Paris

[murray street]

soldiers are subject to the rule of law, just like anyone else. Failing to bring to book those who cross a line will only give more creedence to the terrorist causes.

You are really advocating that we forsake all accountability surrounding military activity, in effect, declaring Martial Law in someone else's land. You are really saying that Putin got it right when he had his former spy executed and we should do the same.

This is a covert war they hit us we hit them. France are part of NATO, SAS are in NATO, so they can and will hit them hard.

[Reynard]

Support for bombing in Syria is 58%, those against 22%

YouGov, this morning.

[Reynard]

In addition to the weapons left behind the US also disbanded the Iraqi army. Most of the high-ranking Baathists who had been loyal to Saddam found themselves out of work and power in a country where US left a vacuum.

It's not a surprise to find them organising in IS now.

America, Saudi & Turkey all had a role in bankrolling and training IS from its early incarnation through to now.

IS now control a large %age of oil being extracted in Libya, Syria and Iraq. Turkey buys oil from IS, apparently via the assistance of Iraqi kurd middlemen. The kurds are the only group having success on the ground against IS, despite being bombed by the Turks. Saudi and US are happy to have the market flooded with this oil as it damages the Russian economy.

We now have France bombing Raqqa at the same time as US announces $ billion of sales in bombs to Saudi.

US and Saudi continue to bomb Yemen.

Amongst all this our mainstream media continues to build the case for war. Shares in arms companies surge, along with the oil price.

It's time to waken up guys.

With oil at $40 a barrel? thats not a surge. There's an absolutely glut of oil around just now, hence the price. Basic supply and demand issues.

[PCCABE]

Support for bombing in Syria is 58%, those against 22%

YouGov, this morning.

What will it solve?

What did it solve with the illegal invasion of Iraq?

[murray street]

French Special Forces went in hard this morning

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34853657

Well done and good luck to them, these animals

were involved in killing 129 innocent Parisians,

more power to all European Special Forces,

target these cùnts and hit them hard and often.

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

French Special Forces went in hard this morning

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34853657

Well done and good luck to them, these animals

were involved in killing 129 innocent Parisians,

more power to all European Special Forces,

target these cùnts and hit them hard and often.

One can only imagine had these 8 IS members went on the rampage today in Paris again.

Makes you wonder where is next on the list. Germany has also made arrests while Holland and the UK are targets according to IS from CNN.

[beyond our ken]

With oil at $40 a barrel? thats not a surge. There's an absolutely glut of oil around just now, hence the price. Basic supply and demand issues.

You missed the point, you really missed the point!

He is PREDICTING an oil price surge

[beyond our ken]

My own opinion is you can not come to some kind of peace agreement with a fascist , that's what they really are a fascist group who are in Egypt , Libya ,, Gulf states , Nigeria , Afghanistan and now they want to expand into far east Muslim countries.

They need to be eradicated and banned from every country in the world.

Countries in the middle east need to come together to form a coalition to put a coordinated united army into Syria. To stop the rest you first have to take away the leaders.

This is also a Muslim Problem that should be sorted by Muslims backed with arms from the west.

Easy option, label all your "enemies" to be fascists and then you can cover a multitude of sins as you deal with them- tehy are fascists so you don't have to follow the normal rules of conflict resolution, eh?. That is lazy, unproductive thinking and it appeals to the lowest common denominator.

Can you provide proof of the fascist agenda of these disparate groups under whatever umbrella they currently claim to be under?

[murray street]

Basically that it look at countries who have not been involved in the middle east none of them have problems.

However until the fascist IS is dealt with nothing will change.

One of the female terrorists blew herself up in her own flat, so she was prevented from doing so in a public place.

I work in the City of London and on Tuesday morning everyone got an email including a statement which came from the Commissioner of City of London Police as a wee reminder for everyone to be on their guard.

Edited November 18, 2015 by murray street

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

Easy option, label all your "enemies" to be fascists and then you can cover a multitude of sins as you deal with them- tehy are fascists so you don't have to follow the normal rules of conflict resolution, eh?. That is lazy, unproductive thinking and it appeals to the lowest common denominator.

Can you provide proof of the fascist agenda of these disparate groups under whatever umbrella they currently claim to be underW

What would you call IS - idealists

[Seaside Nipper]

soldiers are subject to the rule of law, just like anyone else. Failing to bring to book those who cross a line will only give more creedence to the terrorist causes.

You are really advocating that we forsake all accountability surrounding military activity, in effect, declaring Martial Law in someone else's land. You are really saying that Putin got it right when he had his former spy executed and we should do the same.

I'm suggesting specifically that in a theatre of war, during exchanges of lethal intent between opposite forces / targets, it is quid pro quo, so you f**k it into us, well f**k it back at you. I have no problem with this battlefield approach. I have a problem with retrospective attempts at convicting soldiers after an engagement in theatre, its so twisted and frankly undermines soldiers on active service in hot spots.

Leave it to the Officers to issue rules of engagement, they do in any case. Military discipline is in place, leave it there. When the bullets are fizzing at your noggin, you are beyond martial law.

I don’t care how an ISIS fighter gets slotted, why should anyone here, but by heck do they just. Same in Afghanistan, why shed a tear over a Taliban fighter who tried to eradicate you from the planet.

I am not for one minute interested in plutonium poisoning or toxic umbrella tips, leave that to the Spooks, but btw of course that goes on irrespective, and the Brits are very good at.

[Sonny]

An ex-US marine's viewpoint .....

http://educateinspirechange.org/alternative-news/ex-us-marine-ken-okeefe-has-something-shocking-to-say-about-isis-following-the-paris-attacks/

Edited November 18, 2015 by Sonny

[Lord Pityme]

I'm suggesting specifically that in a theatre of war, during exchanges of lethal intent between opposite forces / targets, it is quid pro quo, so you f**k it into us, well f**k it back at you. I have no problem with this battlefield approach. I have a problem with retrospective attempts at convicting soldiers after an engagement in theatre, its so twisted and frankly undermines soldiers on active service in hot spots.[/size]

Leave it to the Officers to issue rules of engagement, they do in any case. Military discipline is in place, leave it there. When the bullets are fizzing at your noggin, you are beyond martial law. [/size]

I don’t care how an ISIS fighter gets slotted, why should anyone here, but by heck do they just. Same in Afghanistan, why shed a tear over a Taliban fighter who tried to eradicate you from the planet. [/size]

[/size]

I am not for one minute interested in plutonium poisoning or toxic umbrella tips, leave that to the Spooks, but btw of course that goes on irrespective, and the Brits are very good at.[/size]

You have a marine who after a conversation with his section executed an injured taliban fighter, who was now helpless posing no more Threat. I guess you believe should have faced no action?

On my visit to the Falklands many moons ago I was struck with revulsion at coming across the wreckage of a british Army helicopter that was shot down, to subsequently hear that the occupants who bailed out into the sea were machine gunned dead by Argentinian soldiers as they tried to avoid drowning.

Every soldier is taught to desist lethal force when it is no longer required, if they don't, and the authorities do not deal with people like the marine sgt, how does that make us different to "them"?

[Lord Pityme]

Support for bombing in Syria is 58%, those against 22%

YouGov, this morning.

What part of Syria are they going to bomb to hit these terrorists who were born and bred in Paris or Brussels?

[beyond our ken]

What would you call IS - idealists

Zealots, bigots, psycopaths and the criminally misguided are just some of the terms that could be used for some of the individuals. Many will be idealists, though their ideals may be questionable.

But how do you identify "IS" or "ISIS"? are they a cohesive group or an umbrella that pulls together all sorts of people, just like al quaeda? Some of them will be doing no more than following tribal loyalty, others will be pursuing an ideal and others will be there just for the killing. Did we execute every German after the 39-45 conflict? Did we even banish national socialism?

It is folly to think of ISIS as a single entity, our governments want us to as it makes it easier to pursue their chosen course of action/in-action. Defeating "ISIS" is not as easy as just killing people or taking out their command & control systems. These people will simply re-group and follow another leader holding another banner, who will undoubtedly be helped by the same people who have brought the thing they call ISIS to prominence.

If this conflict escalates then there is no way we can win, it is going to get very, very messy. The west has got into a mug's game

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

What part of Syria are they going to bomb to hit these terrorists who were born and bred in Paris or Brussels?

The Jihadi John walked out of IS headquarters into a 4 x 4 before a bomb slammed into this 4 x 4.

That would suggest there is intelligence ether watching from close range or infiltrated IS.

LP seriously as things stand today what would you do with IS , drop food parcels.

We all know why this has kicked off it is fully understood. What do you want the west to do now just let the Jennie out the bottle and let them blow up , machine gun down innocent Europeans who nether wanted a war or made decisions on war or voted for war.

We are where we are today which needs fixed.

Once you deal with IS then the minsters of words can sit down till the cows come home and discuss why this all came about to stop it happening in the future. However I would not hold my breath on anything changing.

[beyond our ken]

I'm suggesting specifically that in a theatre of war, during exchanges of lethal intent between opposite forces / targets, it is quid pro quo, so you f**k it into us, well f**k it back at you. I have no problem with this battlefield approach. I have a problem with retrospective attempts at convicting soldiers after an engagement in theatre, its so twisted and frankly undermines soldiers on active service in hot spots.

Leave it to the Officers to issue rules of engagement, they do in any case. Military discipline is in place, leave it there. When the bullets are fizzing at your noggin, you are beyond martial law.

I don’t care how an ISIS fighter gets slotted, why should anyone here, but by heck do they just. Same in Afghanistan, why shed a tear over a Taliban fighter who tried to eradicate you from the planet.

I am not for one minute interested in plutonium poisoning or toxic umbrella tips, leave that to the Spooks, but btw of course that goes on irrespective, and the Brits are very good at.

Soldiers should realise when they sign up that in the modern world, their actions in the filed need to be analysed and accountability maintained. Who said anything about caring how anyone gets "slotted" as you put it? Who asked anyone to cry over taliban?

Saying there should never be accountability over a serviceman's action in the field is dangerous. We want all of them to take care of themselves and do the needful, but no more than that. If they go beyond what is justifiable under the objective then it at least needs to be analysed.

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

Zealots, bigots, psycopaths and the criminally misguided are just some of the terms that could be used for some of the individuals. Many will be idealists, though their ideals may be questionable.

But how do you identify "IS" or "ISIS"? are they a cohesive group or an umbrella that pulls together all sorts of people, just like al quaeda? Some of them will be doing no more than following tribal loyalty, others will be pursuing an ideal and others will be there just for the killing. Did we execute every German after the 39-45 conflict? Did we even banish national socialism?

It is folly to think of ISIS as a single entity, our governments want us to as it makes it easier to pursue their chosen course of action/in-action. Defeating "ISIS" is not as easy as just killing people or taking out their command & control systems. These people will simply re-group and follow another leader holding another banner, who will undoubtedly be helped by the same people who have brought the thing they call ISIS to prominence.

If this conflict escalates then there is no way we can win, it is going to get very, very messy. The west has got into a mug's game

Which takes us to the root of the problem American foreign Policy and the puppet governments who follow their lead.

That really needs sorted but until then nothing can be done to stop what is going on right now with ISIS. I'm no right winger the need to sort out ISIS is a priority. You may not like that but it will prove to be the case which I agree with.

Edited November 18, 2015 by Isle Of Bute Saint

[Seaside Nipper]

Soldiers should realise when they sign up that in the modern world, their actions in the filed need to be analysed and accountability maintained. Who said anything about caring how anyone gets "slotted" as you put it? Who asked anyone to cry over taliban?

Saying there should never be accountability over a serviceman's action in the field is dangerous. We want all of them to take care of themselves and do the needful, but no more than that. If they go beyond what is justifiable under the objective then it at least needs to be analysed.

That's fine , analyse away. The armed services themselves do any of that and more routinely , its if you like, a review, to learn and seek continual improvement, we all do that or should in our lives in any regard. However in a theatre of war, action deemed appropriate happens all the time............it is not imo for civilians to retrospectively look to criminalise their actions post conflict.

As you say "take care of themselves", and "do the needful"...............you said it , I agree.

[oaksoft]

Einstein once said that the definition of madness was doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

We know bombing doesn't work.

We know it causes civilian deaths.

We know it means that when the land war ends we can't win the peace because we've lost the trust of the locals which leads us back to war again.

We know it enflames moderates to the extremist cause.

We know that increases the likelihood of terrorist attacks in our own country.

We know that when we assassinate one leader, 5 other spring up buoyed by the challenge to make a name for themselves.

We know that every new leader in that situation becomes more and more extreme than the last.

We are almost pining for the good old days of just having Al Qaeda to worry about.

In short, we have decades of experience which tells us that this always makes things exponentially worse in the long term.

We know all of this.

And yet we continue to respond in this way.

Can anyone explain this herd-like behaviour to me because I'm simply not getting it?

[Reynard]

Zealots, bigots, psycopaths and the criminally misguided are just some of the terms that could be used for some of the individuals. Many will be idealists, though their ideals may be questionable.

But how do you identify "IS" or "ISIS"? are they a cohesive group or an umbrella that pulls together all sorts of people, just like al quaeda? Some of them will be doing no more than following tribal loyalty, others will be pursuing an ideal and others will be there just for the killing. Did we execute every German after the 39-45 conflict? Did we even banish national socialism?

It is folly to think of ISIS as a single entity, our governments want us to as it makes it easier to pursue their chosen course of action/in-action. Defeating "ISIS" is not as easy as just killing people or taking out their command & control systems. These people will simply re-group and follow another leader holding another banner, who will undoubtedly be helped by the same people who have brought the thing they call ISIS to prominence.

If this conflict escalates then there is no way we can win, it is going to get very, very messy. The west has got into a mug's game

http://news.sky.com/story/1589546/boko-haram-militants-kill-32-in-suicide-attack

We have boko haram attempting to set up a caliphate in Africa too.

[Reynard]

Einstein once said that the definition of madness was doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

We know bombing doesn't work.

We know it causes civilian deaths.

We know it means that when the land war ends we can't win the peace because we've lost the trust of the locals which leads us back to war again.

We know it enflames moderates to the extremist cause.

We know that increases the likelihood of terrorist attacks in our own country.

We know that when we assassinate one leader, 5 other spring up buoyed by the challenge to make a name for themselves.

We know that every new leader in that situation becomes more and more extreme than the last.

We are almost pining for the good old days of just having Al Qaeda to worry about.

In short, we have decades of experience which tells us that this always makes things exponentially worse in the long term.

We know all of this.

And yet we continue to respond in this way.

Can anyone explain this herd-like behaviour to me because I'm simply not getting it?

Let them set up their caliphate then? Thats the alternative I guess. And theyll draw in radicalised muslims from all over the place and look to expand. Their aim is to reintroduce the original caliphate that took in the entire middle east and most of what is now Afghanistan and and Iran, north Africa, and Spain and Portugal. At what point do you resist their efforts?

[Reynard]

You missed the point, you really missed the point!

He is PREDICTING an oil price surge

None of the oil futures boys are.

I'm sure he knows better though.

Theres currently a massive oversupply and thats going to continue regardless. Thats why the price is depressed and will stay that way until demand for oil outstrips supply. And thats not going to happen for a long time if at all. We've got more oil than we can use

[oaksoft]

Let them set up their caliphate then? Thats the alternative I guess. And theyll draw in radicalised muslims from all over the place and look to expand. Their aim is to reintroduce the original caliphate that took in the entire middle east and most of what is now Afghanistan and and Iran, north Africa, and Spain and Portugal. At what point do you resist their efforts?

The nub of your argument then appears to be the following:-

We need to do something.

Bombing is something.

Therefore let's do that.

It is intellectual bankruptcy.

[oaksoft]

Let them set up their caliphate then? Thats the alternative I guess. And theyll draw in radicalised muslims from all over the place and look to expand. Their aim is to reintroduce the original caliphate that took in the entire middle east and most of what is now Afghanistan and and Iran, north Africa, and Spain and Portugal. At what point do you resist their efforts?

Whilst you are at it, you can perhaps come up with a reasoned answer to the following rather obvious question:-

Where were all the suicide bombers before the 1970s?

There were certainly radicalised muslims and I'm certain they didn't just invent the idea of a caliphate.

So why have the suicide bombers and the plane bombers only been around since the 70s?