Gringo180 wrote: » Bit of a coincidence so that these fundamentalist groups have started to wage war on us after our first invasion of Iraq and has got worse after our second invasion?? I don't recall of ever hearing of an attack by these jihadists on American soil before invading Iraq?
Gringo180 wrote: » Bit of a coincidence so that these fundamentalist groups have started to wage war on us after our first invasion of Iraq
crockholm wrote: » The first attack on WTC
Gatling wrote: » If that's the case why not blame russia
P_1 wrote: » One thing that I can't understand is why the victims of these beheadings read out those statements condemming the west before those animals behead them. If you're going to die would your last message not be one condemming the barbarians who are about to chop your head off?
Gringo180 wrote: » The first invasion of Iraq was in 1990, the first world trade bombings was 1993.
Gatling wrote: » Pan Am flight 103 1988 predates the both 1983 Marines barracks in beirut Madrid 1985 The list goes on
Gringo180 wrote: » The backing of the Israelis The blowing out of the sky of Iran Air killing 290 people The propping up of the Shah, one of the most brutal dictators of the 20th century Military presence on the Arab peninsula The list goes on.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » . You asked for Islamic attacks pre-US invasion of Iraq..
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » some serious whataboutery there dude. You asked for Islamic attacks pre-US invasion of Iraq. Some were provided. You lost.
SEPT 23 1989 wrote: » they will have their wish but unlike previous campaigns the western forces will be allowed take the gloves off and fight like they did when they went up against nazi Germany
LordNorbury wrote: » I reckon there is going to be a serious day of reckoning very soon for these four beheadings, the latest obviously being Alan Henning, one of these mornings we are going to wake up to news that an overnight bombing campaign has completely flattened Raqqa.
WakeUp wrote: » what do you mean flatten Raqqa?...I would hazard a guess that wont be happening. and its about the worst thing that could be done if I think you mean what I think you mean/ the smart thing to do here is make a deal with Assad and let his army with Iranian/Russian support crush them on the ground. that would be the correct approach. but of course Assad has to go according to the west in their wisdom. but the thing is he isnt going anywhere. if isis is to be tackled effectively its time for some realism.
Gatling wrote: » Flatten raqqua let's see what happens then isis numbers will soar with nut jobs seeking revenge for the innocent and helpless Muslim women and kids murders by the infidels
LordNorbury wrote: » It'll either be subjected to high level bombing overnight to the point where the town will have been completely flattened, without any consideration for collateral damage or innocent life, or else a large US special ops ground force will be deployed around the town and also simultaneously dropped/parachuted into the town in the middle of the night, the purpose being to surround it in the first instance, and to kill all ISIS combatants in the town. Option 2 will obviously involve US causalities but less Syrian civilian casualties than option 1, which would kill a large number of civilians and very few if any US military personnel. I don't think Obama is capable of sorting this problem out, his leadership and direction since day one has been appalling and weak, but any other US president would have acted as I have envisaged, either already or else the plans would be at an advanced stage. But I think make no mistake about it, what has been happening up until now I don't think will be allowed to continue for much longer, and it is going to take a much larger event I think to disrupt ISIS, who are practically inside Baghdad now. It sounds cruel and disconnected to say, "just flatten Raqqa", but ISIS are killing thousands of Iraqi people every week, it was reported they killed 1,000 Iraqi soldiers last week alone, as they sit just outside Baghdad, so I reckon there is going to be a large scale event in the very near future that is going to knock ISIS for six, and I reckon it will be a ground invasion of Raqqa or I suspect the town will be razed to the ground. This guy I think is on the money when it comes to calling the absolute and total balls that Obama is making of this and the very fundamental strategic errors he is making: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnkHWL7lkmE
Gringo180 wrote: » If you care to read my original post again I said terror attacks on American soil pre the first invasion of Iraq. I still haven't been provided with any.
kryogen wrote: » Really? Christians do not and have never, murdered people, millions of people never mind thousands, raped women and kids and mutilated people in the name of Christianity? Seriously? Some people have a pretty weird grasp on history and reality.
WakeUp wrote: » get their wish where though have people thought this through. western troops cant be sent into Syria, perhaps Iraq but not Syria. not unless a deal is made with Assad and the current geopolitical climate changes. in the eyes of the west Syria/Iran/Russia are evil. yet those three countries have an alliance and defence pact of sorts. so sending western troops into Syria could trigger something a lot bigger and more destructive than we can even begin to imagine. to take out isis they need to be tackled in Syria. air strikes alone wont do that. and western troops on the ground wont be happening for the reasons Ive just outlined. Syria/Iran and Russia wont have that not even close. so whats the plan.
WakeUp wrote: » the colonel is a fool. Im not having a go at you personally so please dont think I am. but that chap is an idiot who doesnt know what he is talking about, blatant American whooya dumb ass arrogance is what is emanating from his mouth. he reckons Turkey are crucial yet fails to mention Syria/Iran/Russia. the only people that can defeat isis on the ground are the Syrians not the Americans or the west or anyone else but the Syrians. bombing isis into dust in Syria will not defeat them but embolden them and it will gain sympathy for them. The US and its allies are part of the problem in the middle east not the overall solution. which the colonel fails to grasp or perhaps he does and he is just following the script. western warmaking in that part of the world has failed, in an epic overt fashion which we are quite clearly seeing. I mean surely they cant be that stupid as to think they alone can take a hammer to this and sort it out. because they cant.
Drakares wrote: » We're talking about Muslims and Christians now. Not 200 years ago. The "Catholic Problem" has been more or less solved with time since people became more scientifically informed and the church became less strict. Are you saying it's all well and good now that Islam has it's turn to start killing people since the Catholic Church has done it? Stop twisting my words to suit your argument. If you can't form any coherent argument then don't post at all. It is stupid and you should feel bad.
johnny wrote: Stop twisting my words to suit your argument. If you can't form any coherent argument then don't post at all. It is stupid and you should feel bad.
LordNorbury wrote: » Disagree, the Japanese were bombed into submission in WW2, same can happen here and should happen here in my view. Obama doesn't understand the nature of what is going on here, he's fiddling around with blowing up a tent here and a jeep there, a complete waste of time.
Larry Wildman wrote: » The only way to deal with these jihadists and those who shelter them is to wipe them out. I'd be on the side of those advocating the use of nukes. It's time for the US to unleash the power of the atom on our friends in the Middle East.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c11f742d28c411a385fee4c52bb48d6b.svg)
