Panorama - Worth Watching Re Ebikes
Motoring0 min ago
Isis Atrocities
More atrocities by isis scum.
http://
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by tonyav. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Nobody with any sort of power seems to care. Platitudes and sorrow reign supreme. Why don't 'they' understand that every non-muslim is at risk and that before we know it they'll be attacking many more people here. We can't rely on the French to turn them back at Poitiers, as they did hundreds of years ago, because one country on its own is too small to deal with the massing hordes.
I know the politics are difficult to balance, but the only thing that will be respected is force. Perhaps not 'nukes' but drones hitting them. The defence budget must also be safeguarded - and even increased I.M.O..
I know the politics are difficult to balance, but the only thing that will be respected is force. Perhaps not 'nukes' but drones hitting them. The defence budget must also be safeguarded - and even increased I.M.O..
-- answer removed --
The problem is that -- well, firstly, something is being done and in Iraq in particular ISIS is being pushed back. More needs to be done and there is a lot of bloody fighting ahead. But the problem is that politicians of the West lost support for sustained military action in the Middle East after the mess they made of Iraq and Afghanistan the most recent time we went in. Badly planned, particularly in the aftermath, rather unpopular because of the lost soldiers, and now of course with little to show for it as the region is still unstable, if not more so.
And this really is the problem. There is an urgent need to defeat ISIS as fast and as completely as possible. People may inevitably ask "what next?", though. I don't think the problem will go away just by winning another war. We will then need to commit to a long-term programme of rebuilding the region, stabilising it, setting it up to maintain its own security. Everything, in other words, that should have been done after the earlier invasions in the first place but wasn't.
Despite all the horror and nastiness and bloodshed, and utterly depraved and barbaric acts committed by ISIS members, there just seems to be no will any more to do what is necessary -- either from politicians or, more importantly, from the general public, whose opinions in this case are leading the politicians to hold back.
It's wrong, it's horrible, we have to intervene at a greater level than is currently the case. But also we have to be prepared to stay there and, this time, do the job properly. I suspect that many people would rather hit and run, which is only a temporary fix. More will follow in ISIS's footsteps, regardless of how many of them are killed, without a rebuilding effort.
And this really is the problem. There is an urgent need to defeat ISIS as fast and as completely as possible. People may inevitably ask "what next?", though. I don't think the problem will go away just by winning another war. We will then need to commit to a long-term programme of rebuilding the region, stabilising it, setting it up to maintain its own security. Everything, in other words, that should have been done after the earlier invasions in the first place but wasn't.
Despite all the horror and nastiness and bloodshed, and utterly depraved and barbaric acts committed by ISIS members, there just seems to be no will any more to do what is necessary -- either from politicians or, more importantly, from the general public, whose opinions in this case are leading the politicians to hold back.
It's wrong, it's horrible, we have to intervene at a greater level than is currently the case. But also we have to be prepared to stay there and, this time, do the job properly. I suspect that many people would rather hit and run, which is only a temporary fix. More will follow in ISIS's footsteps, regardless of how many of them are killed, without a rebuilding effort.
jim360
I actually agree with much of what you say in your last post.There was a lot to be said for the British Empire.It was strict,it was also cruel at times(Amritsa etc) but never as cruel as these savages.We are constantly apologising for our Colonial days but we kept the lid on the powder keg and much benefit was gained by our presence. Indias ancient railway service puts ours to shame but who built theirs.The Indian civil service.Communications i.e. Telegraph.We pull out and now these people can't find their own water. It is common knowledge we had a strong military presence in Iraq back in the 1929's and 30's.
Nigel Farage said tonight we are the architects of a lot of the trouble now in the M.E. as had been stated by some ABers earlier.We were happy to topple Gadafi and Sadam but didn't finish the business.
It makes me boil to see British politicians apologising for our Colonial past.
Some unsavoury moments. Yes but on the whole beneficial to the country and the world stability at the time.
I actually agree with much of what you say in your last post.There was a lot to be said for the British Empire.It was strict,it was also cruel at times(Amritsa etc) but never as cruel as these savages.We are constantly apologising for our Colonial days but we kept the lid on the powder keg and much benefit was gained by our presence. Indias ancient railway service puts ours to shame but who built theirs.The Indian civil service.Communications i.e. Telegraph.We pull out and now these people can't find their own water. It is common knowledge we had a strong military presence in Iraq back in the 1929's and 30's.
Nigel Farage said tonight we are the architects of a lot of the trouble now in the M.E. as had been stated by some ABers earlier.We were happy to topple Gadafi and Sadam but didn't finish the business.
It makes me boil to see British politicians apologising for our Colonial past.
Some unsavoury moments. Yes but on the whole beneficial to the country and the world stability at the time.
Thanks retrocop. I wasn't entirely meaning a return to colonialism, but certainly our recent intervention in Libya has shown how much of a failure it is to stick to just "nuking them off the face of the Earth". The aftermath of saying job done in Libya after a few bombing raids has been a country shattered with an ongoing Civil War -- which is receiving very little attention these days. That is entirely wrong as, of course, based on the article above, ISIS is sticking its nose in even there. There is no better demonstration that just washing our hands after a few bombing raids is an utterly stupid decision.
Our Colonial past was messy and should not be repeated, but I don't see that this means that we should never intervene again. It seems a far worse idea to stay out of it. For there is every chance that things will just get worse. When we "only" had tyrannical leaders to worry about, at least we could feel fairly confident that they'd confine themselves to killing their own people. ISIS won't stop there. They must be stopped -- and then we must be prepared to stay for however long is necessary to ensure that they, or something like them, can never start again.
Our Colonial past was messy and should not be repeated, but I don't see that this means that we should never intervene again. It seems a far worse idea to stay out of it. For there is every chance that things will just get worse. When we "only" had tyrannical leaders to worry about, at least we could feel fairly confident that they'd confine themselves to killing their own people. ISIS won't stop there. They must be stopped -- and then we must be prepared to stay for however long is necessary to ensure that they, or something like them, can never start again.
jim360
I agree with your analysis there. I think we're caught in a terrible catch 22 situation. If Afghanistan/Iraq had been a resounding success, delivering a stabilised government, then there would be greater support for military action in the region. However, the problem is that there is no easy solution. Isis isn't a country you can fight - it's an ideology. To an extent, Nazism (a proto-Isis) was defeated because it was an ideology which was specific to Germany in the 30s.
But how can the West deal with such nebulous entity? It has a recognised leader but it's structure is complex and crosses national borders. Isis seized control of Mosul in Iraq last year, but its power base is in Raqqa, eastern Syria.
The idea of nuking the whole region might appeal to some as a short term measure, but I suspect that might not be such a good move, what with the nuclear fall out that will impact neighbouring countries.
I agree with your analysis there. I think we're caught in a terrible catch 22 situation. If Afghanistan/Iraq had been a resounding success, delivering a stabilised government, then there would be greater support for military action in the region. However, the problem is that there is no easy solution. Isis isn't a country you can fight - it's an ideology. To an extent, Nazism (a proto-Isis) was defeated because it was an ideology which was specific to Germany in the 30s.
But how can the West deal with such nebulous entity? It has a recognised leader but it's structure is complex and crosses national borders. Isis seized control of Mosul in Iraq last year, but its power base is in Raqqa, eastern Syria.
The idea of nuking the whole region might appeal to some as a short term measure, but I suspect that might not be such a good move, what with the nuclear fall out that will impact neighbouring countries.
jim360
I realise you were not suggesting a return to colonialism.What I was suggesting we kept the lid on the powder keg by colonialism at the time. I also acknowledged it was cruel and "messy" if you will.Now we seem to have to be in a continuous policing action all the time and consider popping back to try to quell the mess we created.
I realise you were not suggesting a return to colonialism.What I was suggesting we kept the lid on the powder keg by colonialism at the time. I also acknowledged it was cruel and "messy" if you will.Now we seem to have to be in a continuous policing action all the time and consider popping back to try to quell the mess we created.
Ah, I see. I thought that was what you were saying, but wasn't quite sure. Yes, we did. It's a shame that this was true because all those struggles for independence have ended up achieving it at a terrible cost later.
I think the biggest problem of colonialism is that it appears in many cases to have acted as a sort of "pause" button. All of those tribal disputes in the region that never had a chance to burn out because for a century or more the old enemies had a new common rival. And then once we (and the French/ Spanish/ Belgians etc) left, it was bad to the old disputes only this time with more modern weapons.
Who knows if it would have come to a natural end, and I'm not meaning either to foist the blame entirely on us either. One way or another we can't ignore it, and at least in that we're in agreement. Shame we're stuck to just talking about it.
I think the biggest problem of colonialism is that it appears in many cases to have acted as a sort of "pause" button. All of those tribal disputes in the region that never had a chance to burn out because for a century or more the old enemies had a new common rival. And then once we (and the French/ Spanish/ Belgians etc) left, it was bad to the old disputes only this time with more modern weapons.
Who knows if it would have come to a natural end, and I'm not meaning either to foist the blame entirely on us either. One way or another we can't ignore it, and at least in that we're in agreement. Shame we're stuck to just talking about it.
I'm afraid the problem isn't just in one particular region, it is all over the world. They have fanatics everywhere. And there is more converting every day. And because they breed more than we do, they will be the majority in this country in 30 years or so. And then their extremists will take over and murder us all. All because we are too politically correct to do anything about it.
magicbeatledel
You are certainly correct that Muslim extremists are not particular aligned to one country or region, but your assertion that they will form a demographic majority in 30 years is very, very, very, very, very wrong.
http://
It's one of those myths that keeps getting repeated, but it's still a myth.
You are certainly correct that Muslim extremists are not particular aligned to one country or region, but your assertion that they will form a demographic majority in 30 years is very, very, very, very, very wrong.
http://
It's one of those myths that keeps getting repeated, but it's still a myth.
