The Student Room Group

Would you be conscripted to fight ISIS?

Poll

Would you be conscripted to fight ISIS?

If the government said, "We are conscripting all able men aged 18-41" to join the army and fight ISIS in the Middle East. Would you join up?

Scroll to see replies

Hell to the no and i am not even a man.
Original post by noobynoo
If the government said, "We are conscripting all able men aged 18-41" to join the army and fight ISIS in the Middle East. Would you join up?

No, I am more than willing to volunteer and in fact I intend to. Not on behalf of the British government however, I would fight independently alongside the Lions of Rojava. The government has no right to coerce people into fighting on their behalf.
Also, the poll makes no sense, sort it out. "Would you be conscripted to fight ISIS?", the question makes no sense because you don't have a choice when it comes to conscription.
Reply 4
Conscripted would imply a modicum of training and legitimacy.

Volunteering and turning up could mean any ragtag bunch of idiots with no training and no discipline.
Original post by Clip
Conscripted would imply a modicum of training and legitimacy.

Volunteering and turning up could mean any ragtag bunch of idiots with no training and no discipline.

Train in Syria. Also, it has been proven over many separate occasions that militia/Guerilla warfare is just as effective as other (legitimate) means
Reply 6
Original post by James Milibanter
Train in Syria. Also, it has been proven over many separate occasions that militia/Guerilla warfare is just as effective as other (legitimate) means


That's because it's asymmetric warfare. You fight guerilla against an organised military force because it's the only thing you can do. You can't stand up fight and you can't hold ground. It won't really work against a force like Daesh who aren't much more than a guerilla force themselves. They're not there to attack, they don't have real logistic chains to attack.
Original post by Clip
That's because it's asymmetric warfare. You fight guerilla against an organised military force because it's the only thing you can do. You can't stand up fight and you can't hold ground. It won't really work against a force like Daesh who aren't much more than a guerilla force themselves. They're not there to attack, they don't have real logistic chains to attack.

So what's your point? all you really did was explain mine
I would consider smoking jihadists a privilege.
Reply 9
Original post by James Milibanter
So what's your point? all you really did was explain mine


No I didn't. The point is that you can't really do guerilla warfare against an entity like Daesh.

Guerilla warfare is about attacking the enemy's logs and making it expensive in money and manpower to occupy an area. Daesh aren't a proper army, and they're getting support from the Sunni areas they're occupying - so what's the idea with fighting Daesh with guerilla war? Start killing the civilians?
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Clip
No I didn't. The point is that you can't really do guerilla warfare against an entity like Daesh.

Guerilla warfare is about attacking the enemy's logs. Daesh aren't a proper army, and they're getting support from the Sunni areas they're occupying - so what's the idea with fighting Daesh with guerilla war? Start killing the civilians?

Killing Civilians is what would happen if we sent in our forces. A few volunteers here and there would stop a mass escalation of violence. Keep the warfare as it is, keep civilians alive and contain ISIS until they surrender. That should be the plan, that is the plan and the plan is working. Why else would they team up with Boko Haram?
Original post by James Milibanter
I would fight independently alongside the Lions of Rojava. The government has no right to coerce people into fighting on their behalf.


I echo this. If I had to fight in Syria, I'd far sooner fight for Rojava than the British Army.
Original post by Plantagenet Crown
Why would I give myself a death sentence?


It's not a death sentence if you're up there in a chopper or an AC-130 dropping bombs on the ********s.

Or tell me you don't salivate at the thought of slamming hellfire missiles into their faces remotely, from a comfy seat in some RAF base in southern England? Sipping tea while helping to end pure evil.
Original post by James Milibanter
Killing Civilians is what would happen if we sent in our forces. A few volunteers here and there would stop a mass escalation of violence. Keep the warfare as it is, keep civilians alive and contain ISIS until they surrender. That should be the plan, that is the plan and the plan is working. Why else would they team up with Boko Haram?


:lolwut:

In case you didn't notice, the plan is not working. IS controls vast swathes of Syria and Iraq. Ancient, priceless ruins are being ransacked and obliterated forever by cowardly cretins with bulldozers and sledgehammers. Innocent people are being beheaded left right and center, with their gruesome deaths published on the internet for all to see. Women and girls are being sexually enslaved. Entire families are being murdered. All minorities are being brutally oppressed. Genocide is occurring against the Christians and Yazidis of Iraq. This is no joke.
Original post by felamaslen
It's not a death sentence if you're up there in a chopper or an AC-130 dropping bombs on the ********s.

Or tell me you don't salivate at the thought of slamming hellfire missiles into their faces remotely, from a comfy seat in some RAF base in southern England? Sipping tea while helping to end pure evil.

Great until you drop bombs on some syrian village that contained 34 innocent kids. Don't say that it wont happen, because it has done previously. Civilian deaths are a given when it comes to attrition.
Original post by James Milibanter
Great until you drop bombs on some syrian village that contained 34 innocent kids. Don't say that it wont happen, because it has done previously. Civilian deaths are a given when it comes to attrition.


Many more will be saved by the obliteration of IS than are accidentally (and of course tragically) killed in the process.
Original post by anarchism101
I echo this. If I had to fight in Syria, I'd far sooner fight for Rojava than the British Army.


Isn't the fight against the global jihad more important to you than quibbles like this?

Anyway, as long as you enjoy deleting terrorists, you're my friend.
Original post by felamaslen
Many more will be saved by the obliteration of IS than are accidentally (and of course tragically) killed in the process.

The answer is not attrition, it is further volunteers, no more civilian deaths, this is a moral issue. Volunteers can go and fight, it is their choice, same with ISIS, civilians are completely innocent so their lives should not be at risk, no matter how much easier it makes the fight against ISIS.
Original post by James Milibanter
Also, the poll makes no sense, sort it out. "Would you be conscripted to fight ISIS?", the question makes no sense because you don't have a choice when it comes to conscription.


I'm pretty sure they allowed conscientious objections during WW1 (though it was heavily frowned upon - silly really, as WW1 was a terrible war on the whole; I would object to fighting in that one, unless it were against the genocidal Ottomans maybe).
Original post by felamaslen
I'm pretty sure they allowed conscientious objections during WW1 (though it was heavily frowned upon - silly really, as WW1 was a terrible war on the whole; I would object to fighting in that one, unless it were against the genocidal Ottomans maybe).

voluntary conscription is a juxtaposition is all I was saying.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending