3 registered members (Edinburgh, Fre3_D0om, 1 invisible),
181
guests, and 2
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums69
Topics113,634
Posts1,341,402
Members1,814
|
Most Online731 Jan 14th, 2020
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: ali_hire]
#1556682
02/12/2015 14:19
02/12/2015 14:19
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,367 Staffordshire
Nigel
Forum veteran
|
Forum veteran
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,367
Staffordshire
|
This has the potential to be a fairly volatile thread.... Fair enough, but on what grounds do you oppose? Following Paris, I was all for it, but on reflection, I'm less than 100% sure. I'm fairly sure that NOT bombing IS will not prevent them continuing to wage their "war" on the UK. However, I can easily see that taking action will encourage further terror attempts on British soil. I guess the difficulty is that terrorists tend to entrench themselves adjacent to civilian targets, like schools and hospitals, which makes air attack difficult and will almost certainly lead to civilian casualties. Russia don't seem overly bothered though... After all the publicly-stated desire from the UK government to un-seat Assad, he must be chuckling to himself that we're contemplating fighting his war for him...
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: ali_hire]
#1556699
02/12/2015 17:20
02/12/2015 17:20
|
Big_Muzzie
Unregistered
|
Big_Muzzie
Unregistered
|
We need John rambo and the a team or we'll never win.
Fire arrows and melons I say!
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: ali_hire]
#1556701
02/12/2015 17:51
02/12/2015 17:51
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,845 Auld Reekie
Edinburgh
Club President, member225
|
Club President, member225
Forum veteran
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,845
Auld Reekie
|
I'm also against the proposal as it stands - too many potential risks. Civilian casualties, military casualties, potential retribution, 70,000 apparently suddenly-to-be-loyal-to-the-west personnel....?? Cameron I thought started the ball rolling a few days ago with a very compelling speech delivered (cunningly) in quiet authoritative tones as a sop to the new-style better-behaved discourse which has been a welcome change in the chamber. From there things are unravelling as the public are appearing unsure - certainly all but one of the people I've spoken to over the past few days are against bombing - and the scantily-concealed bullying tactics of the PM couldn't resist surfacing in that astonishing faux pas of calling objectors "terrorist-sympathiser" Also the seven or so stemmings of terrorist attacks on the UK have not been by IS, only "inspired by"...
BumbleBee carer
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: MeanRedSpider]
#1556708
02/12/2015 18:24
02/12/2015 18:24
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,845 Auld Reekie
Edinburgh
Club President, member225
|
Club President, member225
Forum veteran
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,845
Auld Reekie
|
Well if everyone joined in - Middle East, Russia, Germany et al, there would be a better chance of rooting out daesh presumably, and might also thin the chances of retaliation on just a few countries. In those circumstances, with (known) ground troops to control areas initially targeted by airstrikes, I might reconsider my opinion.
BumbleBee carer
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: ali_hire]
#1556715
02/12/2015 19:37
02/12/2015 19:37
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 776 State of Essex .
robcoupe20vt
Enjoying the ride
|
Enjoying the ride
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 776
State of Essex .
|
This whole mess started (arguably) because of military intervention in the Middle East. I don't see how more military intervention will make the situation better.
Daesh (or whatever you want to call them) are being bombed daily by many other countries already. What difference does it make whether we add a few planes to that or not? It'll just make us more of a target, surely? It smacks to me of just wanting to join in for the sake of it.
And the same people who say we must share the burden of bombing Daesh are the same people who don't want us to share the burden of giving refuge to the people displaced as a result of the violence in Syria (a different debate, I accept).
I'm not completely against some sort of military action, but it needs to be carefully planned and to be part of a much wider approach to bringing peace to the region.
Dropping more bombs on them will not work long term. They have been fighting each other before the west got involved . I am totally against it and in fact we should not be bombing Iraq either . Cameron needs a good hard kick in the b*lls and he may change his mind because hes hell bent on escalading this problem . Let any other country bomb ISIS if they want . Russia is now the superpower in the middle east . Foreign policy under the Obama admistraion is a joke no direction or plan .Obama is more worried about climate control ? When will the west ever learn to stay away from the middle east . Do none of these politicians ever read their history .
Fiat 20VT Fiat 16vt Fiat 130TC Fiat 131 sport Kawasaki ZX6RP7F Kawasaki GPZ550 Kawasaki ZX7R P2
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: ali_hire]
#1556728
02/12/2015 21:32
02/12/2015 21:32
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,783 In the coupe.
magooagain
Club Member 259
|
Club Member 259
Forum is my life
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,783
In the coupe.
|
I can't help thinking that if the UK getting more involved that it will amount to nothing. I also don't think that the more bombing will reduce or stop future attacks in Europe.
I think that the politicians in the UK need to do more about the terrorist grooming that is rife there. Something that really works would hopefully give some confidance to the British public.
As usual on all sides it's the innocent that are suffering.
When will man learn.
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: MeanRedSpider]
#1556729
02/12/2015 21:35
02/12/2015 21:35
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,845 Auld Reekie
Edinburgh
Club President, member225
|
Club President, member225
Forum veteran
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,845
Auld Reekie
|
So is there a view that we should just leave them to it and do nothing? We've been led to believe that their financial backing and vital supply lines need to be halted. A concerted effort by an international and organised body of troops might then have an effect under support from the air. How can you cut off the snake's head as Cameron puts it when it's a guerilla/internet-based organisation?
BumbleBee carer
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: ali_hire]
#1556744
02/12/2015 23:07
02/12/2015 23:07
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,617 SE Essex
charlie_croker
I need some sleep
|
I need some sleep
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,617
SE Essex
|
I think its the stupidest idea I have read this year. And one of the greatest military minds had this to say:
"The political object is the goal, war is the means of reaching it, and the means can never be considered in isolation from their purposes." (Carl von Clausewitz)
We are committing our forces with no clear strategy or end game.
Air power has it's uses, BUT it cannot occupy land, only boots on the ground can do that, unless we commit ground forces, (and anyone familiar with the concept or history of "mission creep" will know that is a real danger. ) We are doomed to failure. And if we do, we will have to occupy Syria for some time.
Haven't we learned anything from our escapades in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya? Does anyone believe we have improved security in anyone of those countries? Well possibly Afghanistan but we all know that the Mujahadeen appear to be in the ascendant.
And this is the government that pared our forces to the bone, (we have only 82,000 soldiers, which with our logistics "tail" probably means a best case scenario of less than 26, 000 infantry soldiers, a quick check shows we actually have 12,300 officers to 25,840 infantry)
We apparently have only 3 operational squadrons of Tornado GR4s, the Harriers (Which used to carry out the Close Air Support role), were mothballed and sold after 2010 defence review. Although the FGR4 (Typhoon) can be configured for air to ground.
Best case scenario, (assuming we have the pilots, spare parts and logistics) is we have the following: 131 Typhoon 98 Tornado
My personal feeling is anyone wanting us to bomb Syria, should be prepared to take the Queen's shilling if it all goes wrong, be happy to see their kids serve. I have read (not on here, I might add), many comments by armchair generals, desperate for others to go to war for them.
Happy
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: MeanRedSpider]
#1556747
02/12/2015 23:54
02/12/2015 23:54
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 776 State of Essex .
robcoupe20vt
Enjoying the ride
|
Enjoying the ride
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 776
State of Essex .
|
So is there a view that we should just leave them to it and do nothing? YES .Enought countries bombing syria as is . What will happen when the bombing ends ? Even if they mangage to smash ISIS they wont hang around and they will move on and re -group . Too many other terrorists groups in the middle east and surrounding countries .Escalating the bombing wont solve the problem .
Fiat 20VT Fiat 16vt Fiat 130TC Fiat 131 sport Kawasaki ZX6RP7F Kawasaki GPZ550 Kawasaki ZX7R P2
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: ali_hire]
#1556748
03/12/2015 00:01
03/12/2015 00:01
|
Enforcer
Unregistered
|
Enforcer
Unregistered
|
I suspect that to understand this we need to think in terms of political expectations. We are expected to join in.
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: Edinburgh]
#1556759
03/12/2015 08:15
03/12/2015 08:15
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,895 2011 and 2015 FCCUK F1 Champ.
bezzer
Forum is my life
|
Forum is my life
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,895
2011 and 2015 FCCUK F1 Champ.
|
I was undecided on this issue until I heard Margaret Beckett and then Hilary Benn speak in the Commons last night. Following their 'speeches' I'm now in favour of airstrikes in Syria. And on another point.... ...and the scantily-concealed bullying tactics of the PM couldn't resist surfacing in that astonishing faux pas of calling objectors "terrorist-sympathiser" His tactless comments were however very relevant when it comes to the Leader of her Majesty's opposition as well as the Shadow Chancellor....
......My Boy...... (PB #7)
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: Edinburgh]
#1556763
03/12/2015 08:42
03/12/2015 08:42
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,144 Southampton, Hants
Roadking
Club member 1809
|
Club member 1809
Forum is my life
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,144
Southampton, Hants
|
- and the scantily-concealed bullying tactics of the PM couldn't resist surfacing in that astonishing faux pas of calling objectors "terrorist-sympathiser" Countered by the "scantily-concealed bullying tactics of the leader of the opposition" when he stated that Labour MPs who voted in favour cannot hide? Personally I'm not in favour, as it will be the usual mish-mash of operating "within the rules" against an opposition that isn't. You beat terrorists with terror, and there is no stomach for that, indeed the government falls over itself to hold to account young men put in harm's way who sometimes act in a manner not expected on the playing fields of Eton. I'd be interested to see Cameron's reaction if a British pilot ends up doused in petrol in a cage. His first reaction will probably be "thank fk he's not one of mine" followed by "this won't help my re-election chances". One potential positive outcome, the emergence of a credible future leader of the opposition.
"RK's way seems the most sensible to me". ali_hire 16 Dec 2010
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: ali_hire]
#1556775
03/12/2015 09:32
03/12/2015 09:32
|
FreakinFreak
Unregistered
|
FreakinFreak
Unregistered
|
Yup, HIlary Benn made a fine speech but he should have aimed it at Assad first. As it is we're just helping the Russians in shoring up a dictator, and then, further down the line, how do we extricate ourselves from that one.
|
|
|
Re: Bombing in Syria
[Re: ]
#1556777
03/12/2015 09:55
03/12/2015 09:55
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,144 Southampton, Hants
Roadking
Club member 1809
|
Club member 1809
Forum is my life
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,144
Southampton, Hants
|
Yup, HIlary Benn made a fine speech but he should have aimed it at Assad first. As it is we're just helping the Russians in shoring up a dictator, and then, further down the line, how do we extricate ourselves from that one. Controversial, but we've already sorted out 2 Middle east dictators, how did that work out? And we let their African equivalents carry on regardless...
"RK's way seems the most sensible to me". ali_hire 16 Dec 2010
|
|
|
|