Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

That's a rather potted history of a complex situation. It's hard to pin "all recent events" on Iraq II or even Afghanistan, when in fact these wars were, as you suggest a response to some overly-religious gentleman flying several jetliners into American buildings. Clearly the hijackers had something more on their mind than "resistance and struggle". It was "jihad" (in the apparently misused Western sense of the word). When the current crop of militants are waving their scimitars around, it's a bit silly to dwell on the semantics.

There was no reason for GWB to attack Iraq and it has certainly exacerbated the problem. What concerns me more is why small groups of fundamentalists in Islam are gaining more power and more mind control. It is not just Israel, and it is not just 20th century Western imperialism, although these have been great recruitment captains. Growing radicalisation and conservatism in Islam seems a great leap backward for the human spirit and frankly I don't understand it.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

As to your last sentence, while I don't understand it either, my thoughts are that they feel inferior and not respected. How their activity gets them more respect is baffling. The truth of the matter is that the only thing they respect in the end is raw power.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

I would say they feel superior and not respected. They must feel their medieval culture is under threat from rampant Western ideals, and iPhones hidden, take arms against us.

I am pleased to see that the British media (most of) has finally stopped propagating images of the beheadings victims in orange jumpsuits, and using decent pre-capture images of the victims.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Good post. Air strikes are a necessary evil, and are an intermediary measure until there is a willingness to undertake a ground invasion or ISIS is sufficiently degraded. It's not logical to say that destroying hard military targets or leadership has no effect. It's a blunt instrument, morally dubious, but it will degrade capability, particularly if economic and financial weapons are also used. I disagree on Afghanistan; the Taliban have been weakened (for now). To the extent that these repressive regimes do not attack the West, a blind eye could be turned. We did that in Iran thirty years ago, and slowly that great civilisation is shedding its experiment with darkness. The difference here is two fold: first, militants make terrorist attacks on us; second, through increased migration the spillover of ideals is inevitable. On this last point, this is why we are seeing a British/Canadian teenagers boarding planes to them to Syria/Iraq. We didn't see that in Afghanistan, nor in Vietnam. It's a necessary conflict, and walking away from it or closing our eyes and thinking it a local political movement is not the right approach.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

The Taliban never attacked the West - no matter what you get from Fox or CNN. The Taliban allowed Al Qaeda to stay in Afghanistan but not to operate in Afghanistan because they considered them a potential threat to their authority. If we hadn't attacked Afghanistan the Taliban might of kicked them out on their own. The Taliban is still in Afghanistan and Pakistan stronger than ever and will no doubt remain a major power in those countries long after the westerners have gone. Al Qaeda is larger, stronger and more widespread than ever now despite their founder being killed and all the 'degrading' the west could throw at them. They will go to fight anywhere the US goes, just like they did in Iraq. 1st Gulf War was because Iraq attacked Kuwait (rightly or wrongly) for slant drilling and stealing their oil, (and Saddam openly supporting terrorism ala Gadhaffi by rewarding families of suicide bombers), 2nd Gulf War was revenge because Saddam tried to kill George Bush's daddy so they used the MWD ruse. There are more suicide attacks and commando style raids against Iraqi and Afghan military and police now than there ever were while Saddam Hussein or the Taliban were in power and both those countries have been so thoroughly de-stabilised there is no end in sight. Each day the news is published outlining what air strikes were carried out the day before and because there are no allied troops in the target areas the results (bomb damage assessment) are reported by aid organisations or international observers so the coalition doesn't get a chance to inflate or fabricate the numbers. Just read the news, ISIS controls towns in the vicinity of Baghdad and the Iraqi army can't keep them out. Iraqi press releases say things like "We have successfully driven ISIS out of 30 towns" but they are back again within days. When the bad guys bring all the SAM missles they've been capturing along the way or trading oil for, or they capture from Iraqi arsenals, the air campaign which hasn't been able to stop their advance so far will become less effective and far more dangerous.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

As to why they fight I suppose jihad is just a perverted misinterpretation of Koran and like you I don't believe it's just indignation over Jews or other infidels being on their land (Bin-Ladin's reason for 9-11). Each nation of the Arab Spring has a segment of population who are fundamentalists and who are repressed, outlawed, marginalised in some way first by the dictators then their moderate fellow revolutionaries so first they have revolution then they have civil war. ISIS militants came from all those countries for the chance of a unified struggle. The attraction to radicalised western youths is probably a chance to be part of founding the Caliphate as a new homeland for fundamentalist Islam, considering Saudi Arabia to be traitors to their faith. Different ideal but same process as western dilettants heading for Spain in 1935.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

The Taliban plunged the country backwards and supported Al-Qaeda. Is it remotely possible that some individuals were members of both the the Taliban and Al-Qaeda? There were ethical grounds to intervene in Afghanistan simply on the Taliban's mistreatment of women, but once they provided facilitated AQ attacks Western action to remove them from power was entirely justified. Not sure why you are making apologies for these repressive regimes. Perhaps you conflate misguided attempts to halt communism with valid attempts to halt religious fundamentalism. Admittedly Iraq muddy the waters considerably, as that was a totally needless war. Literally a GWB and American hawk power grab (as you and Novo contend) but one wrong disproportional war does not disqualify the West from protecting itself and a region from evil forces. Even the Arabs are reluctantly signing up.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Yes. And again, why the lurch of Western educated youth to fundamentalism? One reason (and obviously a minor one at that) is simply youth. A wild idealism andfascinstion with power. Spain, Russia, China, there are parallels to be sure.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

I'm not apologising or trying to justify the Taliban or ISIS, just stating the facts as I know them. The taliban like the mujahadin they grew from don't fight set-piece battles if they can help it; relying on the same ambush and hit and run tactics they used to defeat the Russians. You can't bomb a hard target where no hard target exists. Stinger missiles from the CIA helped with the helicopters and the Russians were poorly supplied and had low morale, captured soldiers would be made addicted to heroin so they didn't even have to be tied up, then occasionaly one would be beheaded for fun or revenge. Mujahadin mistreated their women then and we just let it slide. No big deal when Russia was the enemy, right? The taliban is still in Afghanistan and still attacking government forces regularly, same as before. Some days there are multiple attacks. Some days they kill a few soldiers, some days a dozen. The US installed Karzai because he's a Pashtun like most southerners (and Taliban) plus his warlord relatives seemed valuable allies but now that he's out and denouncing the US louder than ever it isn't going to hurt support for them, at least in the south. Like Jack Webb on Dragnet, "Just the facts, ma'am." If you think mistreatment of women was sufficient reason to invade Afghanistan you aren't going to like what's going to happen in Iraq or Afghanistan or Syria one bit unless someone ponies up a massive army willing to fight a religous war in the immediate future, and by that I mean with the conviction and resources to stay and fight for years and endure thousands of casualties with no guarantee of victory. Take the battle for Ayn-al-Arab as an example, Kurds are unable to call for close air support and (supposedly) lack the heavy weapons to defeat ISIS militants even with good old Death From Above attacking all ISIS positions they can identify for weeks. Iraq steadfastly refuses to let any Arab nation bomb anywhere in Iraq as if they had any sovereignty left anyway so they're placing political currency over military reality - makes it harder to want to go fight for them. Options that don't include a crusade are few and equally distasteful. Western paranoia over a nuclear armed Arab state (or chemically capable) could be basis for the next call to arms, I wouldn't be a bit surprised

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

You definitely know your subject CT, but I'm wondering what your position is at present? Are you willing to let them consolidate power, train international terrorists and inflict minor genocide? I mean, it is happening as we speak and as you construct good arguments about the dangers of taking action. Do you think we should be sitting this one out?

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Hell no, kill them all. My concern is that it's taking too long to start and without that massive army (which doesn't just organise itself out of thin air) they will not be beatable in our lifetime. We all know (or suspect) how convoluted the balance of power was in the Middle East before the Arab Spring revolts and even before the Gulf Wars. The Shah falling, Iran and Iraq war, Saudi prestige a balance to Iran's influence and Israel in the middle like a porcupine, ever ready to defend itself within or without it's borders and hostage to a conservative-heavy government. Now a lot of traditional alliances will be modified or abandoned and new ones made in the face of the current threat. If the Arab states can't get their head out of their ass and form a coalition NATO can't start soon enough.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Good answer.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Caretaker, balanced, intelligent and informed. Thanks for your posts, and I doubt that you need anyone's approval on your perspectives. :)

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

If you doubt it why on earth have you just provided your approval?

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Mostly agree with that, but the main impediment to the West encouraging / permitting a Middle East equivalent to NATO is the Israeli lobby in Washington.

That and of course the fact that some potential (even essential) members of such a body are financing ISIL in the first place.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Screw Israel, we shouldn't be looking to them for a moral compass. (Just my humble opinion)

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Absolutely correct, but try and sell that approach in the US (or Canada for what that matters).

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Here we go, check rt.com/nert.com/news/ws/ lead story Pakistani Taliban Pledge Support For ISIS

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

It could be a case of extraordinary measures for extraordinary times.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Poor, obnoxious Shard, just gutted you don't get the approval you crave right? What a dumb comment.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

You're just annoyed because I point to the holes in your very flimsy arguments or your tedious vacuous quotations.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Are these really extraordinary times? I imagine (in my imagination) that you're even older than me. Can you remember a previous time which wasn't extraordinary?

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Not really :lol: you are just not even half as smart as you think you are, and not even worth responding to, that's about it really, but feel free to keep up your self flattery, no doubt it serves you well :thumbup:

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

I questioned the extraordinariness too. It seems normal geopolitical times to me, but I am younger than both of you.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Israel is the one nation in that region that the US can count on for full military support if needed. More so than even NATO. Moral compass, no. Trustworthy ally who would put it all on the line, yes.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Slightly tangential, but there is some excellent photography of Helmand here:

BBC News - Bringing the front line to UK streets

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

I didn't read it all but it is interesting and somewhat ironic that religion always finds its way to the battlefield.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Are you referring to the photo of the makeshift church?

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Yes among many other examples, at least within the US military. Twas not a criticism, just irony, at least from my view. However belief and conviction differences are the difference there.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

I think most American soldiers see their efforts as God's work. Indeed, I've read accounts from atheists of their being forced to attend services and appear as believers whilst on the front line.

I suppose in the hell that is war most men would value a spiritual refuge of sorts, so I didn't see the British church as that incongruous with the environment. It would be such a surreal environment that I think many would want there to be a god (assuming he's on their side!).

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

American soldiers being forced to attend services? That would be headline news on CNN and MSNBC, doesn't pass the smell test.
God is 'always' on your side. If not what is the point?;):sarcasm:

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

This kind of thing: Military | American Atheists. CNN reports on it periodically.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Why do you think the US has asked every ally but Israel ?

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

The deeper challenge is how to stop radicalisation ? It's happening everywhere, and a "victory" in Iraq/Syria (I/S coincidentally) will continue to fuel radical thought and principles.

BBC News - The boy from Kosovo who grew up to be a suicide bomber

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Blame Canada.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Actually, I have seen a bunch of news stories about how religious the US armed forces are. If I remember correctly, there were stories about religion featuring heavily at the air force academy.

I found the following links with a very simple search so the information is definitely out there:

Religion and the American armed forces: One army under God? | The Economist


Air Force’s mind-boggling violation: Members forced to swear religious allegiance - Salon.com


(The air force academy is discussed in detail starting at page #59):

http://www.af.mil/Portals/1/document...arent-free.pdf

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Since this thread is on the Canadian forums, can I drag the topic away from the obvious truth that US soldiers are just as gullible and fanatical as any other country's army and mention instead that, on tonights CBC News it was pointed out the Canada's half dozen CF-18's won't be in a position to fire a bullet or drop a pamphlet for at least three weeks?

That's predictable of course, but what was amusing was an admission from a senior commander that by the time they get there they don't expect to know what to do.

There was some mumbling about attacking targets of opportunity if and when a militant ever ventured out from a civilian population centre. I suppose Canadian Intelligence would help.

And for this, we're pissing off these bastards even more?

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

Just helps with more propaganda, and case for cause for our 'enemies'

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

The population of Kobane and surrounding towns was about 400,000 before ISIS began attacking it in September and since then over 200,000 have fled to refugee camps over the Turkish border. If the city falls within the next 2 weeks (without intervention by ground troops that's likely) and any residents are still there they will be in extreme peril. The Turks aren't going to help them because they're Kurds and won't intervene until Turkey is attacked or the coalition can devise a plan for a coalition of ground forces where pro-Assad forces receive no support. If 50,000 or 100,000 civilians get butchered in that city when ISIS takes it over that may sway public opinion in the US and other western nations to supporting widening the scope of their involvement. A few propaganda beheading videos got people here indignant because the victims were white so hopefully the mass butchery that Kobane is on the verge of will be enough to spark interest. As rebel groups in Libya and other countries declare affiliation with ISIS I suspect some of our allies in the area will want to keep their armies close to home rather than deploy to Syria in case they're next. By the time Canada gets the 6 F-18's we're sending from Cold Lake to Kuwait they will likely be joining the other western players in attacking ISIS targets in Iraq. Should the tide of battle turn against ISIS in the coming months with increasing western involvement I would expect them to make a concentrated attack to try and re-take Mosul Dam so they have the option of blowing it and flooding everything down to and including Baghdad.

Re: US step up war on ISIL
 

It seems we are going to move to ground attack sooner rather than later. That is the tone of the media reports this week. Britain and Canada's fighter support is token at best, perhaps a cynical public softening ploy by respective ministries of defence. Of course it's terrible to have to engage in another ME conflict, but when so many innocents are likely to be butchered (as you somewhat awkwardly put it) and an anti-Western power base in IS is solidified, there is not much option.