| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| What should we do about ISIS? |
| Withdraw all Western forces and hope for the best |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Deploy a large number of ground forces into Iraq and Syria to defeat them, then rebuild both countries |
|
41% |
[ 5 ] |
| Negotiate with ISIS to stop further attacks and expansion of the group |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Allow Middle Eastern countries and militia groups to deal with the problem |
|
8% |
[ 1 ] |
| It's too late! ISIS can't be stopped. |
|
8% |
[ 1 ] |
| Containment from the air but no ground force invasion in Iraq and Syria (current policy) |
|
8% |
[ 1 ] |
| Other (please explain) |
|
33% |
[ 4 ] |
| No Idea |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 12 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Member 7167 
"What Good Fortune For Governments That The People Do Not Think" - Adolf Hitler.
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Location: The Collibran Hideout
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | Small groups of special forces to take out their leaders and whole command structure, either in person or by getting in place and calling down targeted laser guided air strikes.
Once the snake is headless then work with the other middle eastern countries in restoring order.
Apart from the special forces, the only ground troops we want in there are to provide support, not to fight a war. |
I went for option 2.
What you propose would be part of this strategy and it is what the US and it's allies did prior to the second Gulf war. By the time the ground forces invaded Iraq very little of the command structure was functional and anybody with stripes kept well out of (sniper) sight.
Also the Iraq army relied heavily upon armour which had a much shorter range than the US tanks. Coupled with the tank buster aircraft the Iraq armour was nullified very quickly.
_________________
Now Retired - Every Day Is A Saturday |
|
|
|
 |
Jezza 
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | It's a tricky one, no doubt. Not quite sure there's a poll option for this, but I think the best response is to get some kind of agreement going between the US/EU/gulf state bloc and the Russian/Iranian bloc to negotiate a ceasefire between Assad and the rebels (ideally requiring some significant compromises on Assad's part), and then focus the energy on working with Assad's forces (perhaps backed by regional powers) to hit IS-held zones hard and stop the flow between Syria and Iraq, leaving IS isolated in Iraq where they can be more easily defeated by Saudi-led ground forces.
I honestly think sending American/EU ground forces in will be an unwinnable disaster, and act as a great advertisement for IS, too. I don't think there has to be a predominantly regional solution. |
Great post David with interesting points.
I think the idea of a ceasefire between Assad's forces and the rebels through the assistance of the US/EU/Gulf bloc and Russian/Iranian bloc is very idealistic but not impossible if both groups feel that ISIS are a significant threat to their interests but I really cannot see such an agreement occurring but I would be happy to be proven wrong if it's possible.
I do agree with you that deploying troops would probably not help. It is likely that deploying troops would weaken the group but defeating it would be difficult as the last deployment of troops demonstrates plus it will have a feeling of regression and not learning from the hard lessons of 2003-2011 if we go back in and deploy troops again.
Plus I worry that going back in would feed into the narrative that ISIS likes to espouse that the cause of all the problems in the Middle East is due to the West. I've always suspected that along with disguising its weakness and setbacks on the front lines in Syria and Iraq, ISIS commits terrorist attacks to provoke countries into deploying troops.
For example, in many propaganda videos ISIS has mentioned "waiting for the Army of Rome" that will be defeated in Dabiq (a small town in Northern Syria) which is most likely code for Western forces or anyone outside the barometer that constitutes a serious threat to their expansion such as Russia so we need to be careful not to feed into that propaganda and narrative. The link below explains this idea in greater detail and actually wonders whether going in would actually damage their reputation and credibility amongst supporters rather than enhance their cause by indeed going in and defeating them in Dabiq.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pietros-maneos/the-great-battle-of-dabiq_b_6696936.html?ir=Australia
If full deployment is useful in defeating them and significantly weakening them then I wouldn't rule it out but it will need to be carefully considered, discussed and planned. We can't go in all guns blazing if that path is eventually chosen or else the same mistakes will be repeated from 12 years ago.
| Tannin wrote: | A very good question, Jezza, and one which certainly should be set apart from the other threads which inevitably putresce into unreadable and pointless word-swamps.
What is to be done?
That is the question. Really, it's the only question of immediacy.
Frankly, I don't know. You have a much better knowledge of and understanding of the situation on the ground than I do. Nevertheless, it seems to me that IS has bugger all in the way of actual resources. The resources they are strongest in are external assets which we allow them to draw on:
(a) Oil sales. All the oil in the world won't bring them a cracker if they can't get it to a market.
(b) Publicity. I am at a loss to understand the way we let them use Western-invented, Western-provided IT assets to spread their vile message of hate.
All-out military solutions seldom work. IS itself came about because the brainless Americans spent billions of dollars and thousands of lives on a military "solution" to the Iraq problem in the first place. With that said, I am not averse to military action on any scale if it can be shown to be useful and practical. |
Great post Tannin.
On the ground Syria is a total mess and very fragmented and fractured with multiple groups having different agendas and goals amongst one another so defeating ISIS on the one hand will require the use of these other groups to cooperate with one another along with Assad possibly but there's no guarantee that will happen.
I also feel disenfranchised Sunnis living under ISIS' controlled areas will need to be won over and appealed to for the group to be beaten. How we do that I'm not sure but that's where I feel the issue of sectarianism is important and needs greater understanding and addressing from Middle Eastern and Western governments if ISIS is to be defeated because they feed off that divide.
Great points about oil sales and the publicity that they receive! Publicity plays a significant role in the group's relevance and notoriety to recruit but to also spread their propaganda and instil fear amongst their enemies. Anonymous has allegedly declared a 'cyber-war' against the group but I am skeptical of their effectiveness to disrupt their online propaganda but it would be great if they could achieve it.
No question that the US is responsible for allowing the group to flourish in Iraq (not so much in Syria) and creating the conditions necessary for them to become a serious problem for the region and to fill the power vacuum left after the De-Ba'athification of Iraq and creating the sectarian power shift from Sunni to Shia.
| Morrigu wrote: | I have what I am sure many will think a stupid question (so no lambasting I warned ya)
Even if the world manages to eradicate them in the Middle East, will that stop daesh given they seem to have so many sleepers (and supporters) just waiting in it seems so many countries? |
Not a stupid question at all Morrigu! A very worthwhile one actually.
I suspect you're right that defeating ISIS in Iraq and Syria wouldn't totally eliminate the group. The group has now spread itself in Africa, Asia and even the Caribbean recently so they're everywhere these days. Some jihadist groups from Asia and Africa have pledged their allegiance to ISIS such as Boko Haram in Nigeria and Jemaah Islamiyah in Indonesia so there are groups who are now a 'part of them' or at the very least fully back them.
If ISIS were defeated on the front lines in Syria and Iraq there's every chance they'll go underground again which was what was happening after the Iraqi civil war in 2006-2007 ended and just before the US had withdrawn in 2011. There was actually a period when ISIS was quite weak in the region with the best it could achieve was the odd suicide terrorist attack in Iraq but the group became stronger again after the withdrawal of US troops in 2011.
Defeating them will be easier now when they're more exposed rather than going underground again. Sadly I think it's very likely that the group won't be totally eradicated and may re-emerge or form under different names or aliases or may even merge with other jihadist groups.
| Member 7167 wrote: | | Added No Idea to poll. |
Thanks for that Member! I wasn't able to change it myself.
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
|
|
|
|
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ That rhetoric is pretty blatantly offensive, yes. How eager would you be to face death by chemical weapons if Australia turned in on itself Syria-style and you ended up starving in a camp with your family? I'd take the coffee, thanks.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
|
|
|
|
Skids 
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Me too!
You just sit back in lala land with your latte macchiato David, everything's just rosy mate 
_________________
Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Perhaps. When was this exactly? |
|
|
|
|
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
David, answer me this:
Why do you believe that it is OK for Westerners to risk their lives fighting this evil regime in Syria (which threatens us all but threatens Syrians the most), but that it is OK for able-bodied Syrians to behave like cowards, relying on other people's bravery to save their lives?
Or do you propose simply to surrender? (Bear it in mind that because of your pro-freedom beliefs and ability to think for yourself, you would be one of the very first to have your throat cut.)
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Listen to the middle-class Westerners lecturing refugees on bravery. What's the bravest thing any of you have done lately? Did you take a spider out of the shower?
If you guys are all such heroes, here's an idea: take a trip to the Kurdish provinces tomorrow and offer up your services. They could use a few more men, and I presume you support their struggle against IS. They'll give you a gun and everything.
You are willing to do that, aren't you? What's the matter, afraid of a few bullets?
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
|
|
|
|
Morrigu
Joined: 11 Aug 2001
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Syrian wives and mothers left behind condemn men who have fled the country, and ask: Who will free us? Who will protect us? It is wrong to leave your country
Syrian men fleeing their war-torn home country are being criticised by the women 'left behind' to live in squalor in refugee camps.
When questioned about their feelings regarding the large number of men who have fled Syria for Europe without their wives and children, these women do not mince their words.
One woman accuse them of abandoning Syria in a time of crisis, while others stop short of calling them cowards by saying it is 'haram' - forbidden under Islam - to leave their country.
The women, interviewed by American video journalist Bilal Abdul Kareem, all live in a refugee camp in Syria, having left their home cities and villages during the four-year civil war.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3263593/Syrian-wives-mothers-left-condemn-men-fled-country-ask-free-protect-wrong-leave-country.html
_________________
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Disgusting comment from you, David.
Stop avoiding the point. Someone has to do the fighting. Who do you think it should be?
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | | Disgusting comment from you, David. |
Says the poster who referred to Syrian refugees as cowards.
Is it opposite day?
In response to your bolded question, I'll go with the radical proposal of "whoever is willing and able".
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
It is their country. It is their war. it is their homes. It is their families. But someone else should do the fighting. Yer right.
This is what the word "coward" was invented for. If you can't call this behaviour cowardice, exactly what could you use the term for?
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
There's no hope in hell of winding any of this in now without a radical break in the order of things, and that involves the biggest levers such as energy policy and China.
Those effwits spent all the money and goodwill during the 00s, and turned too many people into evangelical zealots. Now, there's no goodwill, no money, no control over tax revenue and policy, which has been handed to country-less billionaires, and no clear analysis of the economics at play.
In the light of the sheer number of people and places in chaos, trapped in deformed economies or displaced, the facebook-level dumbness of the Muslim obsession leaves me expecting a lot more time wasting to come.
What made anyone think locking up growing populations under the rule of demented dictators in monopoly oil economies *for decades* would result in everyone living happily ever after? The fact is no one gave a toss about all those people until the dysfunction made it into their backyards.
This is the tip of the ISISberg.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
