything.

pepsipete wrote:

The thing is we (the West) appear to have no clear objective as to who we want to end up running the country  Assad the Kurds, Iran, somebody else.

Freathy?
... anyway there will be a 2 day break as the RAF don't generally work weekends.

They need to get Jeremy Hunt on the job then. Diplomatic representative of the year. He'll have them up and flying Sunday mornings no problem, and for less dosh.    

As for hearts and minds, I haven't seen much hearts and minds over the last 15 years coming from our side of the divide. Lots of bombs though, some smart, some definitely not. I wonder what we would be thinking if we had been bombed to diddly for years by some foreign thugs and been shepherded to work at the point of a gun.
Of course their brutish murdering ideology needs to be dismantled, but I can't see this latest government succeeding in that, they can't even say the right thing to the Irish who actually want peace. Six months in and it's back to home rule. Great work boys. Nothing ever changes with certain sorts. Totally trashed the one good foreign policy Blair ever had. He did an excellent job there, one that the Conservative and Unionist Party could never have achieved.

There is now talk of Cameron having dodgy information regarding the the 70,000 who are ready (apparently) to take the fight to IS.

A "Tony Blair" moment for Mr Cameron.

VillageGreen wrote:

There is now talk of Cameron having dodgy information regarding the the 70,000 who are ready (apparently) to take the fight to

A "Tony Blair" moment for Mr Cameron.

not quite on that cvnts level just yet

I can't help thinking the biggest terrorists are the Saudi Royal family. public beheadings have increased exponentially this year, yet they're the ones we sell arms to.

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Angry wrote:

I do laugh when people make a point of naming isis/isil daesh like it suddenly makes them cute and cuddly.

watch the lapdogs in Westminster start pushing for ground troops to move in the new year starting yet another long and drawn out war that achieves very little

I have good friends in the Kurdish community many of whom have lost friends and family fighting daesh. They are Sunni Muslims like daesh and have a good case for calling their little bit of Northern Iraq the State of Kurdistan, daesh are not genuine followers of Islam and the are not now and will never be a state. The Kurds are on the ground fighting the evil that is daesh, they don't want the world to be thinking that daesh in any way represent Islam or that are a state, it's important to them.

I do not wish to be considered cute or cuddly.

The Kurds do not want Western ground troops, they want some better kit to fight with, a few spotters to make sure the bad people get bombed and the filthy scum Turks off their backs. Not too much to ask imho.

Oh, ps. If you think the name thing is not important you are more of clueless tw@ than I previously thought, difficult to imagine I know. Perception is everything, the Islamic State is a huge draw to intellectually challenged jihadis, the murdering scum daesh, reviled by every media source, is mush less inviting. For every Jihadi John there are dozens of poor saps that really don't deserve the fate they are going to. Knocking down the ideology is every bit as important than killing the ring leaders, maybe more so.

father christmas or santa claus makes no difference what so ever what people call him its the same guy like allah or god. Calling ISIS, daesh again is just trying to make them sound ute and cuddlly because pc guys dont want to utter the name islamic state.

go take a chill pill tis

The reason they get called daesh is because it is an Arabic saying which degrades IS.

VillageGreen wrote:

The reason they get called daesh is because it is an Arabic saying which degrades IS.

It is an Arabic acronym derived from the phrase “al Dawlah al-Islameyah fi Iraq wal-Sham" or literally, “Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham”. In the same manner we refer to Isis or Isil, Daesh is the Arabic equivalent.

ISIS may not like the phrase but its not by any stretch a degrading statement. Again its a santa claus or father christmas argument really.

there are far more important matters for MP's and armchair generals to worry about than trying to be PC when describing isis/isil/daesh.

Hugh Watt wrote:

I can't help thinking the biggest terrorists are the Saudi Royal family. public beheadings have increased exponentially this year, yet they're the ones we sell arms to.

The blatant government hypocrisy on this issue (also selling arms for Israel to decimate Palestine) are about the only two issues which genuinely genuinely anger me.

When they want a war they spout ethics and morals. ISIS have been behading and killing for years, yet it took white western lives to be 'terrorised' for Westminster to act. What does that tell ISIS? Bomb the west and the world will pay attention.

Back to Saudi Arabia though. Why is not a word spoken when all manner of atrocities are committed there? Oil and weapons contracts we can't afford to lose. Yet send a pleb like Hilary Benn to the commons with a quivvering lip and ISIS who behead are an urgent world menace like the Nazis which need defeating with immediacy, and everyone claps in jingoistic approval.

ejh wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

I can't help thinking the biggest terrorists are the Saudi Royal family. public beheadings have increased exponentially this year, yet they're the ones we sell arms to.

The blatant government hypocrisy on this issue (also selling arms for Israel to decimate Palestine) are about the only two issues which genuinely genuinely anger me.

When they want a war they spout ethics and morals. ISIS have been behading and killing for years, yet it took white western lives to be 'terrorised' for Westminster to act. What does that tell ISIS? Bomb the west and the world will pay attention.

Back to Saudi Arabia though. Why is not a word spoken when all manner of atrocities are committed there? Oil and weapons contracts we can't afford to lose. Yet send a pleb like Hilary Benn to the commons with a quivvering lip and ISIS who behead are an urgent world menace like the Nazis which need defeating with immediacy, and everyone claps in jingoistic approval.

The nazis are a good comparison as we spent most of the 30's allowing them to re-arm and by the time we got round to do anything about they'd annexed most of Eastern Europe

It's already quite clear that the European thing is now producing a central German rump that has more in common with the newly entered Eastern countries. The Atlantic and most Southern states are those under the central cosh, peeing against the wind.
It's back to the old fault lines. Those countries weren't really annexed in the 30s, they were in agreement with the whole project.
Listening to the Philosopher's Arms as I type. My favourite form of philosophy. Gladys told a lie.

Angry wrote:

father christmas or santa claus makes no difference what so ever what people call him its the same guy like allah or god. Calling ISIS, daesh again is just trying to make them sound ute and cuddlly because pc guys dont want to utter the name islamic state.

go take a chill pill tis

It's actually quite funny the way you seem to get almost everything wrong,

And on St Nicholas Day to boot. Dear old Nick, the main man in Eastern Europe with the barba alba. Coinciding with the Winter continental snows of course. Can't think where the myth came from

Hugh Watt wrote:

The nazis are a good comparison as we spent most of the 30's allowing them to re-arm and by the time we got round to do anything about they'd annexed most of Eastern Europe

You make it appear so simple.

The post Great War Treaty of Versailles is a lesson in how not to decide the fate of a country.

Huge, important countries (in the economic and political sense) can not and must not be humiliated by the victors. The virtual abolishing of any military services and the payment for all the losses and damage caused to the opposing countries would bring Germany to its knees. Resentment was an obvious by product.

It wasn't so much that we allowed Germany to rearm. More that we had no appetite for confrontation. Hitler recognised this and despised the Allies for their weakness.

There are certain similarities with the collapse of Communism in the USSR. The West (as supposed victors) have succeeded in enticing previous soviet states into joining them. Ukraine is an obvious flashpoint with the Baltic states likely to follow. It is the West that have land grabbed, not the Russians. Why do we proceed to rub their noses in it.

This reasoning also carries similarities into the Islam debate.
The Western World has abused the East be it financially, religiously and probably racially.
It's pay back time.

History teaches us that, unfortunately, appeasement doesn't work.