Nuke Saudi Arabia.
What's the alternative to bombing ISIS?
- Thread starter Edgar Allan Pillow
- Start date
I'm not sure I know enough about ISIS ideology to comment. There was an article that said their main aim is territory and literally establishing a kingdom starting from the ME and eventually covering everyone, and that forcing them to abandon territory and become like AQ will mean they lose their Caliphate and legitimacy.
I know ISIS was driven out of a few cities in Iraq recently and retaliated with a huge bombing in Baghdad. So that makes sense given the theory. But it also means that to defeat them by taking back control, they will start more and more of these random attacks on Western soil (and probably everywhere else they can get their hands on). And it's also worth considering that many of the recent European jihadis have been killing in allegiance to ISIS without ever being in contact with them. I'm not sure the destruction of their caliphate will deter these people from continuing.
I know ISIS was driven out of a few cities in Iraq recently and retaliated with a huge bombing in Baghdad. So that makes sense given the theory. But it also means that to defeat them by taking back control, they will start more and more of these random attacks on Western soil (and probably everywhere else they can get their hands on). And it's also worth considering that many of the recent European jihadis have been killing in allegiance to ISIS without ever being in contact with them. I'm not sure the destruction of their caliphate will deter these people from continuing.
Our "scorched earth" response to the Boer war was to stick them in concentration camps. Doesnt that kind of response make you uncomfortable?
I dot know but i suspect loads. If the solution is "scortched earth" the. It wont just be strongholds.
Or you support locals with higher stakes than you will ever have, fighting the same type of war against ISIS. Kurds.
Also, wind/solar energy worldwide. The end of all money to Saudi and ISIS. 
Oh God. People seriously suggesting a war.
If they own a handbag, let's find it and leave a collective shit in there. That'll teach em!
You are asking two different questions. You want to fight ISIS in their home in Iraq/Syria and then you want to fight the ideology that is infiltrating the muslim youth in Europe.
On the first question, they are already losing badly. It is easy to see an ISIS that is completely out of Iraq by the end of the year and one that also has no access to the Turkish border, leaving it effectively isolated.
The second question is much more complex. A good start would be instant detention and persecution for anyone who travels to Syria.
On the first question, they are already losing badly. It is easy to see an ISIS that is completely out of Iraq by the end of the year and one that also has no access to the Turkish border, leaving it effectively isolated.
The second question is much more complex. A good start would be instant detention and persecution for anyone who travels to Syria.
You really think the moderate ones are on our side?
He is proposing to do nothing.
A military defeat of Islamic terrorism is impossible. Having left Iraq, if we'd stayed out of the conflict this time round, things would have gone better for us, but worse for the people of the Middle East. So no easy answers. Probably no answers at all.
I do wonder why we haven't been more vigorous in our support of the Kurds though.
I do wonder why we haven't been more vigorous in our support of the Kurds though.
There already is a warOh God. People seriously suggesting a war.
It scares me that people don't realise this.
That was part of the response, yes. Eliminating holdouts the Boers could retreat to, fortifying down to the acre, etc...
To be fair, there's a huge difference between the concentration camps made by the British (which were just internment facilities), and the Nazi concentration camps which were death factories. Again, what other options are there?
TBF what he is saying is true but only beforehand, now that we did it it doesn't work.
Yes. He addressed the cause but never offered a solution.
Because for whatever bollocks geopolitical reason we need a presence in Turkey and actively supporting the Kurds would end our relationship with Turkey.
Well, now that I think about it Raoul might be right, he proposes to do what we did in Cambodia which is nothing. The only problem is that Pol Pot didn't brought the war to us, he kept himself in Cambodia-Vietnam.
Thats because the solution is very complicated and lets face it, very few people are informed enough to actually make it. The video was more about what we can't do rather than what we can do.
Like I said, its an unbelievable complicated and difficult situation. Like Michelle Obama said, 'Somebody who understands that the issues of our nation are not black or white. It cannot be boiled down to 140 characters.'
The thing is, I didn't suggest to do what he said we can't do.
Bombing is a rather silly term the media like to use that conjures up images of indiscriminate carpet bombing from B52s, where more civilians die than do ISIS members.
In terms of ISIS - the first and most important thing is to deny them land to operate in. This degrades their ability to claim they have a state and attract fighters to join them through their propaganda channels, where they can train, plan, and execute attacks elsewhere, including the west. They are currently operating in a failed state mired in a civil war and in another state that lacks the military expertise and capacity to get rid of them. Without any outside intervention, they will continue to indefinitely keep doing what they are doing and we will continue to see these random attacks in the west.
In terms of ISIS - the first and most important thing is to deny them land to operate in. This degrades their ability to claim they have a state and attract fighters to join them through their propaganda channels, where they can train, plan, and execute attacks elsewhere, including the west. They are currently operating in a failed state mired in a civil war and in another state that lacks the military expertise and capacity to get rid of them. Without any outside intervention, they will continue to indefinitely keep doing what they are doing and we will continue to see these random attacks in the west.
You knew what I meant.
Unfortunately, Cenk thinks that what we can't do is a solution, when its merely a recipe to continue the status quo. He doesn't have any insight or expertise to prescribe something that would work because it would contravene the political slant of his show and its viewers.
Agree completely. A military defeat of ISIS is possible, though, and there really is no alternative to that. To put it differently: All viable alternatives have the defeat of ISIS as a prerequisite.
Good summary.
Fecking horrible comment. 'These people'?! Who exactly are 'These people'? Because last I checked those dictators were oppressing millions of perfectly innocent people.
How's this for crazy ?
I was reading about Angola. At one time the situation was : The US was funding guerrillas to oust the government. The US oil companies had oil installations in the country. The Cubans were defending the installations of the Americans, which were being attacked by the guerrillas the US was funding.
I was reading about Angola. At one time the situation was : The US was funding guerrillas to oust the government. The US oil companies had oil installations in the country. The Cubans were defending the installations of the Americans, which were being attacked by the guerrillas the US was funding.
The problem with this is that its happening (all be it on a miniature scale at the moment). ISIS is losing land and held areas. That is one of the major reasons these attacks are becoming more frequent. They know they are losing so they are clinging on to peoples fear by carrying out attacks in the west.
The problem is, how do you take away their land, and yet stop these attacks. I'm afraid, I don't think thats possible. Your solution is right, but theres a metaphorical hill we have to climb until we get to the other side which hopefully is peaceful.
I think I misread your post. I was hoping for you to forget about it
The installation part might be misleading, so I understand. What I mean is that we have the resources to be the muscle and we should provide it, the political part should be dealt by the locals, but we need to help them get rid of ISIS.I'm pretty sure he's referring to ISIS
Then those innocent people should rise up and get those dictators out. Yes, it won't be painful and some, maybe many civilians will die. It's a sacrifice they will have to make.
That's working well in Syria at the moment...
You mean exactly like they did during the Arab Spring which has led to the growth of IS?
The attacks have to be dealt with through collective security and intelligence sharing in the EU and US. There will continue to be one off attacks by unstable people who have nothing to do with ISIS or religion, but are somehow intrigued by the idea of killing people to express their frustrations with life. That's a separate topic from what needs to be done in Iraq and Syria. For example, even if ISIS are expelled from the cities they hold there, they will probably just melt back into fighting as an insurgency with random car and truck bombs, Cafe shootings etc.
Did the Arab Spring have any redeeming qualities? Or did it just create power vacuums filled by worse regimes than before?
It's horrible in the context of what the likes of Saddam did to his people but he did definitely keep them in check. Sadly to keep humans in check you have to be cruel to some to send a message to the rest.
Once we removed Saddam Iraq went to shit because it's hugely divided in tribal, sectarian and religious ways, same with most places in the Middle East. He managed an equilibrium of sorts even if it meant hundreds of thousands of innocent people had to pay the price for it.
Just because we can talk doesn't mean we're not every bit as animalistic as any other creature and control is only enforced by fear of violence/death, we don't respond to anything else.
That would be the next horrible comment from you.
Half of Western diplomacy seems to be devoted to appeasing the Turks. The other half to keeping the Saudis on side. It's a weird and wonderful world.