We are bragging on the bbc news that a tornado has took out a 4X4 with a few IS fighters in it. WOW I bet they are quaking in their boots. Have our leaders not learned anything from Iraq and Afghanistan? The enemy send in a suicide bomber cost £200 if that and usually they take out high value targets or scoring massive proganda especially when the Suicide bomber takes out a high ranking officer. We send in high tech jets and helicopters costing millions, flying them from Cyprus to Iraq and take out a worthless 4X4 with a few low ranking soldiers.
I guess I already know who will win this war
Im sure weapon manufacturers and the banks\shareholders who invest in them are pretty happy. Its not about winning or losing its about profit, tax payers will pay a lot of money if you show them beheading videos
We are bragging on the bbc news that a tornado has took out a 4X4 with a few IS fighters in it. WOW I bet they are quaking in their boots. Have our leaders not learned anything from Iraq and Afghanistan? The enemy send in a suicide bomber cost £200 if that and usually they take out high value targets or scoring massive proganda especially when the Suicide bomber takes out a high ranking officer. We send in high tech jets and helicopters costing millions, flying them from Cyprus to Iraq and take out a worthless 4X4 with a few low ranking soldiers.
Why don't the combined UN and /or Naato use Drones all the time rather than conventional Planes and other methods.
They are, drones are not cheap either. What I am saying is that Afghanistan has cost the UK 2-3 billion pounds and between 450-500 of our service personnel. A long drawn out campaign that never had a single objective as it was changed every year.
The "enemy" are fanatical Muslims who love to fight and die for their God Allah. That is all they want to do. So you cannot win against an enemy in this conventional way.
The way to beat ISIS in my view is to swallow our pride and our hopes of policing the world, admit we were wrong and make friends with Assad and support him. He will rid Syria of ISIS overnight just as Hussein would have done in Iraq. In the past the west has always used terrifying despots who kill and torture on a whim and it has worked to keep the barbarians in line. This change of strategy will bankrupt the west and the enemy will win. IS are trying to provoke a land war because they want to be martyred.
Not at all. We planned how to win the war. We didn't plan what to do afterwards.
In ww2, the allies were already talking about what to do with post war Germany even before D Day.
The difference is perhaps that the war in Iraq wasn't that popular to begin with, so there was a great deal of pressure on Western leaders to pull out troops as soon as possible. Leaving a power vacuum (both civilian and military) has happened before, with the same result (of what is in effect a civil war) so it isn't surprising that this has happened. At the time the troops were withdrawn there were plenty of voices, including those in the military, that the Iraqis were just not ready to run their own country.
They are, drones are not cheap either. What I am saying is that Afghanistan has cost the UK 2-3 billion pounds and between 450-500 of our service personnel. A long drawn out campaign that never had a single objective as it was changed every year.
The "enemy" are fanatical Muslims who love to fight and die for their God Allah. That is all they want to do. So you cannot win against an enemy in this conventional way.
The way to beat ISIS in my view is to swallow our pride and our hopes of policing the world, admit we were wrong and make friends with Assad and support him. He will rid Syria of ISIS overnight just as Hussein would have done in Iraq. In the past the west has always used terrifying despots who kill and torture on a whim and it has worked to keep the barbarians in line. This change of strategy will bankrupt the west and the enemy will win. IS are trying to provoke a land war because they want to be martyred.
Does this mean we wouldn't have to provide new homes and protection for all the refugees, many of whom will in turn provide support for rebellion in their own countries and "righteous" attacks on the West for supporting such evil despots? Fanatical Muslims, as before, will still attack us anyway because we are non Muslims and must be seen as such to be seen as inferior.
.
Exactly. It is showing them we can pick them off one by one if we want. We are practically able to shoot them in either the left bollock or right bollock if we want. Preferably both.
I do agree that the air war is having an effect. ISIS hate the fact we can bomb them at will and they die for nothing. Their aim as stated in their recent video is to fight us one to one on the ground. So maybe the price is worth it psychologically.
Kidnapped boy is brainwashed by ISIS and then released. They are making child soldiers for the future.
This was on another thread yesterday. Brainwashed or terrified? Both matter of course, as that's how IS operate. Would he dare speak against them after the horrors he's witnessed?. Many more like him to follow as thousands of little innocent children have been kidnapped and have no idea where their parents are..They stop at nothing and every form of depravity is being deployed.
I still say its overkill to send a plane and maybe two crew with a huge missile to knock out a pickup truck. Use drones without risk of losing Crewmen, they maybe slower but can operate at great altitude and speed is usually not a factor.
Anyone know what comparative costs are taking all expenses into consideration including backup ground crew.
More like it, ISIS have took Kobani right on Turkeys border where the turks have a load of tanks lined up ready to blast the evil scum to hell where they belong. Come on Turkey get in there
We're fighting an idea, propagated by fanatics, who dress in plain clothes so blend with the native population, and fight using guerilla tactics...
Against them we have easily identified military personnel, handcuffed by rules and regulations about how and when to engage an enemy.
Yes, the aircraft are a show of force, but they're more PR and suppression than a tool to 'win' against IS forces. As for ground forces, we might have the latest weapons, but that doesn't mean they're the most effective. For example, the British Army uses the SA80 rifle, but it's really a suppression fire weapon. It is outclassed by the humble Enfiield rifle first manufactured in the early 1900's. That gun fires a bigger bullet with more stopping power over a greater distance with higher accuracy. There are thousands of Enfields in circulation and the ammo is easy to source. Any guerilla fighting force can pick them up.
We need to start learning some new tricks, because we've played this game over and over again already and the outcome hasn't changed. What's so different now?
I still say its overkill to send a plane and maybe two crew with a huge missile to knock out a pickup truck. Use drones without risk of losing Crewmen, they maybe slower but can operate at great altitude and speed is usually not a factor.
Anyone know what comparative costs are taking all expenses into consideration including backup ground crew.
There was a guy talking about this on tv and he said they're not attacking random trucks they happen to come across but carefully selected targets identified by a tracking device and I guess that would be SAS guys/ insiders who'd be putting them on..
Take that how you want but it makes more sense than firing off expensive missiles just to knock out a 4x4 with a few ISIS rednecks in.
Comments
We won the war easily. We then had big problems winning the peace.
Im sure weapon manufacturers and the banks\shareholders who invest in them are pretty happy. Its not about winning or losing its about profit, tax payers will pay a lot of money if you show them beheading videos
This is why we need troops on the ground.
Same difference and you know it.
Not at all. We planned how to win the war. We didn't plan what to do afterwards.
In ww2, the allies were already talking about what to do with post war Germany even before D Day.
Yes, SHIT.
I like it.
They probably are using drones already, but conventional aircraft tend to be a lot faster and carry a lot heavier payloads.
They are, drones are not cheap either. What I am saying is that Afghanistan has cost the UK 2-3 billion pounds and between 450-500 of our service personnel. A long drawn out campaign that never had a single objective as it was changed every year.
The "enemy" are fanatical Muslims who love to fight and die for their God Allah. That is all they want to do. So you cannot win against an enemy in this conventional way.
The way to beat ISIS in my view is to swallow our pride and our hopes of policing the world, admit we were wrong and make friends with Assad and support him. He will rid Syria of ISIS overnight just as Hussein would have done in Iraq. In the past the west has always used terrifying despots who kill and torture on a whim and it has worked to keep the barbarians in line. This change of strategy will bankrupt the west and the enemy will win. IS are trying to provoke a land war because they want to be martyred.
The difference is perhaps that the war in Iraq wasn't that popular to begin with, so there was a great deal of pressure on Western leaders to pull out troops as soon as possible. Leaving a power vacuum (both civilian and military) has happened before, with the same result (of what is in effect a civil war) so it isn't surprising that this has happened. At the time the troops were withdrawn there were plenty of voices, including those in the military, that the Iraqis were just not ready to run their own country.
Do we not get the fact that we are not helping?
Does this mean we wouldn't have to provide new homes and protection for all the refugees, many of whom will in turn provide support for rebellion in their own countries and "righteous" attacks on the West for supporting such evil despots? Fanatical Muslims, as before, will still attack us anyway because we are non Muslims and must be seen as such to be seen as inferior.
.
http://edition.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/bestoftv/2014/10/04/dnt-damon-isis-releases-kidnapped-boy.cnn.html
Kidnapped boy is brainwashed by ISIS and then released. They are making child soldiers for the future.
Exactly. It is showing them we can pick them off one by one if we want. We are practically able to shoot them in either the left bollock or right bollock if we want. Preferably both.
This was on another thread yesterday. Brainwashed or terrified? Both matter of course, as that's how IS operate. Would he dare speak against them after the horrors he's witnessed?. Many more like him to follow as thousands of little innocent children have been kidnapped and have no idea where their parents are..They stop at nothing and every form of depravity is being deployed.
Anyone know what comparative costs are taking all expenses into consideration including backup ground crew.
Against them we have easily identified military personnel, handcuffed by rules and regulations about how and when to engage an enemy.
Yes, the aircraft are a show of force, but they're more PR and suppression than a tool to 'win' against IS forces. As for ground forces, we might have the latest weapons, but that doesn't mean they're the most effective. For example, the British Army uses the SA80 rifle, but it's really a suppression fire weapon. It is outclassed by the humble Enfiield rifle first manufactured in the early 1900's. That gun fires a bigger bullet with more stopping power over a greater distance with higher accuracy. There are thousands of Enfields in circulation and the ammo is easy to source. Any guerilla fighting force can pick them up.
We need to start learning some new tricks, because we've played this game over and over again already and the outcome hasn't changed. What's so different now?
Surely our prize for 'winning' the war is what we have now, another one .. and one I don't think can ever be won.
Global terrorism rose 43% in 2013, terrorism is on the rise.http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/30/global-terrorism-rose-despite-al-qaida-splintering
The list of terrorist attacks, just up to August in this year alone is, is lengthy indeed! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2014
There was a guy talking about this on tv and he said they're not attacking random trucks they happen to come across but carefully selected targets identified by a tracking device and I guess that would be SAS guys/ insiders who'd be putting them on..
Take that how you want but it makes more sense than firing off expensive missiles just to knock out a 4x4 with a few ISIS rednecks in.
a couple of apaches based in turkey could muller em! what an opportunity!!
yanks have hit them with one punitive airstrike ffs they should whack the slags around the clock.
Good for him but I'd imagine the people out there being scared shitless of ISIS would hardly call themselves losers if ISIS get hammered..
The will when someone worse inevitably takes their place.