the UK has voted in favour of Syrian air strikes.

originally posted by: blupblup
It was always going to happen so we now just have to hope that we can inflict as much damage against IS fighters and strongholds and cause little to no damage to civilians.
At the end of the day IS are literally the biggest c*nts on the planet right now and every single MP and member of ATS no matter their position on our involvement in Syria, wants these animals destroyed and halted in their tracks from spreading hatred, misery and carnage in the region and elsewhere.

The problem is that this ideology espoused and the actions perpetrated by IS are not contained to Iraq and Syria.
If we're going in to help the Syrians and try and end the civil war Then that's one thing and that is good - but IS will simply not be defeated by us dropping a few precision guided missiles.
You cannot destroy a mind set, an ideology and a warped interpretation of a religion by simply blowing stuff up.

Saudi Arabia are hugely influential and finance much of this terrorism and need dealing with but we don't, we suck up to them and ask them for guidance on human rights.
The situation is just not a simple "let's go join our buddies cos they asked us and bomb stuff and it'll all be ok"
If only it was that simple.

People are radicalized in their homes, online and there are probably as many who wish to harm us outside this region and already in "the west" as there are in the middle east.

But the decision is made and I hope that something worthwhile is accomplished by our involvement and the continued involvement of our allies.

What a strange and messed up world this has become.

Very well said. This will be a problem for a long time, whether its radical islam, radical (insert belief system), domestic terrorism, or some other group that may form in the future. Its up to us to be vigilant and do what we can to quell the problem, to preserve peace and solidarity for our progeny.

Genie Energy will be moving the rigs in soon then.

It seems to me that all of the 'Leaders' now feel the need to be SEEN to be taking part. At the moment we have uncoordinated airborne campaigns from France, UK, USA and Russia and Lord knows how many different Factions on the ground. By entering the Arena as separate 'contestants' in this melee, each country is inadvertently inviting reprisals against themself. Surely there is now a case for some sort of centralisation of Control (UN? , sorry, probably too reluctant) otherwise, as previous posts have pointed out, it's only a matter of time before there's a major misunderstanding and cock-up.
I can also see a scenario developing whereby, if we arm the current Local Ground factions as an offensive against ISIS, we will eventually have to confront them.

originally posted by: Swsgm30

I can also see a scenario developing whereby, if we arm the current Local Ground factions as an offensive against ISIS, we will eventually have to confront them.

What you mean like when we funded the Afghans to fight the Russians or when we funded Iraq to fight Iran or when we recently gave lots of money and weapons to Syrian 'rebels' to fight the civil war and then ISIS/Daesh came about?
No that would never happen - don't worry it's all under control.
There are like 70k moderates who all love the US/UK and our allies are ready to fight together in coordinated attacks to combat ISISl/Daesh AND Assad and everything will be fine.
We'll bomb the crap out of Syria some more for years to come and that'll eradicate ISIS/Daesh everywhere in the world.

Now apparently Syrian state media are saying British airstrikes are illegal and David Cameron is running a 'PR campaign' in support of a 'US-led show in violation of the UN charter.'

www.rt.com...

I hope the article is untrue, as surely ISIS are going to use this to increase their numbers.

For those who haven't already seen it; here's the declassified US DIA report from 2012

www.judicialwatch.org...

a reply to: stumason

Well, drop enough bombs on an area seperately, after a while you get the same result imo.
Anyway, carpet bombing was only an example and maybe not the best one I could've used, but I hope my point was clear.
I was referring to bombing of all airforces involved, not just the RAF.

If what you say is true, that RAF officially had no civilian casualties reported in Iraq against ISIS airstrikes, then it's highly commendable and an example for all other airforces to follow.

I still think, that the ISIS ideoligy can't be eradicated by bombs only, because that in turn allows radicalism to grow larger around the world.
ISIS should not be made into martyrs, because it will strengthen their cause even further.

I would do it just for the lulz.

originally posted by: stumason

originally posted by: Tyrion79
a reply to: MrCrow

Question, what's the bigger threat?
1. A suicide bomber taking as much innocent lives as possible.
2. An airplane carpet bombing an area, taking all lives within extended range.

Nr.1 is considered terroristic, nr.2 is considered necessary, because of it.

Your examples fail, because the UK is not "carpet bombing" anywhere and hasn't done so in 70 odd years.

In fact, in the 400 or so airstrikes carried out by the RAF in Iraq against IS, zero civilian casualties have been reported, because of the strict ROE the RAF go by and the precision of the weapons used. Find me any other air force that can make a similar claim.

Not sure that claim of zero civillian causalties can be verified; it makes for a nice soundbyte and helps ease the collective conscience of the nation but there has been extensive reportage from the past couple of years of ISIS forcing oil workers to continue to man the plants when they're taken over.

How does a jet, even with precision targeting discern between combatant and guy that's been treated as a slave?

The UK has not voted in favor of syrian air strikes,a very small group of profiteers who pass themselves off as representatives of the people have voted. It should not be presented as though every man woman and child in the nation took such a vote.

This is a global phenomenon too,these creatures perform the same masquerade in every culture they have infected and undermined and in our confused states they play us off against one another.
Who pays the price of their actions? We do.

We are left to hold the karmic bag of their disgusting deeds,because after all they represent us,right?
This is despicable and it has to stop.

Can it be made clear, the UK didn't vote for air strikes, our aspiring war mongers did in Parliament. We the people were given no choice about this and the reason being that we the people would NOT have voted to do it. Look at Iraq, how much better is Iraq after we walked in there and started throwing our weight around while losing our own soldiers in a war over lies. Iraq went straight back to the internal Muslim crap slinging while soldiers died in the middle of it all.

The only thing I agree with is that IS and radical Islam should be defeated but my difference is that it should be defeated HERE in the UK where it and Radicalism has a growing following not helped by the open door policy we have for unknown young males with no documents that we offer sanctuary to but get repaid by demands for Shariah law and home grown attacks.

This notion that Obama etc want to end IS is utter cobblers, they set them up, supply them and allow them safe exits along with countries like Turkey.

Try having a war on corruption...

originally posted by: Mclaneinc


The only thing I agree with is that IS and radical Islam should be defeated but my difference is that it should be defeated HERE in the UK where it and Radicalism has a growing following not helped by the open door policy we have for unknown young males with no documents that we offer sanctuary to but get repaid by demands for Shariah law and home grown attacks.

I would expand that to include all of Europe, US, Canada and Australia.

I would go further and state that if they want to live in these countries

the would have to embrace the (non religious) customs of the countries

of not covering their faces.

I recently saw an Australian video from a dash board cam. which exonerated

a police officer of sexual and racial harassment of a Muslim woman in full

Hijab. If it hadn't of been for the web cam. he would have both lost his job

and been imprisoned.

'She' got off a sentence for false accusation, because she had four young

children??!! A statement from her lawyer said it was someone else impersonating

her in a hijab Couldn't make it up could you?




My children always knew *My house my rules* And its now the same for their

children. When in Rome and all that...... Taking it a step further .....

OUR COUNTRY OUR RULES!

RAF bomb raids in Syria dismissed as 'non-event'

Since MPs voted for war over Syria RAF Tornados and Typhoons have mounted only three strike missions

...

General Mark Welsh, chief of staff of the US Air Force, said: “This is never going to look like the first Gulf War air campaign. That is just not the intent of the strategy that has been decided on, whether anyone agrees with that or not.”

Of the 148 airstrikes on Syria between 1 and 22 December, the United States carried out 127 and the “rest of coalition” 21, according to the Centcom figures. It is known that French aircraft carried out two strikes in the period, meaning that no more than 19 strikes were carried out by the RAF. A “strike” means that at least one bomb was dropped or missile fired.

British Ministry of Defence reports of the RAF’s three attack missions in Syria speak of them striking at least 17 targets. The unmanned drone attack on December 25 involved firing a single Hellfire missile at an Isil checkpoint south of Raqqa.

The Ministry of Defence said that the RAF’s contribution to reconnaissance over Syria is more significant, with some reports that it is providing up to 60 per cent of the coalition’s entire tactical reconnaissance capability. It declined to specify the number of reconnaissance missions flown, however.