Calis Beach and Fethiye Turkey Discussion Forum
General Topics => The Debating Chamber => Topic started by: Colwyn on September 26, 2014, 14:23:23 PM
-
Cameron is currently addressing the House of Commons appealing to MPs to confirm the decision to join the US and France in bombing supposed IS positions in Iraq. The BBC World correspondent advised that MPs are likely to vote the way the PM hopes. I wonder what people think about this now and what they will think about it in ten years' time if Britain is still fighting IS.
-
Quite some time since your post Colwyn. I can only assume that people sense that Mr Cameron is in that old rock and hard place scenario. What would the boys from the valleys advise now we are off and running?
-
We are damned if we do and damned if we don't
If we don't support the fight against terrorism, we stand and watch.
-
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. (Quote from Edmund Burke.)
-
No option really. IS have to be stopped.
-
The problem is that it's not going to reduce the terrorist threat in the UK, or anywhere else for that matter. It could well increase the likelihood of attacks. But, doing nothing, isn't an option.
-
Only a few people have commented on this but those that have seem to be of a similar view - doing nothing is not an option. I find this rather surprising given the track record of the UK joining with the USA in military actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. They didn't turn out very well and they certainly didn't make the world a safer place. They didn't even make the UK a safer place. I also find this "no option" view a rather dangerous way of thinking. It suggests that, really, there is no political decision to make; it makes itself; there is nothing to debate. However, I am not clear why the UK has no option. Countries such as Germany, Sweden, Spain, Russia, India, Japan and Turkey do, it seems, have an option; and, up to now, they have opted to stay out of the aerial campaign. Why do they have a choice but the UK doesn't? Is it because our country is more important than theirs, wealthier, more moral? Is it a legacy of our more recent imperial past; a form of dangerous nostagia of a once "great power"? Whatever, there was a decision to be made; there was an option; doing nothing - i.e. not bombing supposed IS positions - was always a possibility (as the Foreign Secretary said barely a couple of weeks ago). I suspect we will, again, in hindsight, come to regret this decision. I regret it now.
-
Me too Colwyn; perhaps people don't comment because of the seeming inevitability of it all.
Ken O'Keefe sums up pretty much everything I think about the War on IS - and where he says US he could just as easily be saying UK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESZN_YDE-TU
And here is another favourite of mine on the origins of the IS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMjXbuj7BPI&app=desktop
-
You might well be right Colwyn in your preferred non interference option. Perhaps these IS fellows will see the error of their ways and return to more peaceful ways of making their views known without the abhorrent blood letting.
-
Going to war won't make them change their attitudes and ideology - its interference and wars in the Middle east that got us to this place to start with. If anything it is exactly what these extremists want and creates a justification for their actions in their minds and the minds of others who will join them.
We funded and armed these people and they are driving around in American tanks and using the weapons supplied to them by the Western governments to carry out their atrocities.
I really recommend watching the video above on the origins of the IS.
That said I am now off to the beach :)
-
Choose your beach wisely! Enjoy. ;)
-
The other option is to stop spending billions of Dollars killing people and enforcing regime changes. Spend this money on improving the lives of the people in these countries. And influencing change in the leaders behaviour.
The likes of Sadam Hussein, Muammer Ghaddafi and Bashar al Assad were and are not desirable leaders but they kept their countries relatively stable. Just look at the mess left behind in Iraq and Libya following our desire for nice leaders to take the place of the undesirables.
These bombing campaigns will never end . If, and it is a big if, ISIL is defeated , yet another organisation will take its place.
-
This makes for informative reading.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/31/combat-terror-end-support-saudi-arabia-dictatorships-fundamentalism?CMP=twt_gu
-
Well, as many have said, we cannot stand by.
We stood by when Hitler occupied the Rhineland, where did that get us?
When you have spent a good part of your life living in the Middle East as I have you begin to understand
that it is still a tribal and religious division that determines policy, its evolution, and it has a long way to go.
The fundamentalist factions dont care about how many of their own people die or who they hurt, they would not
lose one milisecond of sleep over the death of an "infidel" baby. They kill and maim without mercy in a twisted belief
that they are going to heaven and will receive 72 virgins there for their pleasure --- if they can force conversion to their
twisted version of Islam in just one non-muslim. So, wipe them out as much as you can ... or they will wipe you out!
Having secured Syria and Iraq, (if we do nothing) they will move on to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and the oil riches
will ensure they can expand from there, World War 3 will be here! The difference will be instead of thousands killed -- it will be Millions!
Of course I am well known here a a liberal thinker :)
-
I thought that a request had been made by the democratic leader of Iraq for help which in her hour of need we have responded to. We have stayed on the side lines in the islamic conflict in Syria for a long time has this stopped the killing I don't think so many of these conflict can be traced back to the maps drawn over a hundred years ago, it maybe time for the Kurds in the three countries effected to have there own state.
-
How do you negotiate with someone who is holding severed heads and gauged out eyeballs in their hands.?
Offer them coffee and chocolate digestives.? It's them or us, and i'm on the side of us.
-
It's them or us, and i'm on the side of us.
Who is this "us"? The British, the Americans (North, US) and the French? This "us" seems a tiny minority of the world's population. How come no other Europeans are part of "us" - except our dear old friends across the channel - Vive La France, eh? I get a whiff of the 1950s,Hollywood, cowboys and indians films about this. Will John Wayne and the 6th Cavalry be riding over the hill soon?
-
So what is your solution then Colwyn.?
-
Quite.
-
I don't have a solution to this problem. Should I have one? I don't have a solution to China's deconstruction of democracy in Hong Kong - despite the UK government having a negotiated democratic rights for HK. I don't have a solution to stopping drug trafficking out of Columbia. I don't have a solution to Israel's total disregard for a huge pile of UN rulings against their continuing illegal seizure of Palestinian land and disproportionate bombings of the civilian population of Gaza. I notice that all the other major atrocities going on the world don't attract UK intervention. Just as well considering how successive UK governments' "solutions" seem to have made matters worse. Solutions? You are joking! We don't have any.
The best place to start would be to apply international pressure on, and withdraw international support from, the Israeli regime. Many of the problems of the Middle East would be eased if "The West" didn't forgive all of their humanitarian crimes and continue to supply their military appetite.
-
I agree with you Colwyn. All the while "we" meddle in other countries business nothing will change. To misquote the many to whom this phrase is accredited.
He maybe a bast**d but he is our bast**rd
-
I loved the videos Nichola, couldn't have said it better myself ;) There was no Isis one year ago but suddenly they came out?
a new group. And to your point Colwyn as to the UK getting involved, we are Americas puppets
If they say jump we jump! Why have we not got involved in Israel? There are hundreds of people getting killed but no intervention from Uk or US. Strange don't you think?
-
Where do you think Hitler started?
Weren't we guilty of idly standing back until it was nearly too late?
10s of 1000s of people gave their lives, including Americans, we also bombed and killed the oppressors and no doubt killed lots of innocent people, giving you the freedom you have now to say what you like,
If we went by your school of thought we would be under German rule now
The united troops are out there trying to give oppressed people their freedom now, I for one am fully behind our troops.
-
Still doesn't answer my question, Why do we not intervene in Israel/Palestine then? 100's getting killed there why are we not helping?
-
Israel and Palestine is a conflict between two nations, that have been forced together, that has to be sorted by dialogue and pressure from United Nations however it is not seen as a threat to world peace as the situation with ISIS or whatever they are called now, anyone who thinks they are not a threat needs to wake up.
-
Where do you think Hitler started?
Weren't we guilty of idly standing back until it was nearly too late?
10s of 1000s of people gave their lives, including Americans, we also bombed and killed the oppressors and no doubt killed lots of innocent people, giving you the freedom you have now to say what you like,
If we went by your school of thought we would be under German rule now
The united troops are out there trying to give oppressed people their freedom now, I for one am fully behind our troops.
Interesting comparison Andy, but here is the rub, Hitler was a direct threat to 'us' and required military and political action to defeat him and his evil regmes, the latter point being Churchill's efforts to bring the USA into the Hitler war on the side of the British, which he was unsuccessful in and required the Japanese military action to bring it about 2 years after the start of the war in Europe.
Sorry I digress, the point was Hitler and his allies, a number from within the UK too, was defeated by engaging directly against him, in order to defeat him. In all of the recent military engagements in muslim countries, there has been little or no support for the so called liberating western forces. Most have been happy to have the lunatics running their asylum, and most shied away from taking any action, let alone military action against the evil jihadists or whatever. Look at the glorious Iraqi army, trained and armed at great expense largely by the west, first sign of trouble peeled off their uniform, left their modern weapons behind and ran. Those that the west believed would stand and fight - with the honorable exception of the Kurds - after having taken the money, from corruption and otherwise, simply melted away, and, in many cases, have sought and gained political asylum in the west!! It's like Vietnam all over again ...
Unlike the Brits (and their allies) in '39, those that the west might hope are prepared to fight, are not ..... and so any comparison to the ww2, with this crowd in the middle east, afghanistan, pakistan or wherever is very wide of the mark. Just to finish off on this point, my old man served in the army in Iraq (and across North Africa and rest of middle east) and he always maintained before Iraq 1 and since that the place was, in his words, 'a fly-blown ****hole' where no one could be trusted, and the place was not worth a drop of British blood, and the more things have gone on, the more I think he is was absoloutely right.
BTW this is a very well argued piece on the west policy on military intervention http://www.monbiot.com/2014/09/30/bomb-everyone/ (http://www.monbiot.com/2014/09/30/bomb-everyone/)
-
Israel and Palestine is a conflict between two nations, that have been forced together, that has to be sorted by dialogue and pressure from United Nations however it is not seen as a threat to world peace as the situation with ISIS or whatever they are called now, anyone who thinks they are not a threat needs to wake up.
Come on Andy you really are stretching the point now, what two nations? One is a regional military super power, and the other a state in name only. One demands and gets what it wants because of the USA backing, the other is never able to give up enough to its oppressor neighbour to get what it needs in order to establish its state. Almost on a daily basis Israel steals Palestinian land and drives out the Palestinian people. And it is largely this single problem that has united all muslims and more importantly enabled/encouraged the growth of radical and political islam, that threatens the world more than any other single political issue.
-
On meddling in the Middle East. If the US (with UK trailing along, as usual) hadn't decided on regime change in Iraq and so overthrown Saddam Hussein we would not have created a power vacuum in which Islamic State could flourish. The arms intended for "moderate reformers" in the Syrian Free Army rapidly found their way into hands of jihadists. So we both created the conditions for the rise if IS and we armed them and we are now bombing Iraq and our American chums are bombing Syria. Hooray for intervention? I don't think so. We don't know what the hell we are doing in the Middle East and so blunder about making matters worse. At least we haven't decided to bomb Nigeria in order to sort out the Boko Haram and make an even greater mess in Africa. Yet.
-
Ok let's sit back and do nothing, then we can see what a catastrophe for the world we can create, it will be far worse than anything we have caused by 'interfering'
-
So you're walking down the street and you see a pensioner lying on the
ground having the life kicked out of him by a yob.It's ok to walk past and
say to yourself " nothing to do with me, that's up to you two to sort out. "
-
Does that apply to Israel and Palestine or to Islamic State versus everyone else?
-
At this moment in time it applies to IS
-
These countries were better off before US and UK intervention, where are Saddams weapons of mass destruction? why don't Isis attack Israel? they are not muslim but killing Palestinian kids who are muslim. People need to wake up what is happening around them.
-
Not sure many Kurds will agree with you in respect of Iraq and Saddam Hussein...
JF
-
Not sure many Kurds will agree with you in respect of Iraq and Saddam Hussein...
JF
Is Iraq , following our intervention , a safer place than it was during Saddam Hussein's reign? It has taken months for the Government to be formed. During which time ISIS was free to develop and capture vast quantities of US supplied equipment and ammunition.
-
Israel and the Palestine issue has been the major cause of unrest in the region. And the covert US support for the Taliban during the Russo/Afghanistan war ( which the US actively encouraged) . Has done more to ferment radical Islam than any other act in history. The politicians do not understand the politics of these regions and should leave well alone. As I wrote in an earlier post , their money would have been better spent on persuading these tyrants that there was a better way, than depositing cash in Swiss bank accounts, to look after there countries.
-
Is Iraq , following our intervention , a safer place than it was during Saddam Hussein's reign?
In general terms, I suspect not. However, my comment was in response to how a Kurd would view the statement "These countries were better off before US and UK intervention".
Incidences such as the Anfal campaign of 1987/8 were horrific with up to 100,000 men, women and children murdered by the use of chemical weapons. Remember "Chemical Ali"?.
JF
-
I do not condone these awful actions but there must be a better way than bombing the hell out of a country to encourage regime change or to help improve the lives of the people.
-
We should have left the Middle East as it was. However since we didn't and 9/11 7/7 happened we cannot run the risk of these maniacs becoming any more powerful than they are.
To do nothing would mean the whole of the Middle East will come under threat from these people.
-
I don't think for a minute they would stop at the Middle East, and I don't think the English Channel would
provide a very effective moat.They want to rule an Islamic World. (a bit like someone else. }
-
Every football fan is an expert on what the manager's doing wrong and how the team should be run.
It's no different with this debate.
;)
-
The prawn sandwich guys don't have a clue! ;D
-
I don't think for a minute they would stop at the Middle East, and I don't think the English Channel would
provide a very effective moat.They want to rule an Islamic World. (a bit like someone else. }
I don't think for a minute they would stop at the Middle East, and I don't think the English Channel would
provide a very effective moat.They want to rule an Islamic World. (a bit like someone else. }
Well if there are boots to be put on the ground then let the boots be Saudi, Qatari, Jordanian, Syrian, Iraqi, Eygiptian and even Israeli, and if they get through that lot and then take on a NATO country then we can get involved. I am sick and tired of seeing British troops, at great personal cost to them and financial cost to the nation, fighting no win situations in Muslim countries.
-
The prawn sandwich guys don't have a clue! ;D
Roy Keane; The modern Rene Descartes.
-
Stop press US marines takes delivery of Nike trainers