ISIS - Are we doing enough? (3 Viewers)

[Kolmias]

It's actually well documented that Turkey is helping rebels in Syria, even going to the extent of helping rebel groups like Al Nusra, Al Qaeda affiliates and ISIS... In return, they have been able to obtain enormous profits from oil revenues and contain a hostile Kurdish population... In fact, Turkish border patrols and intelligence, allowed the mastermind of the recent Paris attacks to cross the border of Turkey and Syria on multiple occasions, but yet, they see a Russian front line bomber as a bigger threat, the question is why? Because Turkey has everything to gain from instability in Syria and Iraq... Those things I mentioned are just the tip of the ice berg... Turkey does not belong in NATO...

You would be a fool to think that the war aganist ISIS is merely a battle of good vs evil. The world does not work like that.

Turkey, like any other nation, will always act to what it considers it's best interests. Supporting NATO in the battle aganist ISIS is probably not in Turkey's best interests so why they should they do it?

The government of a nation should always act in the best interests of it's nation.

 

[wannaspoon]

Truth burns...

 

[isildurrrr1]

NATO's stance is not immediately clear... From the looks of things, they seem to support Turkey, however, they seem to be really distancing themselves from this event... So I think the jury is still out on that one, it is in no doubt, a option that Russia would possibly consider...

And Russia's response is....

OMG NO MORE TURKISH FOOD GOING TO RUSSIA NOW SANCTIONS!

Yeah not exactly balls to the wall response people thought putin would have.

Everyone knows the turks are a bunch of dicks. First day of joining airstrikes they decide to bomb kurdish targets.

Russia isn't any much better. They're not exactly hitting major daesh targets either, a lot of them are just hitting the almost dead FSA so Assad can further secure power and be the only viable option for leadership.

 

[nerdasdasd]

I don't know much about the whole ISIS, middle east thing so can you guys fill me in?

Media says so much shit that I can't even follow it without sticking articles up on a billboard and trying to reference it all ...

1. Who created ISIS?
2. How did ISIS/Daesh form?
2a. Who are the real tourists / bad guys?
3. Which nations are bombing the right targets?
4. Why is the middle east so messed up?
5. Did the U.S. make the middle East situation worse?

 

[wannaspoon]

 

[isildurrrr1]

I don't know much about the whole ISIS, middle east thing so can you guys fill me in?

Media says so much shit that I can't even follow it without sticking articles up on a billboard and trying to reference it all ...

1. Who created ISIS?
2. How did ISIS/Daesh form?
2a. Who are the real tourists / bad guys?
3. Which nations are bombing the right targets?
4. Why is the middle east so messed up?
5. Did the U.S. make the middle East situation worse?

ISIS was originally Al Qaeda Iraq. During the kick of the syrian civil war they formed allegiances with syrian counterparts. Daesh Formed because the Sunnis in Iraq are pissed that the Shia government is essentially treating the sunnis like shit. A lot of former Sunni anti-AQI peeps (sons of iraq) joined AQI/Daesh because the shia govt wouldn't give them any jobs in the military.
Daesh are the biggest threat due to their popularity.
The French, USA, Aus, UK everyone except for Russia and Turkey are focusing on ISIS targets whilst the latters are playing political fuck fuck games.
The middle east is messed up because of the religious conflicts between the sunni and shia. Everything is drown towards further sectarian lines.
US shouldn't have pulled out of Iraq. If the US army was still there ISIS would've been extremely underground like they were.

 

[wannaspoon]

 

[wannaspoon]

Looks like they are finally taking steps to close the border with Turkey to end the oil exports and arms dealing, maybe we can see the back of this conflict soon... Looks like Turkey has gone full retard and fired mortars into Syria as well... I wonder why??? (I really don't, it's blatantly obvious)

 

[isildurrrr1]

The US trained Iraqi Army fucked up real time even with the billions of dollars spent in arming and training going to waste. How could the Army numbering 30,000 let Mosul the second biggest city fall so easily to a small terrorist group numbering at least 1000 back then? Unbelievable.

Because a bunch of sunni military duders just said 'fuck this shit' and essentially joined Daesh. A bunch of Saddam's former military leadership are part of Daesh and are leading it.

Even under Saddam there were sectarian tensions. Just look at the number of assassination attempts against him and his family.

 

[wannaspoon]

ISIS was originally Al Qaeda Iraq. During the kick of the syrian civil war they formed allegiances with syrian counterparts. Daesh Formed because the Sunnis in Iraq are pissed that the Shia government is essentially treating the sunnis like shit. A lot of former Sunni anti-AQI peeps (sons of iraq) joined AQI/Daesh because the shia govt wouldn't give them any jobs in the military.
Daesh are the biggest threat due to their popularity.
The French, USA, Aus, UK everyone except for Russia and Turkey are focusing on ISIS targets whilst the latters are playing political fuck fuck games.
The middle east is messed up because of the religious conflicts between the sunni and shia. Everything is drown towards further sectarian lines.
US shouldn't have pulled out of Iraq. If the US army was still there ISIS would've been extremely underground like they were.

That is a narrow minded sort of analysis on how Daesh came into being... Think it is most certainly a lot more complicated than that...

 

[nerdasdasd]

That is a narrow minded sort of analysis on how Daesh came into being... Think it is most certainly a lot more complicated than that...

let's see your view on these Q's

1. Who created ISIS?
2. How did ISIS/Daesh form?
2a. Who are the real tourists / bad guys?
3. Which nations are bombing the right targets?
4. Why is the middle east so messed up?
5. Did the U.S. make the middle East situation worse?

 

[isildurrrr1]

That is a narrow minded sort of analysis on how Daesh came into being... Think it is most certainly a lot more complicated than that...

No it's pretty much that simple. Daesh can only hold sunni areas in Iraq that essentially 'invite' them in. AQI got it's ass handed to them couple of years back and got booted out of a lot of places when they went 'fuck your sharia law'

 

[bangladesh]

What you all fail to realise is that 'military action' is inevitably going to kill civilians. When say France decided to step up it's military action OVERNIGHT, I'm sure they were just reacting to the attacks in Paris and are just now being more careless attacking more targets which again --> more civilians killed. This itself I feel is the most dangerous part of what western countries are doing to ISIS because not everyone will be mentally fucked up enough to blow themselves up in terrorist attacks and u either have to have some srsly fucked up developmental issues growing up or just really have hatred for something. The developmental issues are a different issue but the hatred I think is quite relatable. When a father for example watches all his children and family die in an airstrike when all they're guilty of is living in a certain city, then THAT is gonna cause hatred, hatred that could drive him to either join ISIS to fight against the people who killed his family or even worse, blame their death on every westerner he sees and punish them for his loss.

 

[Loudvicuna]

What you all fail to realise is that 'military action' is inevitably going to kill civilians. When say France decided to step up it's military action OVERNIGHT, I'm sure they were just reacting to the attacks in Paris and are just now being more careless attacking more targets which again --> more civilians killed. This itself I feel is the most dangerous part of what western countries are doing to ISIS because not everyone will be mentally fucked up enough to blow themselves up in terrorist attacks and u either have to have some srsly fucked up developmental issues growing up or just really have hatred for something. The developmental issues are a different issue but the hatred I think is quite relatable. When a father for example watches all his children and family die in an airstrike when all they're guilty of is living in a certain city, then THAT is gonna cause hatred, hatred that could drive him to either join ISIS to fight against the people who killed his family or even worse, blame their death on every westerner he sees and punish them for his loss.

Not dismissing what you're saying but you're making assumptions

 

[bangladesh]

Not dismissing what you're saying but you're making assumptions

lol if you're gonna say i'm making assumptions at least say what assumptions i'm making..

 

[Loudvicuna]

lol if you're gonna say i'm making assumptions at least say what assumptions i'm making..

.

What you all fail to realise is that 'military action' is inevitably going to kill civilians. When say France decided to step up it's military action OVERNIGHT, I'm sure they were just reacting to the attacks in Paris and are just now being more careless attacking more targets which again --> more civilians killed. This itself I feel is the most dangerous part of what western countries are doing to ISIS because not everyone will be mentally fucked up enough to blow themselves up in terrorist attacks and u either have to have some srsly fucked up developmental issues growing up or just really have hatred for something. The developmental issues are a different issue but the hatred I think is quite relatable. When a father for example watches all his children and family die in an airstrike when all they're guilty of is living in a certain city, then THAT is gonna cause hatred, hatred that could drive him to either join ISIS to fight against the people who killed his family or even worse, blame their death on every westerner he sees and punish them for his loss.

 

[bangladesh]

.

The first part about reacting to paris attacks is not an assumption, french president announced it's a war between them and who did it to them so they did react to paris attacks.
Second part about attacking more targets may not be careless but more bombings --> more civilians being killed.
I don't understand what part of this is an assumption.

 

[isildurrrr1]

The first part about reacting to paris attacks is not an assumption, french president announced it's a war between them and who did it to them so they did react to paris attacks.
Second part about attacking more targets may not be careless but more bombings --> more civilians being killed.
I don't understand what part of this is an assumption.

You made an assumption that the increased airstrikes will lead to an increased 'carelessness' in the bombings. You obviously have no idea how military ops are done. They take civilian casualties super seriously since Iraq. It is not my fault the enemy decides to hide behind civilians.

 

[bangladesh]

You made an assumption that the increased airstrikes will lead to an increased 'carelessness' in the bombings. You obviously have no idea how military ops are done. They take civilian casualties super seriously since Iraq. It is not my fault the enemy decides to hide behind civilians.

In the previos Iraq war 176,000–189,000 people were killed in violence in the Iraq war, including 134,000 civilian(using Iraq Body Count's figures), according to the findings of the Costs of War Project, you closed minded being. What makes you think this is any different?

 

[isildurrrr1]

In the previos Iraq war 176,000–189,000 people were killed in violence in the Iraq war, including 134,000 civilian(using Iraq Body Count's figures), according to the findings of the Costs of War Project, you closed minded being. What makes you think this is any different?

130k civilians in a decade long war. that's around 13k a year, which INCLUDES numbers killed by insurgents not just coalition troops you mong. In the past 130k would die within a month of a 'real' war.