News4 mins ago
Enter Your Question Title Hereuk Bombing Of Syria ?
"It is in Raqqa, Syria, that ISIL has its headquarters...
our assessment is that there are about 70,000 Syrian opposition fighters on the ground who do not belong to extremist groups." PM Cameron
cf 'weapons of mass destruction' Bush and Blair.
Campaign Against Isis: Is There Any Hope for Military Success?
http://
our assessment is that there are about 70,000 Syrian opposition fighters on the ground who do not belong to extremist groups." PM Cameron
cf 'weapons of mass destruction' Bush and Blair.
Campaign Against Isis: Is There Any Hope for Military Success?
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sevenOP. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Bombing their leaders would only be creating a chain of promotion opportunities throughout their organisation. So long as the ideology is in the ones we don't hit, it will continue.
The most we can hope for is for the internal struggles to be the next leaders create rifts and internal factions, so they end up civil warring themselves into oblivion.
The most we can hope for is for the internal struggles to be the next leaders create rifts and internal factions, so they end up civil warring themselves into oblivion.
No.
Airstrikes on their own, are a useless, pointless, empty gesture with no military advantage at all.
The RAF Tornadoes have flown more than 1,600 missions over Iraq and carried out over 360 air strikes. And the result is that IS has grown in numbers, expanded into neighbouring countries, and has not been contained - in fact the opposite is the result. Further bombing of IS in Syria indeed a futile gesture.
The other woorying aspect, is that Camerons 36 page dossier, is more concerned with making the case for attacking Assad (who is no thread to this country), than making a case against IS.
100% of the UK population would like to see ISIS beat, but that means boots on the ground not pointless airstrikes.
zero% of the UK population is interesteed in regime change in a country thousands of miles away. Cameron's dodgy dossier is clear in mixing up regime change and the fight with ISIS. It wants a vote for military involvement in Syria to be a Green light for attacking Assad as well as ISIS.
Airstrikes on their own, are a useless, pointless, empty gesture with no military advantage at all.
The RAF Tornadoes have flown more than 1,600 missions over Iraq and carried out over 360 air strikes. And the result is that IS has grown in numbers, expanded into neighbouring countries, and has not been contained - in fact the opposite is the result. Further bombing of IS in Syria indeed a futile gesture.
The other woorying aspect, is that Camerons 36 page dossier, is more concerned with making the case for attacking Assad (who is no thread to this country), than making a case against IS.
100% of the UK population would like to see ISIS beat, but that means boots on the ground not pointless airstrikes.
zero% of the UK population is interesteed in regime change in a country thousands of miles away. Cameron's dodgy dossier is clear in mixing up regime change and the fight with ISIS. It wants a vote for military involvement in Syria to be a Green light for attacking Assad as well as ISIS.
Baldric,
No idea about Unz, but that is a repist of an Independent Report by a very well respected Irish Journalust, Patrick Cockburn.
https:/
No idea about Unz, but that is a repist of an Independent Report by a very well respected Irish Journalust, Patrick Cockburn.
https:/
-- answer removed --
This conflict is almost unique in that we need to acknowledge that we will have no peace from IS elements until they are *all* dead.
In all other wars, leaders do their damnedest to not lose the entirety of their young generation and can be driven to a point where they acknowledge defeat and sue for peace. Even Japan, with its Samurai culture still very prevalent, part of its class system and permeating right up to the generals and the emperor himself, conceded defeat, in the end.
We need to acknowledge that we are up against a foe who will not capitulate, even in the face of total annihilation.
Liberals are currently behaving like that stubborn boss, who realises he's wrong but sticks, stubbornly, to their original stated position because doing the 'right' thing means changing their mind in public. Which is seen as weakness, in some circles… apparently.
In all other wars, leaders do their damnedest to not lose the entirety of their young generation and can be driven to a point where they acknowledge defeat and sue for peace. Even Japan, with its Samurai culture still very prevalent, part of its class system and permeating right up to the generals and the emperor himself, conceded defeat, in the end.
We need to acknowledge that we are up against a foe who will not capitulate, even in the face of total annihilation.
Liberals are currently behaving like that stubborn boss, who realises he's wrong but sticks, stubbornly, to their original stated position because doing the 'right' thing means changing their mind in public. Which is seen as weakness, in some circles… apparently.
// How much, I wonder, would ISIS have grown if it were not for air strikes?
//
That's quite laughable. You are admitting ISIS has expanded on our watch into Syria, Libya, Lebanon, and Egypt, but then wondering what would have hapoened if we hadn't dropped our ineffectual bombs on them in Iraq.
The answer, as I have already said above is that our bombing of ISIS in Iraq has made NO difference to their expansion.
//
That's quite laughable. You are admitting ISIS has expanded on our watch into Syria, Libya, Lebanon, and Egypt, but then wondering what would have hapoened if we hadn't dropped our ineffectual bombs on them in Iraq.
The answer, as I have already said above is that our bombing of ISIS in Iraq has made NO difference to their expansion.
-- answer removed --
Airstrikes are about being seen to do something.
No western Governments will commit to troops on the ground, but they cannot admit to their electorate that they are ineffectual. So they launch bombs from hundreds of miles away, dropped from 6 miles high and landing fairly indiscriminately as a show of our strength.
ISIS's abilility to wage war in Syria or abroad is not affected in the slightest by a few Toyotas being destroyed.
No western Governments will commit to troops on the ground, but they cannot admit to their electorate that they are ineffectual. So they launch bombs from hundreds of miles away, dropped from 6 miles high and landing fairly indiscriminately as a show of our strength.
ISIS's abilility to wage war in Syria or abroad is not affected in the slightest by a few Toyotas being destroyed.
-- answer removed --
Birdie,
// Gromit - I repeat - "If not air strikes, then what do you offer as an alternative if ground troops (at this time) are unavailable? //
We have 110,000 professional soldiers and 25,000 reservists. The Syrian border is a 4 hour flight away. So our ground troops are 'not available at this time' only because we don't want them to ve, not for any logistical reason.
// Gromit - I repeat - "If not air strikes, then what do you offer as an alternative if ground troops (at this time) are unavailable? //
We have 110,000 professional soldiers and 25,000 reservists. The Syrian border is a 4 hour flight away. So our ground troops are 'not available at this time' only because we don't want them to ve, not for any logistical reason.
@Gromit
Logistically speaking, how do we support ground troops, keeping the round-trip flight time uppermost in mind?
In answering, please try not to mention a certain location which has hitherto been peaceful for about four decades, in case the thought hadn't occurred to them yet.
Should we even be discussing such matters on a public forum?
Logistically speaking, how do we support ground troops, keeping the round-trip flight time uppermost in mind?
In answering, please try not to mention a certain location which has hitherto been peaceful for about four decades, in case the thought hadn't occurred to them yet.
Should we even be discussing such matters on a public forum?
Syria is 4 hours flight time from the UK, and about 20 minutes from Cyprus where we maintain a base. We have full naval backup in Cyprus, and an airbase from which to mount attacks.
Assuming the Turks are too untrustworthy as an ally, jordan is perfectly placed to kount a groud offensive against ISIS.
But the problem is, Cameron, Obama, Hollande do not regard ISIS as the primary target. They think Assad is, who has never been a threat to this country during his family's 45 years in power.
Assuming the Turks are too untrustworthy as an ally, jordan is perfectly placed to kount a groud offensive against ISIS.
But the problem is, Cameron, Obama, Hollande do not regard ISIS as the primary target. They think Assad is, who has never been a threat to this country during his family's 45 years in power.
Not as many mountains or caves in Syria, AOG. Afghanistan's mountains (or their tactics) have stopped anyone conquering it, since the time of Alexander and Ζευς knows how he managed that.
And it is not as if bombing factories or farmland can force them into submission. They don't neex to bring in any harvest or manufacture things: they have oil; they can buy in everything they need. A gazillion greedy merchants willing to meet their every need.
That is why I think interdiction might work.
But, I would insist on oil facilities first, just to see which countries suffer a fuel crisis and whom we can point the finger at for funding terrorism.
Footnote: buying Venezuelan oil funds Communism, which would be equally troubling to some people.
And it is not as if bombing factories or farmland can force them into submission. They don't neex to bring in any harvest or manufacture things: they have oil; they can buy in everything they need. A gazillion greedy merchants willing to meet their every need.
That is why I think interdiction might work.
But, I would insist on oil facilities first, just to see which countries suffer a fuel crisis and whom we can point the finger at for funding terrorism.
Footnote: buying Venezuelan oil funds Communism, which would be equally troubling to some people.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.