Jihadi John reported killing

[thegimble]

WW the answer to taking out ISIS is quite simple it only takes a bit of will from all countries involved. Let Russia sort out Syria and let Nato take ISIS out of Libya and Iraq with the Kurds help.

That would need boots on the ground and there is no appetite for that in the West.

The only war ever won by airstrikes was arguably the War against Japan in WWII where the atomic bomb put an end to it and meant an invasion of mainland Japan wasn't required.

Every other modern war has only been won with boots on the ground with some bloke with a gun and bayonet forcing some other bloke with a gun and bayonet to concede. Whether these nutters would ever totally concede and go away is doubtful as we see in Afghanistan but you will never win just by dropping bombs.

The West has a habit of trying to wage ground wars by proxy by building up some opposition group or other. When the Taliban were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan they were the "good guys" so got military aid. Now they are the "bad guys".

The Kurds and Nato won't work given Turkey is a Nato member and would quite like the Kurds wiped out anyway.

Exceptional post DaveO.

And I agree my plan is the only way I can see an end to this inside 10 years but will not happen due to old held believes and values.

Proxy wars after another based on a lie has cost millions of lives. Even Vietnam was on a lie.

[Wintergreen]

He said before he became leader and a nothing man he couldn't see the point of the army.
Furthermore how would you actually get somebody out without boots on the ground.
I'd get any secret forces out a raise Raqqa and Mosul to the ground. If it is to be believed all the civilians have done a runner from those towns.
It'll need radical steps to stop these nutters, and there will be collateral.
Maybe I'm being non PC but what else can be done?

He has never said he couldn't see the point of the army. He has said the money being spent on Trident would be better spent on our conventional forces and given the way way they have been decimated by the Tories I agree with him.

We have no maritime patrol aircraft. I think we borrowed some in the end and one of the first things that happened in 2010 was they sacked all the RAF trainee fast jet pilots who were 18 months into a 21 month fast jet training course. Just a couple of examples.

As to getting Jihadi John out the difficulties with that doesn't mean you ignore the law and indulge in state sanctioned killing without trial. That is what happened here and that is scary. The fact we got the Yanks to do our dirty work doesn't alter this.

It means whoever is in government can decide that because at some point in the future they decide you may be a threat to the UK they can just bump you off. We are supposed to be better than that.

We may never have caught him but his death won't stop some other tosser from beheading someone so it's just revenge. So it serves no practical purpose and has all the down sides I have mentioned.

It serves a VERY practical purpose. It sends a message to those who would behead innocent people that they WILL be tracked down and killed.

[Wintergreen]

WW the answer to taking out ISIS is quite simple it only takes a bit of will from all countries involved. Let Russia sort out Syria and let Nato take ISIS out of Libya and Iraq with the Kurds help.

That would need boots on the ground and there is no appetite for that in the West.

The only war ever won by airstrikes was arguably the War against Japan in WWII where the atomic bomb put an end to it and meant an invasion of mainland Japan wasn't required.

Every other modern war has only been won with boots on the ground with some bloke with a gun and bayonet forcing some other bloke with a gun and bayonet to concede. Whether these nutters would ever totally concede and go away is doubtful as we see in Afghanistan but you will never win just by dropping bombs.

The West has a habit of trying to wage ground wars by proxy by building up some opposition group or other. When the Taliban were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan they were the "good guys" so got military aid. Now they are the "bad guys".

The Kurds and Nato won't work given Turkey is a Nato member and would quite like the Kurds wiped out anyway.

Shows how little you understand military action.

In Afgahnistan the enemy could simply retreat to the mountains, in the Middle East they can retreat to.......well nowhere. The terrain simply doesn't allow it.

Hence the impact of air power in Iraq vs Afgahnistan.

[Mike]

WW the answer to taking out ISIS is quite simple it only takes a bit of will from all countries involved. Let Russia sort out Syria and let Nato take ISIS out of Libya and Iraq with the Kurds help.

That would need boots on the ground and there is no appetite for that in the West.

The only war ever won by airstrikes was arguably the War against Japan in WWII where the atomic bomb put an end to it and meant an invasion of mainland Japan wasn't required.

Every other modern war has only been won with boots on the ground with some bloke with a gun and bayonet forcing some other bloke with a gun and bayonet to concede. Whether these nutters would ever totally concede and go away is doubtful as we see in Afghanistan but you will never win just by dropping bombs.

The West has a habit of trying to wage ground wars by proxy by building up some opposition group or other. When the Taliban were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan they were the "good guys" so got military aid. Now they are the "bad guys".

The Kurds and Nato won't work given Turkey is a Nato member and would quite like the Kurds wiped out anyway.

Shows how little you understand military action.

In Afgahnistan the enemy could simply retreat to the mountains, in the Middle East they can retreat to.......well nowhere. The terrain simply doesn't allow it.

Hence the impact of air power in Iraq vs Afgahnistan.

Where did they retreat to in Iraq then? Last I heard there are daily terrorist attacks in Iraq of a similar scale to the one that just took place in Europe. Doesn't seem like Iraq is a good example of a military success.

[thegimble]

Shows how little you understand military action.

In Afgahnistan the enemy could simply retreat to the mountains, in the Middle East they can retreat to.......well nowhere. The terrain simply doesn't allow it.

Hence the impact of air power in Iraq vs Afgahnistan.

Where did they retreat to in Iraq then? Last I heard there are daily terrorist attacks in Iraq of a similar scale to the one that just took place in Europe. Doesn't seem like Iraq is a good example of a military success.

We won neither war. We made a tactical retreat out of Iraq once the body count coming home go too big. Also the Iraq army is not on the same scale as the Taliban who are war hardened by years of fighting.

Bombing only goes so far boots on the ground have to go in. Otherwise we will end up bombing everyone and that will only escalate the problem further.

All we did was destabilise countries who's leaders we backed when it suited our agenda. Syria, Iraq and the Taliban (mujahidin) in Afghanistan have all been kept in power by backing from countries who have gone into conflict with. People will say we should remove all despot leaders.

But why have we not removed the Saudi's, Zimbabwae, North Korea, Sudan etc many more. Answer is simple they either have no resources we want or they trade with us on a scale that is suitable for us to turn a blind eye. Or in the case of North Korea they have some links with China. Its really amazes me that Tony Blair saved lives in the Baltic conflict when he sent planes in to stop a massacre. What amazes me is that move helped to end the conflict but he then went to fight wars that killed hundreds of thousands. He was the only leader with the will to go in. But no oil in that region.

We choose where we attack not on the principle of protecting the people but on the basis of where can we can rich from. Only place exempt from that is Afghanistan where we should have gone in with the soldiers who were sent to Iraq on another lie. Its amazing how we view the world from what we read in the media.

[Smokie Jim]

I recognise the apparent ostensible profundity in the posts on this topic an it's related topic I apologise for what I am about to state,I am still raw from this tragic situation but I feel we need to Act Putin seems to be taking the lead and I agree with his strategy of more intense bombing. Further let the world know the more Isil threatains the West the more strong will be the retaliation. This is a war,not against a State or country but an ideology that doesn't hold out the possibility of mediation.

[Wandering Warrior]

I recognise the apparent ostensible profundity in the posts on this topic an it's related topic I apologise for what I am about to state,I am still raw from this tragic situation but I feel we need to Act Putin seems to be taking the lead and I agree with his strategy of more intense bombing. Further let the world know the more Isil threatains the West the more strong will be the retaliation. This is a war,not against a State or country but an ideology that doesn't hold out the possibility of mediation.

Corbyn thinks it will with his none shoot to kill policy. That's fine if you don't have to make a decision whether to lose your life or not!!
I agree, mediation with these idiots is like hitting the Sun with a snowball.
As an aside, Corbyn in his own way is as daft as Daesh with his apologist attitude!!

[keptinthedarkfans]

I recognise the apparent ostensible profundity in the posts on this topic an it's related topic I apologise for what I am about to state,I am still raw from this tragic situation but I feel we need to Act Putin seems to be taking the lead and I agree with his strategy of more intense bombing. Further let the world know the more Isil threatains the West the more strong will be the retaliation. This is a war,not against a State or country but an ideology that doesn't hold out the possibility of mediation.

Corbyn thinks it will with his none shoot to kill policy. That's fine if you don't have to make a decision whether to lose your life or not!!

I agree, mediation with these idiots is like hitting the Sun with a snowball.
As an aside, Corbyn in his own way is as daft as Daesh with his apologist attitude!!

Good post slim jim. As for corbyn. well would rather not get drawn into a political debate about a man that represents everything that is wrong with labour values.And has killed any hopes of a labour rule with him at the helm.

[thegimble]

I recognise the apparent ostensible profundity in the posts on this topic an it's related topic I apologise for what I am about to state,I am still raw from this tragic situation but I feel we need to Act Putin seems to be taking the lead and I agree with his strategy of more intense bombing. Further let the world know the more Isil threatains the West the more strong will be the retaliation. This is a war,not against a State or country but an ideology that doesn't hold out the possibility of mediation.

Its not just an ideology war its a war where nations will put their own interests first before finding a solution. I can not see this war ending.

[Owd Codger]

I recognise the apparent ostensible profundity in the posts on this topic an it's related topic I apologise for what I am about to state,I am still raw from this tragic situation but I feel we need to Act Putin seems to be taking the lead and I agree with his strategy of more intense bombing. Further let the world know the more Isil threatains the West the more strong will be the retaliation. This is a war,not against a State or country but an ideology that doesn't hold out the possibility of mediation.

Corbyn thinks it will with his none shoot to kill policy. That's fine if you don't have to make a decision whether to lose your life or not!!

I agree, mediation with these idiots is like hitting the Sun with a snowball.
As an aside, Corbyn in his own way is as daft as Daesh with his apologist attitude!!

Good post slim jim. As for corbyn. well would rather not get drawn into a political debate about a man that represents everything that is wrong with labour values.And has killed any hopes of a labour rule with him at the helm.

Syria and issues of military apart, how can you say that Corbyn represents 'everything' that is wrong with the Labour Party when unlike the leadership of the last few years of Blair and Brown, he is a true Socialist with the same kind of values of those who founded a century or so ago, a alternative for ordinary working class people to the Conservative and Liberal parties.

Only Tories or those today who think they are Tories because they are better off than others come out with that kind of comment.

All Corbyn has said is that if we join in with air strikes on ISIS in Syria, it could result in retaliation with terrorist attacks on this country which will, in my opinion will happen anyway in view of the fact that the ISIS leadership have indicated that any country which attacks them in Syria will suffer the same fate as Paris.

Like anyone else, he is entitled to a opinion even if it is a wrong opinion for many, including myself on this issue.

Perhaps, if we, the USA, NATO, the United Nations had done something more positive about the rise of ISIS Islamic fundamentalism over the last couple of years or so, the situation might now be now different.

Getting rid of Dictators like Saddam in Iraq and Gadaffi in Libya has not helped as they had their countries under control and free of Muslim fundamentalism and ISIS.

Now we got world leaders like Cameron running round in a state of panic as a result of having done nothing about the rise of ISIS in the middle east and parts of Africa.