Iraq!!!!!

[WinchesterDave]

 

 

 

Woof Woof

Bit of a ledge for that mate made me laugh hahaha

[four-wheel-drive]

Well they are ready and awaiting the call!

 

what will happen when one of them get shot down and or has to eject that will be another one for the chop I suppose.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

what will happen when one of them get shot down and or has to eject that will be another one for the chop I suppose.

 

Well as they are due out of service soon I doubt it will be too much of a problem, as long as the crew are safe and get recovered!

[maxie]

 

 

We welcome debate and nothing but debate, members can be easily persuaded by the whips, financial inducement, self-interest or merely an apathetic lack of will, and it is virtually impossible to get this entity to engage let alone gather any worthwhile momentum on the pressing issues at hand. Yes the termination point of hope, The British Parliament!!

Any chance of allowing the military to do a complete job this time? No chance, wasn’t there another ‘Hundred Years War’ somewhere in the past??

 

There was indeed as I think you will know,1337-1453 but I think there was more than one "100 years war" My history lessons (more moons ago than I can remember) suggested that the 100 years war was something a lot less than 100 years. Then again what do old fogies know.................wind your neck in before you stick it out respect your elders, I may need you to help me across the road one day. Or better still get me a pint of Ruddles

 

Hundred Years war,wasn`t that the one we lost to the french?

[four-wheel-drive]

 

Well as they are due out of service soon I doubt it will be too much of a problem, as long as the crew are safe and get recovered!

My point was if one is shot down the crew would be spirted away before we could get to them.

[Dr_Scholl]

_{Isn't that just like you Brits, always late to the party!}

[welsh1]

We are a small,poor country,and it is not our battle,it is time that countries adjacent to the problem stood up and got counted,we are not the policemen of the world,and recent experience tells us that no matter what we do there will be a vacuum when we end a campaign and it will start all over again.

I understand that IS pose a threat to us , but they pose a massive threat to their neighbours,and it is those rich neighbours(the ones that indirectly financed them to create instability in the region)to stand up and face the music.

[Fuddster]

Whoop whoop the overtime train is a coming....

 

All aboard!

 

Next stop perazzi-ville

 

F.

[maxie]

_{Isn't that just like you Brits, always late to the party!}

WE say the same about about the U.S. The first and second world wars spring to mind.

[DaveK]

'If it quacks'

 

It's a zebra

[nderfel]

as long as all our boys and girls come home safe. my view is that if whatever you think about the decision to start military action once our people are in harms way all that goes out of the window and you get behind and support them.

 

what I don't get is why we don't just leave this to the Saudis and others like them, they have the technology and the will, why do we have to be involved? we are not the worlds police and forcing democracy on these people just doesn't work.

 

as an aside (and yes I have been drinking) Tony bLIAR boils my ****! middle east peace envoy??? someone at the UN has a twisted sense of humour.....

[pegasus bridge]

The money would be better spent defending the uk's borders and fighting the enemy within, but it's easier to bomb a middle eastern country and conveniently forget that many of the most extreme individuals had traveled from up and down the uk. This IMHO is the urgent issue that needs dealing with.

[big bad lindz]

sorry to set your alarm clock off early but actually they are!and have, the coalition (a temporary alliance for combined action) contains the Arab states who are well and truly involved with the bombing of targets.

 

KW

So if they already are why do the west have to be involved and who is paying for it all, do we as British tax payers submit a bill?? or is it all down to back handed deals for arms and oil ??

[The Essex Hunter]

The money would be better spent defending the uk's borders and fighting the enemy within, but it's easier to bomb a middle eastern country and conveniently forget that many of the most extreme individuals had traveled from up and down the uk. This IMHO is the urgent issue that needs dealing with.

Well Adams, McGuinness and their cronies rained terror ever since I was a lad, and I am 53.......

All of our government's never had the balls to deal with them, Or has that know been swept under the carpet??

 

It will never stop as the simple fact these countries are ideal for those type of people to operate in....

 

TEH

[KFC]

I'm sure that George W bush thought that when he killed over 100,000 Iraqi's to get rid of Saddam Hussein then the Iraqi people would carry him shoulder high through the streets as a hero.

As us lefties predicted, all he did was create a political vacuum which ISIL has filled. This worked as a recruiting drive for an insurgency using the weapons we supplied.

 

There's still no comprehension that these are tribal, not political, societies. There's no talk of how peace can be brought to the region after ISIL is 'defeated' so another tribe will grow and fill another vacuum.

 

When the attacks on Saddam started he said " You have wandered into a quagmire from which you will never escape"! The west laughed but we ain't laughing now!!

 

The reality is that this was really done to maintain arms and oil sales with a Saudi Arabian dictatorship which regularly beheads its own people and exports terrorism.

 

Once again, the so-called civilised west walks into foreign nations trying to impose their will and, instead, creates a total shambles . History books are full of it. Shameful.

[pegasus bridge]

Thank god we didn't arm them last year in Syria,

[kdubya]

I'm sure that George W bush thought that when he killed over 100,000 Iraqi's to get rid of Saddam Hussein then the Iraqi people would carry him shoulder high through the streets as a hero.

As us lefties predicted, all he did was create a political vacuum which ISIL has filled. This worked as a recruiting drive for an insurgency using the weapons we supplied.

 

There's still no comprehension that these are tribal, not political, societies. There's no talk of how peace can be brought to the region after ISIL is 'defeated' so another tribe will grow and fill another vacuum.

 

When the attacks on Saddam started he said " You have wandered into a quagmire from which you will never escape"! The west laughed but we ain't laughing now!!

 

The reality is that this was really done to maintain arms and oil sales with a Saudi Arabian dictatorship which regularly beheads its own people and exports terrorism.

 

Once again, the so-called civilised west walks into foreign nations trying to impose their will and, instead, creates a total shambles . History books are full of it. Shameful.

 

 

Ah yes I forgot all this started after 9/11 and the bush legacy, silly me here is me thinking that other than name changes and the ever more brutal methods of creating fear,that It doesn't go back to1968 and places like London Berlin Munich Rome Belgium Italy Spain Paris Kenya Sydney mombasa and lord knows how many other places have not been been attacked by these poor people who just wanted to be left alone (is that in your history book or does yours only have one side to a page?) Christ just in America alone we had the twin towers bombed before the big one in 9/11 , there was even an attempt on the Empire state building.

 

The action by the west in taking Saddam out was probably misguided I will give you that, but the big mistake was believing that would stop any threat to us in the west, and as you well know it didn't and the reason was we tried to act civil to those who are not civilised, we expected western values to prevail and they didn't, simply because we let the lefties shackle our method of eradicating the threat totally and not allowing a finished job.

 

KW

Edited September 28, 2014 by kdubya

[clakk]

we said that man,the hand ringers will still be saying no to military action when their heads roll in the basket .too many british soldiers have died due to rules of engagement written by desk warriors to keep guardian readers happy.the ISIL dont do the geneva accords,they rape,behead beat and murder in the name of islam.their warped ideology is absolutly nothing to do with islam.its about being top tribe hence the bank robbing and ransom taking .sooner people wake up the better ,our tone will never get arrested for causing this power vacuum by removing sadman so we have to deal with it now.we are at war with a group who will blow your kids up and kill your family in nasty ways because your not a certain muslim sect.they dont negotiate ,and dont see the need as the big cheese has told em they can rule the world.

[SHOOTEMUP]

To right, why cant the arabic countrys form a united group to do the actual bombing in stead of getting the west to do there dirty work for them.

Yes and we can sell them the bombs

[welsh1]

we said that man,the hand ringers will still be saying no to military action when their heads roll in the basket .too many british soldiers have died due to rules of engagement written by desk warriors to keep guardian readers happy..

So you are saying that we should get rid of rules of engagement and act like the enemy? The same enemy that we detest and deplore for the way they act.

Does your idea not make us no better than the enemy?

[Sha Bu Le]

So you are saying that we should get rid of rules of engagement and act like the enemy? The same enemy that we detest and deplore for the way they act.

Does your idea not make us no better than the enemy?

It certainly does, but warfare is not civilised, people are going to die horribly even 'playing' by conventions. Take those away from one side and the other side is operating with one arm.

 

ISIS have no rules or conventions. they murder men women and children in the most horrific ways. They murder non combatant foreigners as payback for bombing raids. If we or any of the alliance ever have troops on the ground they too will be murdered in a barbaric manner if captured.

 

Rules and conventions are only any good when adhered to by both protagonists and that's not going to happen so abandon all the rules, at least western troops are not going to go on a mass murder trip, and hopefully neither will the Arab alliance.

 

The question is do we want to beat ISIS into oblivion never to be a problem again (won't happen) or live our lives knowing that these savages will reappear and perhaps in our own countries (chances are it will happen). The UK have had 7/7 the US have had 9/11 what next and when ?

[SHOOTEMUP]

It certainly does, but warfare is not civilised, people are going to die horribly even 'playing' by conventions. Take those away from one side and the other side is operating with one arm.

 

ISIS have no rules or conventions. they murder men women and children in the most horrific ways. They murder non combatant foreigners as payback for bombing raids. If we or any of the alliance ever have troops on the ground they too will be murdered in a barbaric manner if captured.

 

Rules and conventions are only any good when adhered to by both protagonists and that's not going to happen so abandon all the rules, at least western troops are not going to go on a mass murder trip, and hopefully neither will the Arab alliance.

 

The question is do we want to beat ISIS into oblivion never to be a problem again (won't happen) or live our lives knowing that these savages will reappear and perhaps in our own countries (chances are it will happen). The UK have had 7/7 the US have had 9/11 what next and when ?

 

Well said I don't think people in this country realise how serious this whole mess is or the ever present danger of homeland terrorism its a very serious threat as these people fear nobody or anything

Edited September 28, 2014 by SHOOTEMUP

[welsh1]

It certainly does, but warfare is not civilised, people are going to die horribly even 'playing' by conventions. Take those away from one side and the other side is operating with one arm.

 

ISIS have no rules or conventions. they murder men women and children in the most horrific ways. They murder non combatant foreigners as payback for bombing raids. If we or any of the alliance ever have troops on the ground they too will be murdered in a barbaric manner if captured.

 

Rules and conventions are only any good when adhered to by both protagonists and that's not going to happen so abandon all the rules, at least western troops are not going to go on a mass murder trip, and hopefully neither will the Arab alliance.

 

The question is do we want to beat ISIS into oblivion never to be a problem again (won't happen) or live our lives knowing that these savages will reappear and perhaps in our own countries (chances are it will happen). The UK have had 7/7 the US have had 9/11 what next and when ?

If we have no rules or standards then we are no better than the enemy we despise.

[KFC]

It certainly does, but warfare is not civilised, people are going to die horribly even 'playing' by conventions. Take those away from one side and the other side is operating with one arm.

 

ISIS have no rules or conventions. they murder men women and children in the most horrific ways. They murder non combatant foreigners as payback for bombing raids. If we or any of the alliance ever have troops on the ground they too will be murdered in a barbaric manner if captured.

 

Rules and conventions are only any good when adhered to by both protagonists and that's not going to happen so abandon all the rules, at least western troops are not going to go on a mass murder trip, and hopefully neither will the Arab alliance.

 

The question is do we want to beat ISIS into oblivion never to be a problem again (won't happen) or live our lives knowing that these savages will reappear and perhaps in our own countries (chances are it will happen). The UK have had 7/7 the US have had 9/11 what next and when ?

And my question is, who should the west install as an all inclusive leader once ISIS is beaten into oblivion?

[overandunder2012]

im surprised nobody seems to think nuking it would be a good idea after all it would be cheaper and well the japanese havent been back