It's funny that the Jordanians still don't really want to get involved in this struggle. They seem to think that IS will respect their borders and will leave them alone. Naive fools. Once they have finished in Syria and Iraq, Jordan will be next on the list. They want to impose a caliphate, not have some odd king ruling part of their "territory". It's the 1930s all over again.
I was watching "Our War" from the Beeb last night which I recorded some weeks ago, about our soldiers in Afghanistan. What came home to me was how their task was essentially impossible. They were sent out of base to wander around in patrols, inevitably stepping on IEDs. All the wars in which foreign forces have had to try and weed the good from the enemy amongst an indigenous population have been more or less failures. Think Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. The wars that haven't been failures are those where there is a clear them and us: The Falklands, 1st Iraq War. Then it is easy to see who you are trying to kill. A war against ISIS will inevitably be of the first category again. We aren't equipped with the language skills and the cultural sensitivity to know who is a jihadi, and who is a peaceful Moslem who wants to get on with his life. You can't "build bridges" with the local population when you are an alien force, wandering around in uniform with a massive pack on, wearing sunglasses and toting powerful weapons. Add into that your religion which they don't much like from the off... You can't win this sort of war by bombing, but I doubt you can really win it by "boots on the ground". So what's left? It is strange that we have sold so much hardware to the Saudis, but you don't get the impression that they know how to use it or really want to. Still, after Jordan, Saudi Arabia will be next. IS would love to get rid of the Saudis. The people of the middle east really ought to be solving their own problems. Don't hold your breath though.
If the day ever came when the whole middle east was unified under a strong, stable, popular government, then we in the west would really have something to worry about. Fortunately it is actually backward, deeply divided, and riven with internal conflicts. Stroke of luck, really.
And don't forget, we brought this lot on ourselves. Would ISIS exist if Saddam had not been toppled? Saddam knew how to rule these people. Then we got mixed up in the Syrian conflict, basically arming and feeding the pre Isis fighters. To me, its the Western Politicians that cocked the whole thing up and ultimately are responsible. The middle east is much better left alone were they can murder and brutalise one another without us lot interfering. The only answer now lies with sending the Japs in. They know a thing or two about brutalisation. Send in a few hundred thousand and kop fer that!
It's a brave and extremely learned person who can declare with any accuracy exactly how and when 'this' conflict began.
Well..........Having seen all the pundits and the security experts in the media with their 'views and solutions'; I keep thinking back to Afghanistan when the Russians with all their resources couldn't deal with the Mujahideen and their limited (and sometimes home made) weaponry...... IS have much better are better organised and have much better weaponry and resources than they did.
One thing for certain, if they have no country/state....wtf do we bomb? I'm sure if the USA gets involved they will find targets. Might not be IS/ISIS though and more than likely lots of innocents and so it all starts again! It is naïve to think IS will walk around in readily identifiable uniform like the Nazis. Of the opinion that Saddam was exactly what the region needed, a nasty snarling dictator that would stand for no shit. Kept the other lunatics in some sort of order. Thanks Tony, great judgement...
What will the reaction of Assad be if the Jordanians bomb the hell out of Raqqah where IS are supposed to be? Will he be happy, will he be sad? Que Sera.......
perhaps the western politicians know exactly what they are doing... i know it sounds all conspiracy theory like but dont forget what is at stake for the powers that be should there be no conflict in this world...
Why do we in the West think that sending in troops can possibly work? Will we never learn? Of course it suits the Arab nations to let another US led Coalition come in and have a go, but that's because they are so inept and unable to organise themselves and form proper strategic alliances. Well maybe it's now time they stepped up to the plate. They are the ones under real threat. There are about 30,000 ISIL fighters. Compare that to the number of troops that Saudi Arabia (200K), Syria (200K), Jordan (100K), Iraq (200K), Iran (500K). I think that between them, if they get their act together, they can and should be left to sort their problem out. Yes they can have air support and even expert advisers/trainers and even equipment. But please not troops again!
The richer Arab nations believe that if you own a dog, you don't yourself go around barking and biting people. ... you let the Americans do all that for you. Seems sensible enough.
Nooooooooooo, if they think we are like him they will feel justified to take over the world without all the religious bollocks :Wideyed:
