How should the world deal with ISIS?

[blackcat]

how should the gov't deal with ISIS or "the deathcult" as out eloquent mellifluous on has christened them[sic].

Why, just as we are. They create a useful tool to point to, and say, be scared about these people and this part of the world and we will protect you from them. the caliphate, the caliphate, the caliphate, the caliphate, Western Sydney. bomb them all <eyesroll>.

they serve a political purpose in Canberra.

 

[blackcat]

Some counter Insurgency expert pointed out that against Serbia nato was bombing at a rate of 250 strikes per day. Against Libya 45, against Daesh 10. Soo it just seems they just not that interested in defeating them. If they can bomb s**t out of Yemen not caring about civilians, who is going to baulk at the collateral for Daesh, this is one enemy that its worth a few innocents. Why? because they are massacring Men Women and Children on a massive scale. Not to mention robbing humanity of its heritage.

why is Kilkullen talking nukes? There are no nukes in the ME. Well, apart from Israel, but they aint that crazy, it wont be a Samson doctrine, everyone knows that the Persians dont want the bomb, so what it Kilkullen's motive? do you know it? seems he has nicely assimilated himself into the power clique.

 

[awaremind]

Was Kilcullen the guy on the 730 report last night I referred to ? Ok yes he was.
Anyway he was talking Nuke risk from Pakistan back in 2009, obviously its a pet concern of his. I'm sure Daesh would love nukes but they are hardly going to develop their own any time soon. However this - was RT's head line yesterday "
At the prospect of the international community’s nuclear deal with Iran, Saudi Arabia has reportedly taken a decision to call in an old favor from Pakistan and get some of its nuclear weapons.

Saudi Arabia is widely believed to have bankrolled the Pakistani nuclear weapons program. In exchange, Riyadh reportedly expects Islamabad to provide missiles in times of trouble to defend the kingdom.

“For the Saudis the moment has come,” a former American defense official told The Sunday Times newspaper. “There has been a longstanding agreement in place with the Pakistanis, and the House of Saud has now made the strategic decision to move forward.”

According to the report, no actual transfer of weapons has taken place yet, but “the Saudis mean what they say and they will do what they say,” the source reportedly said." ......

 

[blackcat]

Was Kilcullen the guy on the 730 report last night I referred to ? Ok yes he was.
Anyway he was talking Nuke risk from Pakistan back in 2009, obviously its a pet concern of his. I'm sure Daesh would love nukes but they are hardly going to develop their own any time soon. However this - was RT's head line yesterday "
At the prospect of the international community’s nuclear deal with Iran, Saudi Arabia has reportedly taken a decision to call in an old favor from Pakistan and get some of its nuclear weapons.

Saudi Arabia is widely believed to have bankrolled the Pakistani nuclear weapons program. In exchange, Riyadh reportedly expects Islamabad to provide missiles in times of trouble to defend the kingdom.

“For the Saudis the moment has come,” a former American defense official told The Sunday Times newspaper. “There has been a longstanding agreement in place with the Pakistanis, and the House of Saud has now made the strategic decision to move forward.”

According to the report, no actual transfer of weapons has taken place yet, but “the Saudis mean what they say and they will do what they say,” the source reportedly said." ......

persia aint going for the bomb. gees the ignorance propounds

 

[Todman]

 

[Tasmaniac]

Looks like the Iraqi army doesn't have the stomach to fight. Lost Ramadi. Despite outnumbering ISIS. I wonder what % of the army/police were Sunni's? and how well supported/back stabbed, by the Iraqi govt.

If an nation can't control it's territoy, then it's not really a nation, look's like a truncated version of Iraq might be on the cards.

Definitely no to sending ground troops, if the Iraqi's aren't prepared to fight, then there's no point in getting involved.

 

[blackcat]

the world should deal will the bad muslims by ignoring them.

no OPs.

but the thing is, the domestic gov'ts in the west have the symbiosis at stake to stoke fear stir fright and other alliterations.

If there were no domestic imperative for national international defense and a kakhi trajectory, Abbott would be farked. hey jane, Tones would be screwed.

sans red speedos, sans Hi-viz vest, sans safety helmet, there is nothing there. #battlilines and vacuum

GuruJane

 

[CountryRace]

Looks like the Iraqi army doesn't have the stomach to fight. Lost Ramadi. Despite outnumbering ISIS. I wonder what % of the army/police were Sunni's? and how well supported/back stabbed, by the Iraqi govt.

If an nation can't control it's territoy, then it's not really a nation, look's like a truncated version of Iraq might be on the cards.

Definitely no to sending ground troops, if the Iraqi's aren't prepared to fight, then there's no point in getting involved.

if only there was a saddam type character

 

[awaremind]

Looks like the Iraqi army doesn't have the stomach to fight. Lost Ramadi. Despite outnumbering ISIS. I wonder what % of the army/police were Sunni's? and how well supported/back stabbed, by the Iraqi govt.

If an nation can't control it's territoy, then it's not really a nation, look's like a truncated version of Iraq might be on the cards.

Definitely no to sending ground troops, if the Iraqi's aren't prepared to fight, then there's no point in getting involved.

I'd like to have some actual proof that this was true- that they were massively outnumbering them and they just ran away... The way that the US and UK are talking you could be forgiven for thinking Daesh were the Allies and Iraq was the enemy. No mention of the 400+ Men, Women and Children massacred in Palmyra over the weekend by daesh in the Guardian. The absence of this is conspicuous. Just a few articles claiming Daesh is strong and well led, Assad will soon fall, and Iraqi's are cowards.

 

[Tasmaniac]

I'd like to have some actual proof that this was true- that they were massively outnumbering them and they just ran away... The way that the US and UK are talking you could be forgiven for thinking Daesh were the Allies and Iraq was the enemy. No mention of the 400+ Men, Women and Children massacred in Palmyra over the weekend by daesh in the Guardian. The absence of this is conspicuous. Just a few articles claiming Daesh is strong and well led, Assad will soon fall, and Iraqi's are cowards.

What would you call actual proof? Should ISIS have given you notification before they advanced so you could fly over and observe?

There have been plenty of articles.

It's a replica (on a smaller scale) of the fall of Mosul, large Iraqi defense force, small ISIS force, (the odds were much more one sided in favour of the Iraqi's), in Mosul the Iraqi's pretty much didn't even fight. Up to 20,000 just dropped all their gear and slunk away. At least they fought in Ramadi.

So the Iraqi's abandon strong positions, and the easy job (overall defense is easier than attack), and at some stage in the future, some collection of poor bastards are going to have to do the hard job of re-conquering a city against Jihadi's who have no problems with civilian casualties, which can be hellishly destructive and costly, even for an advanced army.

If they can't do the easy job, I'm not sure how confident I am they will ever be able to do the hard job.

 

[awaremind]

It just doesn't make any sense. If the Daesh army is so big it can be seen, why is it not hit with more airstrikes??
If it can't be seen and is small why just surrender?
Especially since they must know all their allies will get slaughtered.
If the Iraqi army is so traumatised they can't fight, someone else has to fight unless you want "The Islamic state " to replace most of the middle east on the map.

 

[medusala]

Obama is really on fire, lies about Benghazi, Obama and now these docs leaked. Maljazeera must surely be the only one still drinking the Koolaid.


Where was Rodham in all this?
blackcat



http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...ed-isis-tool-overthrow-syrias-president-assad

Among the batch of documents obtained by Judicial Watch through a federal lawsuit, released earlier this week, is a US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document then classified as “secret,” dated 12th August 2012.

Charles Shoebridge, a former British Army and Metropolitan Police counter-terrorism intelligence officer, said:

“Given the political leanings of the organisation that obtained these documents, it’s unsurprising that the main emphasis given to them thus far has been an attempt to embarrass Hilary Clinton regarding what was known about the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi in 2012. However, the documents also contain far less publicized revelations that raise vitally important questions of the West’s governments and media in their support of Syria’s rebellion.”

In a strikingly prescient prediction, the Pentagon document explicitly forecasts the probable declaration of “an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria.”

Nevertheless, “Western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey are supporting these efforts” by Syrian “opposition forces” fighting to “control the eastern areas (Hasaka and Der Zor), adjacent to Western Iraqi provinces (Mosul and Anbar)”:

The 2012 DIA document, however, further shows that while sponsoring purportedly former al-Qaeda insurgents in Iraq to counter al-Qaeda, Western governments were simultaneously arming al-Qaeda insurgents in Syria.

The revelation from an internal US intelligence document that the very US-led coalition supposedly fighting ‘Islamic State’ today, knowingly created ISIS in the first place, raises troubling questions about recent government efforts to justify the expansion of state anti-terror powers.

 

[JoondalupJ]

Does bombing them help, or does it cultivate more radicals among impacted civilians?

How do you bomb? Targeted strikes? Raids?

Does anyone suggest putting troops on the ground?

Should military action be left to the US or Egypt or someone else? AN alliance of nations?

I don't think anyone would deny seeing these murdering, raping terrorist pedophiles being gone is a bad thing; but I havent seen any explanation about how to do it as worthwhile.

It is a very hard question. In WW2 total war was declared when the USA and Britain went into massive air raiding tactic with the consequence of killing thousands and thousands of civilians not considered.

They believed the Nazi terror and threat had to be destroyed.

Do we think ISIS is as bad , if we do then annihilation bombing would kill millions and maybe change the world, and we'd still have to wonder if any one was left to seek revenge, I personally think it would create a thought in the minds of all people , that it was time to stop. ISIS would be dead, and I think also that they have leaders who are worse or as bad as the blind tunnel visioned SS minded murderers.

It is easy to sit back and say lets wipe them out totally. I've thought that, the problem would be gone , or would it.

I don't know what will happen but I think the world will eventually turn on this crazy criminal organisation and as humans do , make the rivers of blood and radiation flow. If they come close to really seriously threatening Israel , I think the mushrooms' would be seen in the desert. Israel will do that.

The only other way is the world send a million troopps in and stay until they've killed them all on the ground . Or we try to contain them in that area.

Bloody rotten situation hey?

 

[CountryRace]

It is a very hard question. In WW2 total war was declared when the USA and Britain went into massive air raiding tactic with the consequence of killing thousands and thousands of civilians not considered.

They believed the Nazi terror and threat had to be destroyed.

Do we think ISIS is as bad , if we do then annihilation bombing would kill millions and maybe change the world, and we'd still have to wonder if any one was left to seek revenge, I personally think it would create a thought in the minds of all people , that it was time to stop. ISIS would be dead, and I think also that they have leaders who are worse or as bad as the blind tunnel visioned SS minded murderers.

It is easy to sit back and say lets wipe them out totally. I've thought that, the problem would be gone , or would it.

I don't know what will happen but I think the world will eventually turn on this crazy criminal organisation and as humans do , make the rivers of blood and radiation flow. If they come close to really seriously threatening Israel , I think the mushrooms' would be seen in the desert. Israel will do that.

The only other way is the world send a million troopps in and stay until they've killed them all on the ground . Or we try to contain them in that area.

Bloody rotten situation hey?

what about dresden?

mass murder for shits and giggles.

 

[JoondalupJ]

what about dresden?

mass murder for shits and giggles.

Don't know what you mean. I meant that the horror of Dresden which was a city on fire, was how air war totally destroyed a nation and its will to fight. Ruining factories and civilians , I say that to stop ISIS , you would either have to take up that challenge and bomb the region out of human existence including the innocent. I'm not saying do it, I'm saying something more frightening , the known nation in that area that ever thought they may be over run by ISIS or its like , would nuke everything it could from a safe distance if there is such a thing , and if there was not a safe distance, they would still do it. They will never move and if they have to kill everyone they would. Golda Mier(spelling?) said it once before.
The other way is for nations of the world to commit to huge troop numbers probably for the next century as has been forcast as the time this war will take.
To contain this madness in the minds of ISIS fanatics. But you know some people in ISIS can't all be raving lunatics who think they have a god given right to torture , behead , kill destroy everything , they are raving lunatics who promote this , what are the poor bastards that go along with it , some must surely say struth what are we doing here. We just beheaded fifty blokes some of them or maybe all of them were practising muslims. I mean this ISIS is almost like a phantom media invention , except we know what they are doing, but the news is terrible when media is talking about them.

So, first of all I don't understand your giggle and shits comment.

But beside the Nazi SS I don't know if there have been anything quite like this poisonous snake called ISIS, the SS were a group of like minded racist and fanatic killers , I guess ISIS is too. The SS were terrifying fighters and gave no quarter, the only way is to destroy everything , and open up the death camps to the world, that's why firestorm bombings took place. AIRWAR!

But a question was asked, and I say contain, and the world has to be prepared to be part of it , or go in on the ground and fight for as long as it takes.
That means all nations must participate to destroy this madman army. s**t its lioke a bloody Arnie movie isn't it? just not funny.

Or blow them out of existence. Annihilation.

What do you think is a good way to handle a situation that is already so UN handleable now.

Anyone got some bright ideas. I sure don't.

 

[CountryRace]

http://www.wsj.com/articles/to-many...ly-seeking-to-defeat-islamic-state-1435224647

 

[Malifice]

I'd like to say 'thermonuclear carpet bombing' but I wont.

 

[Lebbo73]

I'd like to say 'thermonuclear carpet bombing' but I wont.

That would kill too many CIA agents Mal. It is not an option!

 

[JoondalupJ]

It just doesn't make any sense. If the Daesh army is so big it can be seen, why is it not hit with more airstrikes??
If it can't be seen and is small why just surrender?
Especially since they must know all their allies will get slaughtered.
If the Iraqi army is so traumatised they can't fight, someone else has to fight unless you want "The Islamic state " to replace most of the middle east on the map.

I think the Kurds will fight them forever. I think the west must supply them with everything they can and give them massive air support. There lies a problem , the west perhaps should be bombing the hell out of ISIS, where it can, and at great lengths , but one or two or three nations can't commit to such savage warfare from the sky if only a handful will do it. Everyone who hates this middle age nutcase army must commit to its utter destruction (if that's possible). If they all don't then even Americas actions from the sky will be limited as well. Because America is really the only one that throws its own people into the fray where they lose thousands of soldiers, they carry the weight.
To defeat ISIS MILITARILY everyone has to put up or be looked at as failures and left behind. Then if the military is wiped out of ISIS then will have to begin the re education ( hah lovely term that hey?) of jihadist thought, away from how ISIS has twisted jihad into an "OK" to commit horror and murder wholesale under the false belief that their God Allah condones it. I don't think Islam does condone this ISIS stuff, because they , well most of them I'd hope , would see their old old writings like Christians , see their ancient scriptures to be like something to see it as the history of your faith, not what you read literally today and believe, to commit artocities such as head removal , its an excuse for murderers.
The religion doesn't mean that , now. Only to killers. Like serial killers , excuse to do horror.

So I would think that it starts in the ISIS backyard with all Middle Eastern nations beginning to start trying to destroy this group of murdering gangsters, and then with the co-operation of other military powers from around the world , we finally destroy the last remnants of the dark ages.

Also we have no choice really but to put professional military boots on the ground , if the likes of the Iraqi army are too scared to fight.
If they really join the battle then massive air support.

This is my opinion of the only way , unless there is something sinister behind the ISIS phenomenon involving our friends in the West.

But lone wolf and nut case groups committing terror anywhere in the world has to be addressed because they must be people with some kind of axe to grind , they kill for special purpose , what do they hope to gain, NOTHING, humans won't change the world because there are murderers about , there always have been, maybe the small killer terrorist plots are tactics used by off shoots of people like the Taliban or the ISIS to terrorise the world, by chance attacks , like murdering people in large hotels or beaches'.

If the instigators who invite their so called allies in different parts of the world to kill innocent people, then th instigators are the ones who must be killed en mass , hunted to the ends of the earth, the leaders and of course the fighters who stand up for the horrors, they must become hunted until they realise what is all this for. Because belief in religion is one thing , but if you are a strong believer then, jihadists beware, you will wind up in your hell, there is no heaven for criminal cowardly murdering killers. None!

 

[MaddAdam]

Let them all enter Australia by boat.

It's the compassionate thing to do.

What a deeply moronic thing to say.

 

[MaddAdam]

Da'esh isn't going anywhere. It's key role is to be a sectarian death squad on a grand scale.

As long as Da'esh exists it absorbs large amounts of Iranian time, blood and treasure.

It won't be permitted to change any real facts on the ground - see the swift and effective US response when Erbil was under direct threat - but nor is it going to be completely eliminated.

 

[awaremind]

Da'esh isn't going anywhere. It's key role is to be a sectarian death squad on a grand scale.

As long as Da'esh exists it absorbs large amounts of Iranian time, blood and treasure.

It won't be permitted to change any real facts on the ground - see the swift and effective US response when Erbil was under direct threat - but nor is it going to be completely eliminated.

I think you are right. What a cynical, destructive and irresponsible strategy this is. And they they have the gall to claim the moral high ground in most international affairs. Ultimately though I cannot see this as being effective, as if it becomes widespread public knowledge it will galvanize the whole world against its architects.

 

[MaddAdam]

I think you are right. What a cynical, destructive and irresponsible strategy this is. And they they have the gall to claim the moral high ground in most international affairs. Ultimately though I cannot see this as being effective, as if it becomes widespread public knowledge it will galvanize the whole world against its architects.

I think the US, and I may well be wrong here, isn't entirely thrilled about how the Great Sunni v Shia War is now panning out. Too many of the Sunni countries, especially in the Gulf, are going off the leash and the US is rightly concerned about the unintended consequences.

The US wants a Balkanised Syria and Iraq to minimize and contain Iranian influence. But the Saudis and Qatar are now engaged in a blood feud with Tehran and they will not stop until Assad is gone, with their preferred option being Bashar getting the Gaddaffi treatment.

But is Jabhat Al Nusra taking Damascus really the best idea? I don't think Obama would like that.

 

[awaremind]

Obama is only a figurehead so if he likes it or not doesn't matter much. I think as part of a broader strategy to keep Europe weak and Iran and Russia busy it could work for them quite nicely. If they decide to go in it would be a convenient excuse too. Pity about all the priceless antiquities and possibly millions of casualties.

 

[MaddAdam]

Obama is only a figurehead so if he likes it or not doesn't matter much. I think as part of a broader strategy to keep Europe weak and Iran and Russia busy it could work for them quite nicely. If they decide to go in it would be a convenient excuse too. Pity about all the priceless antiquities and possibly millions of casualties.

Yeah nah.