This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
isis
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
jamiemartin721  Reading 21 Aug 14 10.51pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote hellodah at 21 Aug 2014 7.27pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 21 Aug 2014 6.24pm
Quote hellodah at 21 Aug 2014 5.28pm
Cue posts from the Comrades telling us they are isolated incidents etc, etc ... 'high-spirited' kids etc - how having someone murdered in the street or blown up now and again is worth the tremendous benefits of having 'diversity'. Cue right wing reactionary knee jerk tar brushing. Comrade Martin right on cue with weasel words that criticism of Islamic extremism is 'tar brushing'. It is when you imply that its applicable to all Muslims. I'm wondering when the guy I work for will decide to go Hezbollah on the MOD site.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| jamiemartin721 Reading 21 Aug 14 10.55pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote elgrande at 21 Aug 2014 7.48pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 21 Aug 2014 6.33pm
Quote legaleagle at 20 Aug 2014 7.52pm
Quote ASCPFC at 20 Aug 2014 5.09pm
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 20 Aug 2014 4.57pm
Quote ASCPFC at 20 Aug 2014 4.46pm
I'm surprised by all the calls to wipe them out. I would ask exactly who would you wipe out? People in these situations, when confronted by a force with overwhelming firepower, simply fade away and are driven underground. They begin using guerilla tactics and organising and funding themselves as an Islamic terrorist organisation. Before you know it the problem has spread worldwide to every city/airport/train station/school/university - you get the picture.
Where would you put this state? What country should give up their teritory to house these animals? Maybe somewhere with international jurisdiction like the Antartic? Yes a lot of these people would melt away but as with Pol Pot (to a degree), once the fear of them is removed, the people will rise against anyone who tries to disappear. You cannot be rational with these people. That is why we are always destined to lose unless we do something more drastic.
Not really, a huge force would be necessary to get them to the negotiating table. Why else would they bother? They are pretty much doing what they want at present bar the odd air-strike. As for where would the state be, the obvious answer is more-or-less where it is already. I don't really like the idea of some radical Islamic state but if so many people seem to be attracted to it then who are we to stop them? Inevitably there will just be an escalation of the conflict until some solution is found.
The major difference with Vietnam,Afghanistan,Korea etc is that they were essentially national liberation movements.Here,the underlying ideology is not nationalist but a multinational religious one.So,whether any binding "deal"could be cut (if one gets over whether that's a good idea or not) is,in my view,unlikely. The mere fact of "diplomatic" semi-recognition would give the underlying ideology incredible legitimacy (and support) all over the place... In terms of "sealing off" the territory they already have,do we just,as a part,leave any shia, christians,apostates still located there etc to their grisly fate? ISIS are more or less a 'national liberation movement', albeit one about the establishment of a Muslim Caliphate, their focus is primarily on the region of the Sunni North of Iraq and Eastern Syria. Which is a real problem, because they have a long term goal and achievable strategy, where as Al-Queda were purely 'terrorists' striking at the West, ISIS could quite conceivably establish themselves. They're also a lot more attractive to jyhadists for that reason - as they're representing something real to fight for. Their successes are also appealing to a number of less Islamic militants, such as Baathists and more nationalist insurgents in that Iraqi region, as they have a realistic hope of success. Especially with the prospect of Shia militants Those insurgents are fairly well established, know the area very well. Yes Jamie you might be right,but give a couple of years living under their strict muslim laws,they will soon miss all their little western toys. I suspect that when the dust settles that the area will divide up with ISIS in Syrian parts, and the Sunni nationalists claiming the Iraqi parts. Both factions have a mutual interest in each other prosperity. Likely as not the old Baathists will hold sway over the Iraqi areas, and it'll serve ISIS interest to have a buffer zone that protects their primary holdings of interest in Syria (the Oil fields they seized).
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Y Ddraig Goch  In The Crowd 22 Aug 14 8.47am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 21 Aug 2014 6.33pm
Quote legaleagle at 20 Aug 2014 7.52pm
Quote ASCPFC at 20 Aug 2014 5.09pm
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 20 Aug 2014 4.57pm
Quote ASCPFC at 20 Aug 2014 4.46pm
I'm surprised by all the calls to wipe them out. I would ask exactly who would you wipe out? People in these situations, when confronted by a force with overwhelming firepower, simply fade away and are driven underground. They begin using guerilla tactics and organising and funding themselves as an Islamic terrorist organisation. Before you know it the problem has spread worldwide to every city/airport/train station/school/university - you get the picture.
Where would you put this state? What country should give up their teritory to house these animals? Maybe somewhere with international jurisdiction like the Antartic? Yes a lot of these people would melt away but as with Pol Pot (to a degree), once the fear of them is removed, the people will rise against anyone who tries to disappear. You cannot be rational with these people. That is why we are always destined to lose unless we do something more drastic.
Not really, a huge force would be necessary to get them to the negotiating table. Why else would they bother? They are pretty much doing what they want at present bar the odd air-strike. As for where would the state be, the obvious answer is more-or-less where it is already. I don't really like the idea of some radical Islamic state but if so many people seem to be attracted to it then who are we to stop them? Inevitably there will just be an escalation of the conflict until some solution is found.
The major difference with Vietnam,Afghanistan,Korea etc is that they were essentially national liberation movements.Here,the underlying ideology is not nationalist but a multinational religious one.So,whether any binding "deal"could be cut (if one gets over whether that's a good idea or not) is,in my view,unlikely. The mere fact of "diplomatic" semi-recognition would give the underlying ideology incredible legitimacy (and support) all over the place... In terms of "sealing off" the territory they already have,do we just,as a part,leave any shia, christians,apostates still located there etc to their grisly fate? ISIS are more or less a 'national liberation movement', albeit one about the establishment of a Muslim Caliphate, their focus is primarily on the region of the Sunni North of Iraq and Eastern Syria. Their successes are also appealing to a number of less Islamic militants, such as Baathists and more nationalist insurgents in that Iraqi region, as they have a realistic hope of success. Especially with the prospect of Shia militants Those insurgents are fairly well established, know the area very well.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
redandblue4life  Auckland city ! 22 Aug 14 8.52am |
|
|---|---|
|
It's time we acted we should be there helping destroy these evil basterds killing innocent women and children every day ! Get into them and f*** em up I say !
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 22 Aug 14 9.07am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote redandblue4life at 22 Aug 2014 8.52am
It's time we acted we should be there helping destroy these evil basterds killing innocent women and children every day ! Get into them and f*** em up I say ! i am inclined to agree, politically though i can't see it happening. It would likely cost the conservatives the next election, and without US troop numbers its high risk, ISIS will switch to guerrilla warfare tactics and militarily we lack sufficent troops to pacify the area sufficiently to prevent them operating. Reliance on the Iraqi army to do that is questionable. Probably the best. The insurgent groups in that area will be happy to just hit targets and rack up casulties untill its politically untenable to stay there. the best we can do is provide assistance to the Iraqi military provide air support and special ops support
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 22 Aug 14 9.16am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 22 Aug 2014 8.47am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 21 Aug 2014 6.33pm
Quote legaleagle at 20 Aug 2014 7.52pm
Quote ASCPFC at 20 Aug 2014 5.09pm
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 20 Aug 2014 4.57pm
Quote ASCPFC at 20 Aug 2014 4.46pm
I'm surprised by all the calls to wipe them out. I would ask exactly who would you wipe out? People in these situations, when confronted by a force with overwhelming firepower, simply fade away and are driven underground. They begin using guerilla tactics and organising and funding themselves as an Islamic terrorist organisation. Before you know it the problem has spread worldwide to every city/airport/train station/school/university - you get the picture.
Where would you put this state? What country should give up their teritory to house these animals? Maybe somewhere with international jurisdiction like the Antartic? Yes a lot of these people would melt away but as with Pol Pot (to a degree), once the fear of them is removed, the people will rise against anyone who tries to disappear. You cannot be rational with these people. That is why we are always destined to lose unless we do something more drastic.
Not really, a huge force would be necessary to get them to the negotiating table. Why else would they bother? They are pretty much doing what they want at present bar the odd air-strike. As for where would the state be, the obvious answer is more-or-less where it is already. I don't really like the idea of some radical Islamic state but if so many people seem to be attracted to it then who are we to stop them? Inevitably there will just be an escalation of the conflict until some solution is found.
The major difference with Vietnam,Afghanistan,Korea etc is that they were essentially national liberation movements.Here,the underlying ideology is not nationalist but a multinational religious one.So,whether any binding "deal"could be cut (if one gets over whether that's a good idea or not) is,in my view,unlikely. The mere fact of "diplomatic" semi-recognition would give the underlying ideology incredible legitimacy (and support) all over the place... In terms of "sealing off" the territory they already have,do we just,as a part,leave any shia, christians,apostates still located there etc to their grisly fate? ISIS are more or less a 'national liberation movement', albeit one about the establishment of a Muslim Caliphate, their focus is primarily on the region of the Sunni North of Iraq and Eastern Syria. Their successes are also appealing to a number of less Islamic militants, such as Baathists and more nationalist insurgents in that Iraqi region, as they have a realistic hope of success. Especially with the prospect of Shia militants Those insurgents are fairly well established, know the area very well.
ISIS aren't really a terrorist group, not primarily. They use terror certainly and the tactics, but they are focused on real world gains and establishing territory and holding it. As such theyre much more a threat to the area, and much more attractive to radicalised young Muslims than al-qaeda and its spectacle driven suicide attacks ever were. Isis are a real threat in that they're also successful. That. Means they're attracting recruits and sponsors.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Ouzo Dan  Behind you 22 Aug 14 9.36am |
|
|---|---|
|
The IS have eyes on Turkey, they wont stop until everyone obeys their version of Islam. Thank f*** Saddam actually did as he was told and disposed of those chemical weapons. Edited by Ouzo Dan (22 Aug 2014 9.39am)
The mountains are calling & I must go. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Y Ddraig Goch In The Crowd 22 Aug 14 10.13am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Aug 2014 9.16am
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 22 Aug 2014 8.47am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 21 Aug 2014 6.33pm
Quote legaleagle at 20 Aug 2014 7.52pm
Quote ASCPFC at 20 Aug 2014 5.09pm
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 20 Aug 2014 4.57pm
Quote ASCPFC at 20 Aug 2014 4.46pm
I'm surprised by all the calls to wipe them out. I would ask exactly who would you wipe out? People in these situations, when confronted by a force with overwhelming firepower, simply fade away and are driven underground. They begin using guerilla tactics and organising and funding themselves as an Islamic terrorist organisation. Before you know it the problem has spread worldwide to every city/airport/train station/school/university - you get the picture.
Where would you put this state? What country should give up their teritory to house these animals? Maybe somewhere with international jurisdiction like the Antartic? Yes a lot of these people would melt away but as with Pol Pot (to a degree), once the fear of them is removed, the people will rise against anyone who tries to disappear. You cannot be rational with these people. That is why we are always destined to lose unless we do something more drastic.
Not really, a huge force would be necessary to get them to the negotiating table. Why else would they bother? They are pretty much doing what they want at present bar the odd air-strike. As for where would the state be, the obvious answer is more-or-less where it is already. I don't really like the idea of some radical Islamic state but if so many people seem to be attracted to it then who are we to stop them? Inevitably there will just be an escalation of the conflict until some solution is found.
The major difference with Vietnam,Afghanistan,Korea etc is that they were essentially national liberation movements.Here,the underlying ideology is not nationalist but a multinational religious one.So,whether any binding "deal"could be cut (if one gets over whether that's a good idea or not) is,in my view,unlikely. The mere fact of "diplomatic" semi-recognition would give the underlying ideology incredible legitimacy (and support) all over the place... In terms of "sealing off" the territory they already have,do we just,as a part,leave any shia, christians,apostates still located there etc to their grisly fate? ISIS are more or less a 'national liberation movement', albeit one about the establishment of a Muslim Caliphate, their focus is primarily on the region of the Sunni North of Iraq and Eastern Syria. Their successes are also appealing to a number of less Islamic militants, such as Baathists and more nationalist insurgents in that Iraqi region, as they have a realistic hope of success. Especially with the prospect of Shia militants Those insurgents are fairly well established, know the area very well.
ISIS aren't really a terrorist group, not primarily. They use terror certainly and the tactics, but they are focused on real world gains and establishing territory and holding it. As such theyre much more a threat to the area, and much more attractive to radicalised young Muslims than al-qaeda and its spectacle driven suicide attacks ever were. Isis are a real threat in that they're also successful. That. Means they're attracting recruits and sponsors. That's only their short term goal. Their long term aim is much more far reaching. Power & religious extremism is a dangerous cocktail.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 22 Aug 14 10.15am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Ouzo Dan at 22 Aug 2014 9.36am
The IS have eyes on Turkey, they wont stop until everyone obeys their version of Islam. Thank f*** Saddam actually did as he was told and disposed of those chemical weapons. Edited by Ouzo Dan (22 Aug 2014 9.39am) indeed, though if he had remained in power i doubt Isis would exist. Iraq would have acted to prevent Syrian rebel supply from Iraq, as that part of Iraq was his powerbase. The Sunni Iraq insurgency was piviotal in the Syrian rebel forces logistics
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Ouzo Dan Behind you 22 Aug 14 2.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Aug 2014 10.15am
Quote Ouzo Dan at 22 Aug 2014 9.36am
The IS have eyes on Turkey, they wont stop until everyone obeys their version of Islam. Thank f*** Saddam actually did as he was told and disposed of those chemical weapons. Edited by Ouzo Dan (22 Aug 2014 9.39am) indeed, though if he had remained in power i doubt Isis would exist. Iraq would have acted to prevent Syrian rebel supply from Iraq, as that part of Iraq was his powerbase. The Sunni Iraq insurgency was piviotal in the Syrian rebel forces logistics Agreed Jamie, The power vacuum that has been left by George's coalition of the willing is what is responsible for all this mess. It doesnt help that we are arming IS in Syria yet bombing them in Iraq....
The mountains are calling & I must go. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
ASCPFC  Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 22 Aug 14 3.33pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Ouzo Dan at 22 Aug 2014 2.50pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Aug 2014 10.15am
Quote Ouzo Dan at 22 Aug 2014 9.36am
The IS have eyes on Turkey, they wont stop until everyone obeys their version of Islam. Thank f*** Saddam actually did as he was told and disposed of those chemical weapons. Edited by Ouzo Dan (22 Aug 2014 9.39am) indeed, though if he had remained in power i doubt Isis would exist. Iraq would have acted to prevent Syrian rebel supply from Iraq, as that part of Iraq was his powerbase. The Sunni Iraq insurgency was piviotal in the Syrian rebel forces logistics Agreed Jamie, The power vacuum that has been left by George's coalition of the willing is what is responsible for all this mess. It doesnt help that we are arming IS in Syria yet bombing them in Iraq.... That does help our arms sales though - in several ways.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 22 Aug 14 6.28pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 22 Aug 2014 10.13am
That's only their short term goal. Their long term aim is much more far reaching. Power & religious extremism is a dangerous cocktail. It'll take them a good ten years to secure, of course they're likely to then look at the rest of Iraq. I can't see them going for Turkey and provoking NATO, but Kuwait, Jordon etc would probably be next (although if they went for the rest of Iraqi, Iran would be dragged into it). Saudi, are probably too powerful for ISIS (and ideologically on similar pages) and I doubt they have the capacity to take on Iran.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.