What would you do with regards to ISIL/ISIS/IS...?

Scroll to see replies

ISIS may not be "scared" of the UK and USA, but air strikes have forced them to retreat in a number of places and have allowed people to escape from them. I mentioned Sinjar and Kobane in my last post. You say ISIS isn't just going to give up because of Western air strikes, but they're certainly not going to give up if Western countries sit back and watch them as they expand their caliphate which is run under what is basically fascism.

Of course I'm not an expert on resolving conflicts in the Middle East, but this is a thread specifically asking what you would do, so I responded to it with a relevant post based on my ideas and what I do know about the situation. And I did specify "without sending ground troops".

First of all we need to establish these people we call ISIS do have legitimate grievances. It does not mean what they are doing is right but it doesn't mean their grievances are not legitimate. ISIS is powerful because they have massive support in the region. Who is supporting them? Sunni Muslims. The west is not going to gain the support by Sunni Muslims especially after what they've done in Iraq. They tried it with the so called "moderates" in Syria and that failed. The Sunni Muslims will have to go against ISIS. The west only helps in causing sectarian conflict and adds to the grievances they have. It is best to completely withdraw from this conflict it is up to the people to decide their own destiny.

Reply 21

Wee.Guy

Work with anti ISIS forces to wipe them off the map. this would include Iraqi army, Kurdish forces, and Assad forces, Russians plus other gulf/middle eastern countries. i would encourage the gulf countries to do more,

i wouldnt send ground troops, except SF and other specialist forces.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 22

Crb822

Original post by al_94

It is best to completely withdraw from this conflict it is up to the people to decide their own destiny.

Are you actually serious, the main reason for our part in this conflict is to prevent them from a) going to fight there in the first place and b) preventing them from coming back to the UK and causing terrorism. If we withdraw then their presence in Iraq and Syria will become greater and that will make problems even worse.

In my opinion, the best way to prevent this issue from getting worse is to stop people from becoming radicalised in the first place. Mosque's that are preaching radical hatred should be closed down (or any other place where this is going on) and the people responsible should be arrested. Religious leaders should also do more to give regular speeches in mosques about why not to go fighting in Iraq and Syria. Part of this issue would be sorted if Western people didn't leave to fight in the first place and the growing population of IS would hopefully decrease. Neighbouring countries should also do more as well and Kurdish troops and anyone else willing to help should be supplied with better equipment and supplies.

Reply 23

al_94

Original post by Crb822

They have failed on numerous occasions in the middle east they don't know how to resolve the conflict I think that is clear. I believe the main driving force behind this radicalisation is western intervention and imperialism in their lands. People are not being radiclised in these mosques for the most part there is very little evidence of that. Obviously people shouldn't go to ISIS and blow themselves up like that kid from Australia did but that's a tiny percentage of people that do that.

Reply 24

Alfissti

The best way to tackle the problem?
First strip those who are proven beyond reasonable doubt to be involved in this off their human rights. That includes sympathizers, those who provide any type of funding or any form of assistance to that cause.

Second, go after their immediate families. Any of them on benefits? Automatically withdrawn and that includes their council homes. They will then be fed with bacon, ham and rice cooked in bacon grease waste. Those found to have committed any crime will have an automatic maximum sentences handed to them. ALL their female relatives will be captured and enslaved to be cleaners.

Third, when these scums return, mandatory detention at G-bay and their family to foot the bill of all the rehabilitation costs. Failing which they will be imprisoned.

Why so harsh? Quite simple, it is pretty obvious the soft-touch approach isn't working and never will work. Should stop being taken for a fool while still ahead of the game.

Reply 25

Crb822

Original post by al_94

People are not being radiclised in these mosques for the most part there is very little evidence of that.

In my opinion, they are literally flaunting it and the authorities are doing nothing about it. Any radical preacher should be scrapped of their human rights and deported before they have the chance to poison anyone else's minds. Did you know it took 8 years to successfully deport Abu Hamza?

Reply 26

whorace

Play everyone against each other. Don't like the Kurds or Assad? Have them clean it up.

Reply 27

Soldieroffortune

Original post by Aj12

The Syrians don't have the S-300 yet. Given the toll the war has taken on their military and how Israel seems to stroll in and out quite happily I imagine their air defence system is nowhere near what it was a few years ago.

The lack of strikes has more to do with the political climate, than the power of the Syrian military. America has few allies on striking Syria and is loathe to go it alone any more. Plus as you point out Putin is supporting Syria and could make things difficult. Some of the problems between the West and Russia can be traced back to Iraq and Libya, striking Syria would worsen relations with Russia.

Ah could have sworn they managed to get a few battalions before the state collapsed my bad. Either way they still have the long range S-200 and several more modern shorter range ones that would give most people pause before flying over them..
Oh aye several years of civil war and fighting countless different groups has probably shot their defence systems but never the less plus with regards to Israel they've been doing this for years it's beyond me how they never got shot down or at least had a retaliatory strike against them for it.
Aye but there are a few helping with strikes several Arab nations, the UK etc. enough at least to make it politically acceptable so long as boots stay off the ground and they don't start whacking Damascus aiming for a regime change which the Russians still haven't forgiven the west for with regards to Libya hence their veto along with China since we over stepped out bounds big time :L
But I'd be interested to see what the Russians would do if a strike did hit their base or kill Russians...

Reply 28

Okorange

Original post by whorace

Play everyone against each other. Don't like the Kurds or Assad? Have them clean it up.

That is the cornerstone of western foreign policy. But in the end there isn't a really good solution. I honestly would just let them fight it out but I would increase support for the Iraq state because it is still America's pet project.

Reply 29

Rakas21

Original post by al_94

Nothing it's none of Britains business to deal with what's going on in the Middle East. The best thing is to completely withdraw from this conflict and let them deal with it themselves.

You don't leave a disease to it. You fill your body with medication and fight it so it does not kill you.

What happens if we leave it and they are successful?

Reply 30

pol pot noodles

Original post by al_94

'Their lands'? If some kid from North London thinks Syria or Iraq or Afghanistan is their land, and that ISIS or the Taliban are their people, then they're already on the path to radicalisation IMO.

Reply 31

ExcitedPup

Original post by TheTruthTeller

Apply pressure to these lazy arab states who only care about themselves and oil revenue. Saudi Arabia itself has been OBVIOUSLY funding groups like ISIS as well as other gulf countries.

Superb comment.

If anything, we should be telling Saudi Arabia and Pakistan that the party is over, and if they don't rein in the Islamists we're going to flatten them and bomb them back to the stone age.

Enough is enough

Reply 32

ExcitedPup

Original post by al_94

western intervention and imperialism in their lands.

Whose lands? You can only really say it is "their lands" if they're not really British.

Do you think Muslims in the west are not really "one of us", and are more of a Fifth Column?

Reply 33

ExcitedPup

Original post by Soldieroffortune

The Syrian Air Defence system is a complete shambles. Syria could not stop Israel from striking inside their territory before the civil war, let alone now

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard

Reply 34

william walker

[video="youtube;moOiKp5eER8"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moOiKp5eER8[/video]

Reply 35

Soldieroffortune

Original post by ExcitedPup

It didn't used to be maybe slightly dated before the civil war but still potent to make most think twice, given Israeli doctrine that was a critical target the sane as when it struck Iraq i believe. Either way the fact those planes werent shot down doesnt prove they couldnt have been shot down its a fairly open secret that Israel developed Fission weapons along with South Africa, why would Syria risk the Israelis sending an ICBM after the downing of the planes?
I mean now though god knows if they even have any of the systems or controllers left intact/alive that being said i'd put money the Russian enclave probably has something in it.

Trident

An oil embargo to stop oil exports including those shady trucks going down from Iraq to Saudi Arabia and then being loaded on a cargo ship near UAE.

Then napalm the whole place.