Always find it amusing how the left are prepared to let innocent people die and get slaughtered overseas.
Not all.
For what it's worth I think tone is right in sending troops to help rid the region of those scum bags, the only problem I have is that more countries aren't joining in. A concerted effort in the region might just get through to these farking barbarians that what they're doing wont be tolerated.
Left and right, black and white.
Deja vu all over again.
No long-term plan, no idea of what we intend the place to look like after we're finished, no attempt to consider the unintended consequences of our actions, no finish date, no oversight or parliamentary debate worth the name. We're bombing because there are bad people and we have bombs and 'someone needs to do something'.
We will succeed in breaking up ISIS/ISIL, make no mistake - and then in a couple of years something basically identical will spring up, because you can't bomb an ideology out of existence and because all the thousands of people who've lost family or homes in our latest bombing campaign will be easy targets for radicalisation. Just like last time.
I don't claim to know what the right way of handling this is, but I sure as **** know that repeating every step of the same old plan that has miserably failed in both Iraq and Afghanistan over the past 15 years very ******* likely ain't it.
If you want to avert a very serious imminent danger to life which has the potential to become a catastrophe on a global scale, you'd be paying far less attention to ISIS and far more attention to Ebola. ISIS is just Middle-Easter scumbags being Middle-Eastern scumbags just like Middle Eastern scumbags have done for decades. If they ever looked likely to become a REAL global threat, Australia wouldn't have to do anything about it cos Turkey or Saudi Arabia who have a lot more to lose, would stomp them. The Ebola thing is starting to look very scary indeed - shows no sign of slowing down, has already killed something like 25% of the entire medical staff of some countries, is bound to get into the slums of the big cities sometime soon at which time infection rates and fatalities will skyrocket, and every person who gets it is a living vessel for viral mutation and increases the odds that the virus will finally evolve the ability to infect via aerosol while retaining its lethality, which is the doomsday scenario everyone's dreaded since the Reston outbreak.
Yet we're spending hundreds of millions of $ on bombing a handful of scumbags in the middle east, while international aid towards handling the the Ebola epidemic is still something like 80% from volunteers and charitable donations ffs. I know which international crisis I'm most afraid of, and it isn't rappers cutting the heads off journalists.
yep that ebola stuff is scary.
Not all.
Always find it amusing how the left are prepared to let innocent people die and get slaughtered overseas.
For what it's worth I think tone is right in sending troops to help rid the region of those scum bags, the only problem I have is that more countries aren't joining in. A concerted effort in the region might just get through to these farking barbarians that what they're doing wont be tolerated.
Deja vu all over again.
No long-term plan, no idea of what we intend the place to look like after we're finished, no attempt to consider the unintended consequences of our actions, no finish date, no oversight or parliamentary debate worth the name. We're bombing because there are bad people and we have bombs and 'someone needs to do something'.
We will succeed in breaking up ISIS/ISIL, make no mistake - and then in a couple of years something basically identical will spring up, because you can't bomb an ideology out of existence and because all the thousands of people who've lost family or homes in our latest bombing campaign will be easy targets for radicalisation. Just like last time.
I don't claim to know what the right way of handling this is, but I sure as **** know that repeating every step of the same old plan that has miserably failed in both Iraq and Afghanistan over the past 15 years very ******* likely ain't it.
If you want to avert a very serious imminent danger to life which has the potential to become a catastrophe on a global scale, you'd be paying far less attention to ISIS and far more attention to Ebola. ISIS is just Middle-Easter scumbags being Middle-Eastern scumbags just like Middle Eastern scumbags have done for decades. If they ever looked likely to become a REAL global threat, Australia wouldn't have to do anything about it cos Turkey or Saudi Arabia who have a lot more to lose, would stomp them. The Ebola thing is starting to look very scary indeed - shows no sign of slowing down, has already killed something like 25% of the entire medical staff of some countries, is bound to get into the slums of the big cities sometime soon at which time infection rates and fatalities will skyrocket, and every person who gets it is a living vessel for viral mutation and increases the odds that the virus will finally evolve the ability to infect via aerosol while retaining its lethality, which is the doomsday scenario everyone's dreaded since the Reston outbreak.
Yet we're spending hundreds of millions of $ on bombing a handful of scumbags in the middle east, while international aid towards handling the the Ebola epidemic is still something like 80% from volunteers and charitable donations ffs. I know which international crisis I'm most afraid of, and it isn't rappers cutting the heads off journalists.
This is not correct HM. This time we are going in there as support (not troops on ground btw) the existing government, not to remove it and start again. When the West attacked Iraq and Afghanistan they were taking out the current rulers and trying to setup a new one. It was messy and pathetic. This time we are supporting existing governments to stop an internal war faught mainly from people who do not evencome from the country.
It is vastly different. Whether it is right or not is purely up for debate.
Terrorist is a loaded term. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. You cannot argue that point except from a partisan view. Money/capital has instigated the unrest in most of the places around the world. Who knows what kind of place Iraq might have been if the exploiters never ventured there, what, two hundred years ago? The European powers of yesteryear and US now have created un-natural national boundaries all over the place and they seem to be now reaping what they have sown.
Nothing too unnatural about the borders of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon or Libya. Saudi land is a little made up but Arabia did previously exist through that region. Most of those countries have history in the regions they now occupy, same with Turkey.
Nothing un natural if you don't include the Kurds. The point is the traditional powers have grouped natural enemies, for want of a better term, into new countries that would not have eventuated without their meddling.
Terrorist is a loaded term. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. You cannot argue that point except from a partisan view. Money/capital has instigated the unrest in most of the places around the world. Who knows what kind of place Iraq might have been if the exploiters never ventured there, what, two hundred years ago? The European powers of yesteryear and US now have created un-natural national boundaries all over the place and they seem to be now reaping what they have sown.
Nothing too unnatural about the borders of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon or Libya. Saudi land is a little made up but Arabia did previously exist through that region. Most of those countries have history in the regions they now occupy, same with Turkey.
Nothing un natural if you don't include the Kurds. The point is the traditional powers have grouped natural enemies, for want of a better term, into new countries that would not have eventuated without their meddling.
The Kurds have never had a homeland of their own as a country. They were originally the "medo" part from the Medo-Persian Empire. They have always straddled the regions of Turkey, Iraq and Iran and been incorporated into those societies since the times of the Achaemenid Empire. They are essentially a Persian people group but a little more mixed from Mongolian expansionism.
There's a reasonable possibility that, just like the Sept 11 attacks, part of the motivation of ISIS's latest atrocities is to lure the West into exactly this sort of action in order to further radicalise people in the war zone and make it harder for there to be a long-term peaceful understanding between middle-eastern Islam and western ideals.
Only one reason they're targetting Western journoes.
'We' clearly don't care about all the Arab journoes they've killed.
Terrorist is a loaded term. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. You cannot argue that point except from a partisan view. Money/capital has instigated the unrest in most of the places around the world. Who knows what kind of place Iraq might have been if the exploiters never ventured there, what, two hundred years ago? The European powers of yesteryear and US now have created un-natural national boundaries all over the place and they seem to be now reaping what they have sown.
Nothing too unnatural about the borders of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon or Libya. Saudi land is a little made up but Arabia did previously exist through that region. Most of those countries have history in the regions they now occupy, same with Turkey.
Nothing un natural if you don't include the Kurds. The point is the traditional powers have grouped natural enemies, for want of a better term, into new countries that would not have eventuated without their meddling.
The Kurds have never had a homeland of their own as a country. They were originally the "medo" part from the Medo-Persian Empire. They have always straddled the regions of Turkey, Iraq and Iran and been incorporated into those societies since the times of the Achaemenid Empire. They are essentially a Persian people group but a little more mixed from Mongolian expansionism.
So you are saying what, they don't want or deserve a homeland? Perhaps Switzerland should hand itself to Italy, France and Germany. You say 'incorporated', well that is not necessarily benign.
Terrorist is a loaded term. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. You cannot argue that point except from a partisan view. Money/capital has instigated the unrest in most of the places around the world. Who knows what kind of place Iraq might have been if the exploiters never ventured there, what, two hundred years ago? The European powers of yesteryear and US now have created un-natural national boundaries all over the place and they seem to be now reaping what they have sown.
Nothing too unnatural about the borders of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon or Libya. Saudi land is a little made up but Arabia did previously exist through that region. Most of those countries have history in the regions they now occupy, same with Turkey.
Nothing un natural if you don't include the Kurds. The point is the traditional powers have grouped natural enemies, for want of a better term, into new countries that would not have eventuated without their meddling.
The Kurds have never had a homeland of their own as a country. They were originally the "medo" part from the Medo-Persian Empire. They have always straddled the regions of Turkey, Iraq and Iran and been incorporated into those societies since the times of the Achaemenid Empire. They are essentially a Persian people group but a little more mixed from Mongolian expansionism.
So you are saying what, they don't want or deserve a homeland? Perhaps Switzerland should hand itself to Italy, France and Germany. You say 'incorporated', well that is not necessarily benign.
Don't put words into my mouth just because you are frustrated about something over which you have zero control.
Don't put words into my mouth just because you are frustrated about something over which you have zero control.So you are saying what, they don't want or deserve a homeland? Perhaps Switzerland should hand itself to Italy, France and Germany. You say 'incorporated', well that is not necessarily benign.The Kurds have never had a homeland of their own as a country. They were originally the "medo" part from the Medo-Persian Empire. They have always straddled the regions of Turkey, Iraq and Iran and been incorporated into those societies since the times of the Achaemenid Empire. They are essentially a Persian people group but a little more mixed from Mongolian expansionism.Nothing un natural if you don't include the Kurds. The point is the traditional powers have grouped natural enemies, for want of a better term, into new countries that would not have eventuated without their meddling.Nothing too unnatural about the borders of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon or Libya. Saudi land is a little made up but Arabia did previously exist through that region. Most of those countries have history in the regions they now occupy, same with Turkey.Terrorist is a loaded term. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. You cannot argue that point except from a partisan view. Money/capital has instigated the unrest in most of the places around the world. Who knows what kind of place Iraq might have been if the exploiters never ventured there, what, two hundred years ago? The European powers of yesteryear and US now have created un-natural national boundaries all over the place and they seem to be now reaping what they have sown.
I'm in the 'this is not my battle' camp.
yes thats all well and good, but theres no point going in all guns blazing when you dont have an exit stategy and could leave the place in worse shape than it already is.
yes let them kill each other and just sit back and feel superior and do nothing, pretty much the same philosophy that was used by appeasers to Hitler. We are a developed country that knows right from wrong and have a responsibility to save people who are persecuted or about to be massacred. One cannot ignore this and say they are a moral person If it is difficult or if you may lose is no excuse for not doing what should be done.The I.S. showcasing beheading is all about spin and posturing, to achieve the reactions that have happened and are yet to happen. There reasoning is unclear, at least to me, but beheading is normal for that part of the world. The Saudis knock off their criminals and political enemies that way all the time. Dead is dead whether it's from being stabbed to death by a bullet or having your head removed with a sharp knife. People on here who know about killing sheep will also know that the humans killed in this way by the IS would be totally dead within two or at most, three seconds. Anyway, my point is that the head removal focus is not the issue. The issue for me is we should not be getting involved in any way at all, except humanitarian. It has been said that certain politicians in Australia, from both sides of the argument, have blood on their hands from the last stupid foray into the Middle East. Perhaps it's now a case of in for a penny, in for a pound.
I heard that ISIS is very rich.
they have killed a few journalists, we should advise not people not to travel to these places, especially journalists I believe UK and US journalists dead, thats why they are upset.
I think we need to sit tight at the moment.
If the US & British get involved all well and good, we can come in later if need be, but i dont see the need for us to get involved at this stage. It is difficult when you dont know exactly who and what you are fighting.
it must be impossible for troops to know the difference between civilian and enemy over there. And things dont end well when the civillians dont really want you in there country.
America like to fight using their drones/aeroplanes meaning less us casualties and most likely more civilian casualties.
But my problem with being high and mighty and knowing right from wrong...
Why don't we go into the Israel and Gaza war and straighten them out?
Why don't we go into the Ukraine and 'Separatist / Russian' conflict?
Why don't we jump in and help out against the South African extreme group that is kidnapping female kids?
This is what it is...
We are fighting the USA's war.
Its not the USA's war - this organisation is one that every country needs to be wary of.
Hitler and the Nazi's were once a small group and rose to power because nobody did anything. Lets not make the same mistake twice.
We already made it twice. Indeed, we've made it so many times, what's one more?
(yes, I'm being facetious)
As far as I'm aware the Nazis weren't sending off "look at how bad-■■■■ we are" newsreels left right & centre.
As far as I'm aware the Nazis weren't sending off "look at how bad-■■■■ we are" newsreels left right & centre.
I'm not sure how a massively industrialised army is comparable to a large group of rebels either but whatever.
http://www.dancarlin.com//disp.php/csarchive/Show-277—Riding-Chaos-to-Stasis/Iran-Iraq-Sunni
This podcast is from June, so a bit before it escalated like it has, but it’s interesting listening nonetheless. Discussion covers :
-the history of the modern middle east post the ottoman empire.
Ahh the good old days when there was stable government thanks to strong dictatorships in Syria and Iraq.
Now, the populace of these nations is enjoying the fruits of US intervention (both direct and indirect).
Don't put words into my mouth just because you are frustrated about something over which you have zero control.
So you are saying what, they don't want or deserve a homeland? Perhaps Switzerland should hand itself to Italy, France and Germany. You say 'incorporated', well that is not necessarily benign.
The Kurds have never had a homeland of their own as a country. They were originally the "medo" part from the Medo-Persian Empire. They have always straddled the regions of Turkey, Iraq and Iran and been incorporated into those societies since the times of the Achaemenid Empire. They are essentially a Persian people group but a little more mixed from Mongolian expansionism.
Nothing un natural if you don't include the Kurds. The point is the traditional powers have grouped natural enemies, for want of a better term, into new countries that would not have eventuated without their meddling.
Nothing too unnatural about the borders of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon or Libya. Saudi land is a little made up but Arabia did previously exist through that region. Most of those countries have history in the regions they now occupy, same with Turkey.Terrorist is a loaded term. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. You cannot argue that point except from a partisan view. Money/capital has instigated the unrest in most of the places around the world. Who knows what kind of place Iraq might have been if the exploiters never ventured there, what, two hundred years ago? The European powers of yesteryear and US now have created un-natural national boundaries all over the place and they seem to be now reaping what they have sown.
Do you believe then Ice Temple that the Kurds have a right to form Kurdistan?
I don't particularly care whether they do or they don't, it is simply not an issue that has anything to do with me. I cared when they were being slaughtered for certain but that is not the case now, other than what ISIS is currently doing and should be stopped from doing.
BTW "Kurdistan" has never existed.
Terrorist is a loaded term. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. You cannot argue that point except from a partisan view. Money/capital has instigated the unrest in most of the places around the world. Who knows what kind of place Iraq might have been if the exploiters never ventured there, what, two hundred years ago? The European powers of yesteryear and US now have created un-natural national boundaries all over the place and they seem to be now reaping what they have sown.
Nothing too unnatural about the borders of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon or Libya. Saudi land is a little made up but Arabia did previously exist through that region. Most of those countries have history in the regions they now occupy, same with Turkey.
Nothing un natural if you don't include the Kurds. The point is the traditional powers have grouped natural enemies, for want of a better term, into new countries that would not have eventuated without their meddling.
The Kurds have never had a homeland of their own as a country. They were originally the "medo" part from the Medo-Persian Empire. They have always straddled the regions of Turkey, Iraq and Iran and been incorporated into those societies since the times of the Achaemenid Empire. They are essentially a Persian people group but a little more mixed from Mongolian expansionism.
So you are saying what, they don't want or deserve a homeland? Perhaps Switzerland should hand itself to Italy, France and Germany. You say 'incorporated', well that is not necessarily benign.
Don't put words into my mouth just because you are frustrated about something over which you have zero control.
I think, if you look, I am asking a question. Two questions really. What does incorporated mean in the context of the discussion and do they deserve a homeland. Your response is a straw man if ever I saw one.
Personally I just hope we keep sending asylum seekers back there.