ISIS are pure evil.

Zebra3 wrote: »

If Ireland wants people to go and fight IS, will you volunteer?

I'd go to train the Iraqi Army and/or the Kurdish Peshmerga, like New Zealand is sending their troops to do, like the Americans and British are doing, yes. Yes I would.

Would you... not?

SeanW wrote: »

............

That's why Buddhists aren't murdering Chinese people over the occupation of Tibet, ................

...he said, ignoring the Burmese and Sri Lankans all of a sudden, and the former insurgency in Tibet during the 1970's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Tibetan_unrest

Wurzelbert wrote: »

this should be european thing...the eurocorps and the foreign legion come to mind...no need for irish civilians to volunteer...

God no, they're needed here.

Wurzelbert

DeadHand wrote: »

Talking of Maori soldiers, New Zealand had a Maori battalion fighting in the Mediterranean theatre during the second world war.[...]

more folks from the colonies forced into a war that was not theirs...

liam24

Drakares wrote: »

New Zealand send troops to fight ISIS. Great speech by the Prime Minister: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11407112

What disgusting imperialist scum these people are. What gives a bunch of yokels from some semi-paradise on the other side of the world the right to bomb other people's countries?

liam24

IrishTrajan wrote: »

I'd go to train the Iraqi Army and/or the Kurdish Peshmerga, like New Zealand is sending their troops to do, like the Americans and British are doing, yes. Yes I would.

Would you... not?

Well put on your tin hat and join the Peshmerga. Off you go.

jimgoose

liam24 wrote: »

...What gives a bunch of yokels from some semi-paradise on the other side of the world the right to bomb other people's countries?

I wonder indeed. I hope the Kiwis ask the fine chaps of IS that very thing when they get there.

liam24 wrote: »

What disgusting imperialist scum these people are. What gives a bunch of yokels from some semi-paradise on the other side of the world the right to bomb other people's countries?

.....when did NZ decide to bomb this country/countries? And who are the Yokels exactly?

IrishTrajan wrote: »

I'd go to train the Iraqi Army and/or the Kurdish Peshmerga, like New Zealand is sending their troops to do, like the Americans and British are doing, yes. Yes I would.

Would you... not?

Firstly I don't have any military training and secondly what the hell gives the "West" the right to interfere in the Middle East?

Imagine some Middle Eastern countries decided to bomb London over NI or Dublin over the Irish state being basically run by all the RC paedos. Would that have been acceptable?

You'd swear outside intervention in the ME did any good.

Wurzelbert

liam24 wrote: »

What disgusting imperialist scum these people are. What gives a bunch of yokels from some semi-paradise on the other side of the world the right to bomb other people's countries?

as i understand they are just planning to send a small few folks to train the iraqi army or so and likely get kidnapped and beheaded in the process...a complete waste of men and money anyway...but then maybe i misunderstood and the kiwis are really planning to wipe out isis all on their own...

Tombi!

SeanW wrote: »

No. You have to pervert Buddhism to commit violence.

You have to pervert Islam not to commit violence.

That's why Buddhists aren't murdering Chinese people over the occupation of Tibet, whereas the dozens of Islamist groups ...

Stop with the generalizations of Muslims

Roger Hassenforder

Wurzelbert wrote: »

as i understand they are just planning to send a small few folks to train the iraqi army or so and likely get kidnapped and beheaded in the process...

You almost sound like you'd be disappointed if they retain their heads.

Fair dues to NZ "doing something" about IS

crockholm

Nodin wrote: »

You're aware of the Sri Lankan campaign against the Tamils? The Burmese riots against the Rohinga? Saying "its not exactly like" is a bit of a cop out. They're exclusionist sectarian militants that will and do use violence.

Bit like the muslims then?

Yeah, sure whose interested in that.....
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/dd32491e-8b2b-11e4-be89-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3SWdUcmnK

Rather ignores the sectarian war against the Tamils that went on for near on 30 years and this kind of thing in Burma as well
http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/01/23/burma-investigate-new-killings-rohingya
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/04/01/burma-satellite-images-detail-destruction-meiktila
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/10/26/burma-new-violence-arakan-state
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/25/burma-muslims-two-child-limit

https://www.worldwatchmonitor.org/2010/01-January/14251/

You might be a better informed if you stopped scanning for "muslim" and ignoring all else.

Well,tbh,you didn't post any links about burmeese vs. rohinga people so I just commented on the 2 links you did include.
Well they might be sectarian,but again to compare them to the likes of AQ,BH,IS,ANF and all the others is severe over-exaggeration.

As for mentioning the Tamil in Sri Lanka,well, was that more ethnic cleansing or civil war?

I just don't see how the BSS would realistically be included in a list with any of the Islamic fundamentalists mentioned earlier.

Wurzelbert

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

You almost sound like you'd be disappointed if they retain their heads.

Fair dues to NZ "doing something" about IS

haha, oh no, i wish them all the best...and it is a nice gesture...

crockholm wrote: »

Well,tbh,you didn't post any links about burmeese vs. rohinga people so I just commented on the 2 links you did include.
Well they might be sectarian,but again to compare them to the likes of AQ,BH,IS,ANF and all the others is severe over-exaggeration..

It's the notion that somehow Islam is unique in producing extremists that I'm taking issue with. There are certainly more problems with Islamic extremists at the moment, but taken overall in the course of time, its wrong
to single the faith out as uniquely violent.

crockholm wrote: »

As for mentioning the Tamil in Sri Lanka,well, was that more ethnic cleansing or civil war?.

Hindu v Buddhist, initially started by a co-ordinated massacre of 2-3,000 Tamils, though fuelled by previous decades of sectarian/ethnic discrimination and violence.

crockholm wrote: »

I just don't see how the BSS would realistically be included in a list with any of the Islamic fundamentalists mentioned earlier.

The idea was put forward that somehow you wouldn't have exclusionist Buddhist nationalists. The BSS is exactly the kind of mentality that led to the Tamil war, and examined in that context, is an example of Buddhist extremism.

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

You almost sound like you'd be disappointed if they retain their heads.

Fair dues to NZ "doing something" about IS

When will NZ and the rest do something about Saudi Arabia or is ok for them to behead people?

DeadHand

Zebra3 wrote: »

When will NZ and the rest do something about Saudi Arabia or is ok for them to behead people?

ISIS and SA are similarly odious animals and ideological fellow travelers but threats of dramatically different urgency in that ISIS is actively attempting to expand while SA (while unquestionably looking to aid the rise of militant Islam across the world) is not openly looking to expand physically. For now.

Even if the frankly horrible House of Saud were deposed bitter experience tells us what replaces them could be so much more volatile and expansionist.

DeadHand wrote: »

ISIS and SA are similarly odious animals and ideological fellow travelers but threats of dramatically different urgency in that ISIS is actively attempting to expand while SA (while unquestionably looking to aid the rise of militant Islam across the world) is not openly looking to expand physically. For now.

Even if the frankly horrible House of Saud were deposed bitter experience tells us what replaces them could be so much more volatile and expansionist.

So we'll keep doing business with them and lower our flags out of respect for their dead dictators as they chop people's heads off and fund groups like IS....

liam24 wrote: »

Well put on your tin hat and join the Peshmerga. Off you go.

Take off your tin foil hat and join the work force. Off the dole you go.

liam24 wrote: »

What disgusting imperialist scum these people are. What gives a bunch of yokels from some semi-paradise on the other side of the world the right to bomb other people's countries?

Yes, thoroughly disgusting. Imperialism is absolutely horrendous.

Can you believe that these barbarians want to form an Islamic Empire?! Bunch of slack-jawed yokels indeed! Who gave them the right to bomb other people's countries, and burn people alive, and behead people, and perform mass executions, and indoctrinate children into their warped way of thinking?!

Truly barbarous.

Zebra3 wrote: »

Firstly I don't have any military training and secondly what the hell gives the "West" the right to interfere in the Middle East?

Imagine some Middle Eastern countries decided to bomb London over NI or Dublin over the Irish state being basically run by all the RC paedos. Would that have been acceptable?

You'd swear outside intervention in the ME did any good.

BEHEADING AMERICAN CITIZENS GIVES THEM THE RIGHT. KILLING JAPANESE CITIZENS GIVE THEM THE RIGHT. MURDERING PEOPLE IN MASS EXECUTIONS GIVE THEM THE RIGHT. BURNING PEOPLE ALIVE GIVES THEM THE RIGHT. TEACHING CHILDREN THAT THEY SHOULD DIE FOR THE CALIPHATE GIVES THEM THE RIGHT. THREATENING TO DESTROY THE WEST AND OUR WAY OF LIFE GIVES THEM THE RIGHT.

People like you are disgusting. You argue against interventionism, when you'd be the first to cry for help if they came here.

THESE PEOPLE ARE GOD DAMN MONSTERS.

We should bomb them, and shoot them. Cast down their leadership, and root every one of single one of them from every god damn nook and cranny, every city and town, every lake and puddle, every cave and hole in the ground, and we should shoot them.

The people won't stop. It isn't in them to stop. They will keep going, and keep growing, and keeping committing mass god damn genocide until the last one is dead.

Yes, the West does a lot of corrupt ****. But you know what we don't do? WE DON'T BURN PEOPLE TO DEATH BECAUSE OF A GOD DAMN BOOK.

IrishTrajan wrote: »

BEHEADING AMERICAN CITIZENS GIVES THEM THE RIGHT. KILLING JAPANESE CITIZENS GIVE THEM THE RIGHT. MURDERING PEOPLE IN MASS EXECUTIONS GIVE THEM THE RIGHT. BURNING PEOPLE ALIVE GIVES THEM THE RIGHT. TEACHING CHILDREN THAT THEY SHOULD DIE FOR THE CALIPHATE GIVES THEM THE RIGHT. THREATENING TO DESTROY THE WEST AND OUR WAY OF LIFE GIVES THEM THE RIGHT.

People like you are disgusting. You argue against interventionism, when you'd be the first to cry for help if they came here.

THESE PEOPLE ARE GOD DAMN MONSTERS.

We should bomb them, and shoot them. Cast down their leadership, and root every one of single one of them from every god damn nook and cranny, every city and town, every lake and puddle, every cave and hole in the ground, and we should shoot them.

The people won't stop. It isn't in them to stop. They will keep going, and keep growing, and keeping committing mass god damn genocide until the last one is dead.

Yes, the West does a lot of corrupt ****. But you know what we don't do? WE DON'T BURN PEOPLE TO DEATH BECAUSE OF A GOD DAMN BOOK.

What about all the chemical weapons dropped on Vietnam?

Zebra3 wrote: »

What about all the chemical weapons dropped on Vietnam?

Stop changing the god damn goal posts. You asked what gives them the right, and I answered you.

BuilderPlumber

DeadHand wrote: »

ISIS and SA are similarly odious animals and ideological fellow travelers but threats of dramatically different urgency in that ISIS is actively attempting to expand while SA (while unquestionably looking to aid the rise of militant Islam across the world) is not openly looking to expand physically. For now.

Even if the frankly horrible House of Saud were deposed bitter experience tells us what replaces them could be so much more volatile and expansionist.

In an IDEAL world, I would like to see the following terrorist groups or regimes consigned to history:

ISIS (in any form)
al Qaeda (in any form)
Boko Haram (in any form)
al Shabaab (in any form)
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (in its current form)
The Islamic Republic of Iran (in its current form)
The Islamic Republic of (North) Sudan (in its current form)

ALL of the above have left their countries much worse place after they took power in them. As much as I wish to see ALL the above gone or reformed, it is careful how each plays out. For the first 4 listed terrorist organisations, it is essential these are defeated militarily before they form a state. For the last 3, it should not be a military action. Iran has taken some steps with the unelected elements at least recognising the moderate government of president Rouhani and hopefully the world can support its journey from a Saudi-style monarchy in all but name to a proper republic. Moderation in Iran needs to be supported by the West. For Sudan, perhaps the breakup was messy but at least it shows perhaps there is some reform going on in this theocratic dictatorship too. Relations between Sudan and the West have improved and hopefully this can again install a transition to moderation.

Of the 3, Saudi Arabia proves the most hardline and ignored because there is no pressure on it. As much as I'd love to see the Saudi regime overthrown, I think it would cost us all very dearly and that's why the Saudis can run a neo-Nazi regime in all but name without much criticism from anyone. The West should negotiate things with the regime and reward them for reversing fascism.

A Middle East without fascism where people can dress, drink, eat and worship as they please, a world where Islam can once again be lead by moderate, intelligent people instead of brainless bigots and a world where terrorists don't get a say in where we visit, what transport we use, what laws are implemented in countries, etc. This is what all of us bar the terrorists want to see.

Unfortunately, the choice at present seems to between either a bad military dictator and a fascism 'Islamist' regime in many places and between a bad 'Islamic' republic and a much worse 'Islamic' caliphate in other places. These should not be the only choices and the decent people of Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, Arabia (Saudi and its neighbours), Sudan, and Iraq among others deserve much better than the pretenders who have tarnished these once great nations.

DeadHand wrote: »

It is a morally reprehensible tactic but, sadly, in war the side most willing to eschew morality usually wins.

Eh...no. It's usually those with the superior numbers and greater economic, tactical and strategic advantages that win.

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Well, regardless of what ISIS does, it's not like Ireland will be helping. We'll sit on our hands, talk about humanitarianism, and continue to slash defence spending.

What will you do?

Tombi!

IrishTrajan do not post in this thread again

Tony EH wrote: »

Eh...no. It's usually those with the superior numbers and greater economic, tactical and strategic advantages that win.

The Taliban, and the Viet Minh before them, would disagree with you.

IrishTrajan wrote: »

I'd go to train the Iraqi Army and/or the Kurdish Peshmerga, like New Zealand is sending their troops to do, like the Americans and British are doing, yes. Yes I would.

Would you... not?

What, with your nonsense below:

IrishTrajan wrote: »

I'd love to see a Celtic War Dance... Just a bunch of Irish nutters painted blue from head to toe, foaming at the mouth and off their rockers on shrooms, screaming at the top of their lungs.

Good luck with that.

:rolleyes: