ChatterBank0 min ago
Should Britain Now Take Military Action Against Is?
Just caught a bit of the television news where someone said public opinion is changing and the people of this country are now generally in favour of Britain taking military action against IS. What do you think? Yes or no?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. 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.
"Krom, examining causes does not provide a solution to the current situation"
And what makes you so sure that there even is one?
Further, how exactly do you propose to assess whether intervention will do what we want it to do without first asking what has caused the problem?
I understand that "we must do something" is a powerful sentiment, but I think the cold reality of the situation is that it is far, far too late for us to really have any control over the situation. Yes, you're right. Our security is going to be worse in the future. I can see nothing to suggest that intervening will stop that.
And what makes you so sure that there even is one?
Further, how exactly do you propose to assess whether intervention will do what we want it to do without first asking what has caused the problem?
I understand that "we must do something" is a powerful sentiment, but I think the cold reality of the situation is that it is far, far too late for us to really have any control over the situation. Yes, you're right. Our security is going to be worse in the future. I can see nothing to suggest that intervening will stop that.
If we intervene, our security will not be improved. If we intervene, the vacuum which caused this problem will not go away, and will keep causing more. I see no reason to dump resources into trying to react this way.
I don't really care if that is pessimistic, or if that defeats the idea fighting for the sake of fighting. As far as I can make out, it's the truth.
I don't really care if that is pessimistic, or if that defeats the idea fighting for the sake of fighting. As far as I can make out, it's the truth.
I'm pretty sure that Assad, the Kurds and the Iraqi Shi-ites could pulverise I.S. if there was a will to do it. Its as though they're waiting for us to do it. Any recriminations (and there'll be plenty of them) will be 'washing up' on our shores, then,,,,,,,,,,,again.
Coming to some kind of alliance with those 3 could be a better way forward. It'll mean eating humble pie where Assad's concerned. (I've noticed various gov ministers trying to spin things, lately, to suggest this is all Assad's fault and everyone would be living in peace and harmony if only we'd attacked him 12 months ago. They must think we're all stupid)
Coming to some kind of alliance with those 3 could be a better way forward. It'll mean eating humble pie where Assad's concerned. (I've noticed various gov ministers trying to spin things, lately, to suggest this is all Assad's fault and everyone would be living in peace and harmony if only we'd attacked him 12 months ago. They must think we're all stupid)
Unless you have inside information you have no
true knowledge about 'their intention' and as for " ride rough-shod over all in their path, even to the shores of Europe" that is unthinking panic-mongering.
There are several very well equipped armies towards 'the shores of Europe' , the US have dozens of military bases in the Middle East and have shown the world many times that they will invade to protect US citizens (Erbil protected before Mount Sinjar) , and Obama just reiterated the NATO doctrine in Tallinn Estonia this week, of "an attack one is viewed as an attack on all."
"Krom, the potential causes haven’t been ignored; they have been discussed ad infinitum." ................. have they? Did they discuss how the entire Middle East is a Western construct created and supported by the West to ensure one thing flows? Not honesty nor democracy but OIL.
Do you honestly believe that the US with agents and global satellite and communication surveillance and bases spread all over that territory were 'unaware' of this ISIS threat growing?
Keeping the Middle East states/groups at each others throats suits the Western interests that foster(ed) it.
The US and world at large knows that the Saudi exportation of Wahhabism has stoked these fires and the West used and funded this Wahhabism to fight the Russians in Afghanistan.
Do do you expect your leaders to willingly eradicate a menace that they are complicit in and have been complicit in for so long when it still suits their agenda ?
Ending this 'threat' permanently would involve military action in several Africa countries, libya, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordon, Quatar,Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, etc Puppet Dictator etc.
That would probably lead to a worldwide war which no sensible person would want.
United Nation NOT Nato should lead a coalition of forces to eliminate the ISIS threat in Iraq, Syria, Libya, and leave an overwhelming military presence in Iraq for the foreseeable future. The Saudi exporting of Wahhabi extremism must be stopped with sanctions and the seizure of all their plentiful Internationally held assets.
All support for the Family of Dictators in the Middle East should end.
I honestly do hope you enjoy your relatively privileged 'standard of Living' but have the honesty to recognize its true cost.
true knowledge about 'their intention' and as for " ride rough-shod over all in their path, even to the shores of Europe" that is unthinking panic-mongering.
There are several very well equipped armies towards 'the shores of Europe' , the US have dozens of military bases in the Middle East and have shown the world many times that they will invade to protect US citizens (Erbil protected before Mount Sinjar) , and Obama just reiterated the NATO doctrine in Tallinn Estonia this week, of "an attack one is viewed as an attack on all."
"Krom, the potential causes haven’t been ignored; they have been discussed ad infinitum." ................. have they? Did they discuss how the entire Middle East is a Western construct created and supported by the West to ensure one thing flows? Not honesty nor democracy but OIL.
Do you honestly believe that the US with agents and global satellite and communication surveillance and bases spread all over that territory were 'unaware' of this ISIS threat growing?
Keeping the Middle East states/groups at each others throats suits the Western interests that foster(ed) it.
The US and world at large knows that the Saudi exportation of Wahhabism has stoked these fires and the West used and funded this Wahhabism to fight the Russians in Afghanistan.
Do do you expect your leaders to willingly eradicate a menace that they are complicit in and have been complicit in for so long when it still suits their agenda ?
Ending this 'threat' permanently would involve military action in several Africa countries, libya, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordon, Quatar,Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, etc Puppet Dictator etc.
That would probably lead to a worldwide war which no sensible person would want.
United Nation NOT Nato should lead a coalition of forces to eliminate the ISIS threat in Iraq, Syria, Libya, and leave an overwhelming military presence in Iraq for the foreseeable future. The Saudi exporting of Wahhabi extremism must be stopped with sanctions and the seizure of all their plentiful Internationally held assets.
All support for the Family of Dictators in the Middle East should end.
I honestly do hope you enjoy your relatively privileged 'standard of Living' but have the honesty to recognize its true cost.
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.