RAF Tornadoes strike ISIS targets

Friday 8 April – Typhoons destroyed a terrorist “hell cannon” in western Iraq.

Yes, I've made that point on here before. They were quiet like the mice that they are.

Probably by now most of the Kurds in Iraq would have been either killed or displaced (along with all religious minorities) and maybe even Baghdad would have been attacked. Don't forget that they were pretty close before the strikes began. Meanwhile these people would be patting themselves on the backs for being so "progressive", "empathetic" and "peaceful" while the blood of the victims drained from the bodies. How the hell can you protest against using weaponry with the accuracy to destroy ISIS assets and arms while creating barely any civilian casualties? These people are morons.

This is the thing with pussyfists, sorry I mean pacifists. Standing on the moral high ground while the genocide is happening beneath them. Complete burdens and always with the most obnoxious self-righteousness. These Stop the War Coalition idiots for example. Like Corbyn. They're not actually about reducing violence and misery like they claim. They're only about hindering us and anybody we wish to help. There is nothing at all noble about them or any of their views.

Probably by now most of the Kurds in Iraq would have been either killed or displaced (along with all religious minorities)

and maybe even Baghdad would have been attacked. Don't forget that they were pretty close before the strikes began.

They're not actually about reducing violence and misery like they claim. They're only about hindering us and anybody we wish to help. There is nothing at all noble about them or any of their views.

They're cowards, frankly. They'd rather a million innocent lives die at someone else's hand than be responsible for one death due to collateral damage. They'd rather have an easy sleep at night than face the harsh realities of war. Selfish cowards the lot of them.

Yes, I've made that point on here before. They were quiet like the mice that they are.

I thought this video might cheer us up. It's an airstrike during the Battle of Kobane; there was an ISIS infestation on a hill near the town, they'd raised their flags and dug trenches, and were firing down on the town from it.

[video="youtube;JWMKogbnYCQ"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWMKogbnYCQ[/video]

but... they had an unhappy childhood and needed counselling for anger management issues

They're cowards, frankly. They'd rather a million innocent lives die at someone else's hand than be responsible for one death due to collateral damage. They'd rather have an easy sleep at night than face the harsh realities of war. Selfish cowards the lot of them.

But they'll scream blue bloody murder if we don't act if there's a famine or a potential genocide going on.

They just received 2,000 pounds worth (geddit) of the best counselling the US Air Force can offer. And it works; they won't be feeling any fear or upset now.

In all seriousness, ISIS terrorists who are killed by the West get off pretty easily. It doesn't hurt being dead and you don't know you're dead. For a lot of them, one moment they're driving down the highway in their Toyota Hilux, the next moment they simply cease to exist after a Brimstone missile takes them out.

It's a much more humane death than they give to many of their victims.

Meanwhile these people would be patting themselves on the backs for being so "progressive", "empathetic" and "peaceful" while the blood of the victims drained from the bodies.

This is a problem I have with them as well. At best it's just like "yay we stopped another Irag disaster from happening" but that means the new Saddam is still killing people.... It isn't a victory to cheer about. Either outcome is awful and you have just chosen the least awful.

They're cowards, frankly. They'd rather a million innocent lives die at someone else's hand than be responsible for one death due to collateral damage. They'd rather have an easy sleep at night than face the harsh realities of war. Selfish cowards the lot of them.

Exactly. The 5000 Yezidis on Mount Sinjar who had been surrounded would undoubtedly have been carried off into slavery and (for the men) certain death. Many thousands more Kurds and Yezidis would be killed and ISIS would be well-advanced in their plan to ethnically and religiously cleanse northern Iraq.

It cannot be disputed that Western airpower was the crucial element in helping the Kurds to defend Kobane. Before the air sorties stared, Kobane was completely surrounded and on the verge of falling, Erdogan was gloating about it and everyone thought it was a fait accompli.

Then the US Air Force cavalry arrived and they worked closely with the Kurds to turn Kobane into a giant ISIS graveyard. It was their Stalingard, over 2000 ISIS fighters were killed. Following that the Kurds retook the city and the surrounding villages and have expanded out from there, such that they are not that far away from Raqqa now. It is insane for the hard left to claim that it would have been better if we'd simply allowed Kobane to fall. There's an infuriating cowardice about it, and note how free they are with other people's lives. The Kurds want to fight, we have the means to help them in a big way, but the hard left says "Let them die. It's better to have Kurdish blood on our hands from inaction than ISIS blood on our hands from action".



That's a very important point. ISIS was on the outskirts of Baghdad, there were reports that Iraq government ministers were preparing to fly their staff out to Basra to set up a new command centre there. The hard left often appeal to the importance of stability (the irony... "progressives" desperately clinging to the status quo and calling it principle and values?), and talk about how the 2003 invasion of Iraq "destabilised" the Middle East. Well, the Iraqi government collapsing and Baghdad falling to ISIS would be more destabilising than anything we've seen for centuries. The psychological shock that would cause would be incalculable. It would probably cause tens of thousands more sympathisers to flock to ISIS banner seeing that it was on the march.



Precisely. They will say it's better to have the blood of innocents on our hands from inaction than the blood of criminals and bloodthirsty terrorists on our hands through action. That is a horrible position to adopt, as you say there's nothing principled about it. They are simply doing whatever they perceive is in opposition to the West, no matter how many people will die as a result.

And for those who say there is a moral difference on the perspective of action vs inaction, that is less salient where the actor in question (the West) has so much power. If you are a 6foot5 wrestler and you see a puny little runt trying to rape a child, then you do have much more moral culpability than, say, failing to get involved where it was ten guys with guns and you are just one. If you have it within your power to help and that help you provide is nothing to you but it makes a huge difference to the life of the victim, then I don't believe that the "pacifists" can plead that inaction has no moral turpitude attached and that only action does.

Well said. And as I say above, when the actor in question is very powerful and helping costs them nothing, and the cost of inaction to innocents is so high, then they can't claim that failing to act has no moral implications. Ultimately I don't think they are opposed to violence per se, look how gleefully they cheered on the Russian bombardment and how they shrieked with delight babbling about how "Only Putin is confronting ISIS" (a total lie, but they swallow the Moscow line whole).

Ultimately they will always oppose whatever the West does, and support Russia. The British anti-war movement are effectively Trotskyists and Stalinists, and for whatever reason they feel this vestigial allegiance to Russia (even though Russia is crony capitalism on steroids). They will oppose any Western military action, period. And they will support Russia and any Russian client states where these states are in conflict with the West. They will criticise Western client states and dependents like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Israel while justifying the most heinous human rights abuses in Russian clients like Syria and Iran. They are only consistent on one point; obedience to Moscow

This is a problem I have with them as well. At best it's just like "yay we stopped another Irag disaster from happening" but that means the new Saddam is still killing people.... It isn't a victory to cheer about. Either outcome is awful and you have just chosen the least awful.

Excellent post. Agree with all of it.

My Iraqi friends were telling me that the people in Baghdad were arming themselves to the teeth and getting ready when ISIS were closing in on Baghdad. It was around this time when the airstrikes started really kicking in and they've not come close since. Can you imagine what would have happened if they'd moved in like they did in Mosul? I don't even want to think about it......

Your post actually casted my mind to the Rwanda genocide where over 4 million were killed. Clinton wanted to intervene just as it was kicking off. I don't think I need to explain to you the rest of this..........