I don't want to bore everyone with a history lesson here but IS's main objective seems to be the establishment of a Caliphate in the region. Since they're fanatical Moslems they are likely inspired by how Islam initially grew and spread from what is now Saudi Arabia and into the neighbouring Arab world.
Iraq (old Mesopotamia) was conquered and that's still their primary objective. Syria is the next obvious target. The old Persian Empire (Iran and Afghanistan) may be too much to handle but I'm guessing if they want to aggressively expand then the next target would be the old Byzantine Empire, which means Turkey and, more importantly for Western interests, the Levant.
Once they get control of Syria then Israel will be next.
I think it is far from boring - this is the key to the whole thing. ISIS will not stop at Iraq and Syria because, as you say, they are trying to recreate the original Caliphate, which stretched over a vast region. Now is the time to stop this aggressive militaristic regime, before they become too strong.
Surely the killing of innocent American and UK citizens, and then publishing it live on video is provocation enough to justify military action ?
We have to be careful of the usual "collateral damage"..as we euphemistically like to call it. But any action against IS forces in Syria or Iraq, however brutal or destructive, is now justified. In fact it's now inevitable, why wait ?
I agree. But before we start dropping bombs on Iraq and Syria, we need more allies from the Arab countries as well. If we go alone, it would be the West against Islam and the Arab world. That would irritate moderate muslims who would then think: "Well, maybe IS has the point. Look what the West is doing to us". Also, it's important to stress that any military action against IS would have civilian casualties as collateral damage. IS could use that in their propaganda if we go in the military action without any allies from the muslim countries.
They won't be expanding when the US air force keeps dropping bombs on their head and Israel is heavily armed and also has The Bomb so ISIS taking over there is unlikely. Teaming up with Assad seems the most logical move right now although that would be a U turn that could backfire but I think getting rid of ISIS is the number one concern.
You're right that taking one foot on Israeli soil would be an absolute disaster but don't forget these are fanatics. Hitler thought he could take on the might of the Red Army while simultaneously fighting Britain and the US on the Western Front.
Of course we can only talk speculatively. It's highly unlikely to actually happen but you're right that the first steps we need to take are to bolster defence of Iraq and Syria and it's absolutely essential that neighbouring Arab states help with this. We can't let this be an IS vs The West fight.
We may need to swallow our pride and get talking with Assad and even perhaps Putin as well, although he's rather busy destabilising Ukraine at the moment.
We need leaders with a real grasp of history and the likely long term effects of our actions. Too many short term, knee jerk reactions have resulted in this bloody mess.
Last night's kneejerk reactions to my comments robbed me of any inclination to reply, but I will today.
U96 went further to explain his opinion, which is very close to mine; as long as there are hostages, our leaders cannot open their mouths in public - the hostages will suffer and die. That is quite clear. David Cameron cannot standup in Wales and state his intention to arm the Kurds in the same week as declaring that he's making the safety of David Haines his personal responsibility...and expect him to live. That painted a target firmly on the guy's head....and on the heads of any British aid workers or journalists the IS can reach right now.
As U96 said...the hostages HAVE to be removed from the equation first, then and ONLY then are politicians able to act without having to take on board the consequences to hostages. and right now every single British aid worker in Syria should be being told to return home forthwith...and it made quite clear to them and their famiiies that there will after a stated date be no further Foreign Office or government support given to them in the event of a kidnapping.
I say "families"...because it's the families of hostages that have to pay in pain and grief for the words and actions of politicians. And politicans may pay lip service to this - but its THEIR deeds and words that have caused those families grief.
And I'm not singling David Cameron again - in the last three days James Foley's family have spooken in public about the pathetic efforts of and support given to them by the State Department to ensure James' safety and release despite all Barack Obama's words and declared support...
If we want our politicians to actually DO something about IS....then either we do something beforehand about any hostages...or resign ourselves as a nation to the fact that they ARE going to die and keep on dying. That may sound brutal and callous - but it's EXACTLY what is happening right now; our politicians may cry crocodile tears, but they've already hardened their hearts politically to the deaths of hostages. WE need to be prepared to do the same....or just stop our loved ones going abroad and puting themselves in harm's way.
We're quite fond of telling the Muslim community in the Uk that it shouldn't be allowing its young men to go abroad and fight for their beliefs...well, the same thing applies to US - if you're not prepared to have your sons/brothers/fathers taken hostage and being killed on Youtube, don't let them go to foreign battlezones!!!
Posters have complained about ransom money paying for IS terrorism, and terrorism in the UK; what funding is this??? Our "domestic" Islamic terrorism has NOT been well-funded, its a long list of either guys in well-funded jobs (the London carbombs/Glasgow airport bombing) or young terrorists with homemade explosives on a shoestring. If hostage ransoms and all this money supposed to be raised by IS funds terrorism in the UK, where is it? Where are the guns and milspec explosives it bought??? Certainly not in the UK...
When I and a couple of other posters remarked on Cameron's spinelessness, some posters also commented politely that didn't Cameron go to the Commons and ask for support for military intervention in Syria? Well...no he didn't; he went to parliament with a motion looking for support to assist the Americans in air strikes in Syria to deter the use of chemical weapons if inspectors provided incontrovertable evidence that they had been used by the Syrian government And THAT motion was defeated...and eventually the UN inspectors' report was anything but incontrovertable, and it instead appears that BOTH sides in the Syrian conflict have used chemical weapons...
And while some posters have said that our politicians should now all agree to wipe IS off the map... we do not have and will not have that cross-party agreement for "boots on the ground" military action; look at Ed Milliband's and the Labour Party's words after that defeat of the givernment's Syria intervention motion...
Someone recently mentiioned that Australia has just this morning agreed to send troops to the Middle East at US' request for any action against IS...is this a message to IS - or a message to the Chinese and THEIR sabre rattling with respect to Japan and Vietnam recently??? Australia has steadfastly refused ANY request to take part in ANY military actions for over 40 years after their pretty disastrous involvement in Vietnam - but with Japan recently changing their constitution to allow military actions abroad, this reads far more like Canberra "telegraphing a punch" to Beijing about Australia's willingness to be far more militarily adventerous too ;-)
Do you really believe that Islam is compatible with western values?
Have a think about the Islamic countries around the world before you answer that question.
Is any religion if followed to its original writings compatible with todays world ? most religions therfore have modernised to an extent including many Muslims, the type of religion the terrorists follow is a hardline version and the acts they carry out whilst they say are for religion are far from it, the terror leaders want power and money and they use religion as an excuse to get followers
Islam isn't dangerous, but people like IS, Anjem Choudary and other hate preachers are.
And there are enough of them to be a real threat anywhere, and their motives are based on the religion they support. They don't accept anyone that disagrees with them.
And there are enough of them to be a real threat anywhere, and their motives are based on the religion they support. They don't accept anyone that disagrees with them.
That doesn't mean we should just start slating or criticising Islam. It's the people who use the religious text to spread hate that we should be targeting.
This is the only thing IS can do, to get at the Western powers, behead people, they cannot compete with the US airstrikes so will use shocking, single outrages like beheadings to pressurize.
So sad for Mr Haines' family, may he rest in peace.
That doesn't mean we should just start slating or criticising Islam. It's the people who use the religious text to spread hate that we should be targeting.
It's not just spreading hate but also the consequences of it. IS do not just want to oppose American intervention or to evangelise their faith but rather they want to embark on a crusade, a call to arms, a jihad.
And a holy war is incredibly seductive for the impressionable fanatic. You please God and you get a free pass to Paradise. Must be doubly rewarding if your existence on Earth is miserable
It's not just spreading hate but also the consequences of it. IS do not just want to oppose American intervention or to evangelise their faith but rather they want to embark on a crusade, a call to arms, a jihad.
That's the thing. Even if they established their "caliphate", and it was every bit the medieval shithole that they dreamed of, with as much oppression and brutality as they could ever want, most IS members wouldn't be able to get on with living in it, because what they crave is the jihad, the struggle, and the feeling that they are some sort of "holy warrior"
This is the only thing IS can do, to get at the Western powers, behead people, they cannot compete with the US airstrikes ....
ONLY because we haven't gone to play in their sandbox. When we do it'll be different; all the airstrikes and ground offensives and overwhelming firepower and modern technology in the world didn't defeat the Taliban in a decade...
That's the thing. Even if they established their "caliphate", and it was every bit the medieval shithole that they dreamed of, with as much oppression and brutality as they could ever want, most IS members wouldn't be able to get on with living in it, because what they crave is the jihad, the struggle, and the feeling that they are some sort of "holy warrior"
...except we're giving them exactly what they want - a neverending holy war...only one that will be defensive in nature ;-)
I feel sickened to the stomach at this evil murder of an innocent man whose only aim was to help the very people he was there to HELP. Now we have the prospect of yet another british hostage suffering the same evil fate. The line has been crossed and there has to be severe retribution at those who carried it out by this government. And if it means military action then so be it
You said they didn't go to remembrance services - which are about the past. Pakistan didn't exist in WW1 & WW2 - the Indian army was about 25-33% Muslim volunteers from the areas that would become Pakistan in the late 40s. You raised the past - at least acknowledge the truth about it.
It doesn't read like the past to me and it was you who raised it in reply.
"Strange how you never see Pakistanis at Remembrance Day ceremonies or repatriation of our dead servicemen".
ONLY because we haven't gone to play in their sandbox. When we do it'll be different; all the airstrikes and ground offensives and overwhelming firepower and modern technology in the world didn't defeat the Taliban in a decade...
I know what your saying Phylo, this mob are not hiding in caves in really remote areas, like Al-Qaeda though, they seem to relish being out in the open, fighting. Creating all manner of outrages to Christians, Muslim, anybody who gets in their way. Its a never-ending cycle of the West intervening and various radicals constantly re-emerging to keep jihad going.
Is there a solution?? Can't see one myself, sadly.
That's the thing. Even if they established their "caliphate", and it was every bit the medieval shithole that they dreamed of, with as much oppression and brutality as they could ever want, most IS members wouldn't be able to get on with living in it, because what they crave is the jihad, the struggle, and the feeling that they are some sort of "holy warrior"
I have doubts that they'll be content with the Middle East. I can see their invasions eventually spreading out to beyond countries that have Islam as their main religion if IS aren't stopped.
This is the only thing IS can do, to get at the Western powers, behead people, they cannot compete with the US airstrikes so will use shocking, single outrages like beheadings to pressurize.
So sad for Mr Haines' family, may he rest in peace.
Yes it's retaliation and goading. They want more fuel for their rampage.
David had been held hostage for 18 months. I dread to think what he and his family endured before this atrocity. Now the next British man is lined up.
I've just watched a press conference with the aid agency David worked for. They have been forced to move out of areas where they are desperately needed for the survival of so many.
Comments
I think it is far from boring - this is the key to the whole thing. ISIS will not stop at Iraq and Syria because, as you say, they are trying to recreate the original Caliphate, which stretched over a vast region. Now is the time to stop this aggressive militaristic regime, before they become too strong.
I agree. But before we start dropping bombs on Iraq and Syria, we need more allies from the Arab countries as well. If we go alone, it would be the West against Islam and the Arab world. That would irritate moderate muslims who would then think: "Well, maybe IS has the point. Look what the West is doing to us". Also, it's important to stress that any military action against IS would have civilian casualties as collateral damage. IS could use that in their propaganda if we go in the military action without any allies from the muslim countries.
You're right that taking one foot on Israeli soil would be an absolute disaster but don't forget these are fanatics. Hitler thought he could take on the might of the Red Army while simultaneously fighting Britain and the US on the Western Front.
Of course we can only talk speculatively. It's highly unlikely to actually happen but you're right that the first steps we need to take are to bolster defence of Iraq and Syria and it's absolutely essential that neighbouring Arab states help with this. We can't let this be an IS vs The West fight.
We may need to swallow our pride and get talking with Assad and even perhaps Putin as well, although he's rather busy destabilising Ukraine at the moment.
Last night's kneejerk reactions to my comments robbed me of any inclination to reply, but I will today.
U96 went further to explain his opinion, which is very close to mine; as long as there are hostages, our leaders cannot open their mouths in public - the hostages will suffer and die. That is quite clear. David Cameron cannot standup in Wales and state his intention to arm the Kurds in the same week as declaring that he's making the safety of David Haines his personal responsibility...and expect him to live. That painted a target firmly on the guy's head....and on the heads of any British aid workers or journalists the IS can reach right now.
As U96 said...the hostages HAVE to be removed from the equation first, then and ONLY then are politicians able to act without having to take on board the consequences to hostages. and right now every single British aid worker in Syria should be being told to return home forthwith...and it made quite clear to them and their famiiies that there will after a stated date be no further Foreign Office or government support given to them in the event of a kidnapping.
I say "families"...because it's the families of hostages that have to pay in pain and grief for the words and actions of politicians. And politicans may pay lip service to this - but its THEIR deeds and words that have caused those families grief.
And I'm not singling David Cameron again - in the last three days James Foley's family have spooken in public about the pathetic efforts of and support given to them by the State Department to ensure James' safety and release despite all Barack Obama's words and declared support...
If we want our politicians to actually DO something about IS....then either we do something beforehand about any hostages...or resign ourselves as a nation to the fact that they ARE going to die and keep on dying. That may sound brutal and callous - but it's EXACTLY what is happening right now; our politicians may cry crocodile tears, but they've already hardened their hearts politically to the deaths of hostages. WE need to be prepared to do the same....or just stop our loved ones going abroad and puting themselves in harm's way.
We're quite fond of telling the Muslim community in the Uk that it shouldn't be allowing its young men to go abroad and fight for their beliefs...well, the same thing applies to US - if you're not prepared to have your sons/brothers/fathers taken hostage and being killed on Youtube, don't let them go to foreign battlezones!!!
Posters have complained about ransom money paying for IS terrorism, and terrorism in the UK; what funding is this??? Our "domestic" Islamic terrorism has NOT been well-funded, its a long list of either guys in well-funded jobs (the London carbombs/Glasgow airport bombing) or young terrorists with homemade explosives on a shoestring. If hostage ransoms and all this money supposed to be raised by IS funds terrorism in the UK, where is it? Where are the guns and milspec explosives it bought??? Certainly not in the UK...
When I and a couple of other posters remarked on Cameron's spinelessness, some posters also commented politely that didn't Cameron go to the Commons and ask for support for military intervention in Syria? Well...no he didn't; he went to parliament with a motion looking for support to assist the Americans in air strikes in Syria to deter the use of chemical weapons if inspectors provided incontrovertable evidence that they had been used by the Syrian government And THAT motion was defeated...and eventually the UN inspectors' report was anything but incontrovertable, and it instead appears that BOTH sides in the Syrian conflict have used chemical weapons...
And while some posters have said that our politicians should now all agree to wipe IS off the map... we do not have and will not have that cross-party agreement for "boots on the ground" military action; look at Ed Milliband's and the Labour Party's words after that defeat of the givernment's Syria intervention motion...
Someone recently mentiioned that Australia has just this morning agreed to send troops to the Middle East at US' request for any action against IS...is this a message to IS - or a message to the Chinese and THEIR sabre rattling with respect to Japan and Vietnam recently??? Australia has steadfastly refused ANY request to take part in ANY military actions for over 40 years after their pretty disastrous involvement in Vietnam - but with Japan recently changing their constitution to allow military actions abroad, this reads far more like Canberra "telegraphing a punch" to Beijing about Australia's willingness to be far more militarily adventerous too ;-)
But then he changed to a more brainwashing type of religion.
This is why islam is so dangerous. It's the way it can brainwash people in such a short space of time.:(
Is any religion if followed to its original writings compatible with todays world ? most religions therfore have modernised to an extent including many Muslims, the type of religion the terrorists follow is a hardline version and the acts they carry out whilst they say are for religion are far from it, the terror leaders want power and money and they use religion as an excuse to get followers
Islam isn't dangerous, but people like IS, Anjem Choudary and other hate preachers are.
And there are enough of them to be a real threat anywhere, and their motives are based on the religion they support. They don't accept anyone that disagrees with them.
That doesn't mean we should just start slating or criticising Islam. It's the people who use the religious text to spread hate that we should be targeting.
So sad for Mr Haines' family, may he rest in peace.
It's not just spreading hate but also the consequences of it. IS do not just want to oppose American intervention or to evangelise their faith but rather they want to embark on a crusade, a call to arms, a jihad.
And a holy war is incredibly seductive for the impressionable fanatic. You please God and you get a free pass to Paradise. Must be doubly rewarding if your existence on Earth is miserable
That's the thing. Even if they established their "caliphate", and it was every bit the medieval shithole that they dreamed of, with as much oppression and brutality as they could ever want, most IS members wouldn't be able to get on with living in it, because what they crave is the jihad, the struggle, and the feeling that they are some sort of "holy warrior"
ONLY because we haven't gone to play in their sandbox. When we do it'll be different; all the airstrikes and ground offensives and overwhelming firepower and modern technology in the world didn't defeat the Taliban in a decade...
...except we're giving them exactly what they want - a neverending holy war...only one that will be defensive in nature ;-)
Hardly the greatest of ideas, that.
What is the alternative?
It doesn't read like the past to me and it was you who raised it in reply.
"Strange how you never see Pakistanis at Remembrance Day ceremonies or repatriation of our dead servicemen".
I know what your saying Phylo, this mob are not hiding in caves in really remote areas, like Al-Qaeda though, they seem to relish being out in the open, fighting. Creating all manner of outrages to Christians, Muslim, anybody who gets in their way. Its a never-ending cycle of the West intervening and various radicals constantly re-emerging to keep jihad going.
Is there a solution?? Can't see one myself, sadly.
I have doubts that they'll be content with the Middle East. I can see their invasions eventually spreading out to beyond countries that have Islam as their main religion if IS aren't stopped.
Yes it's retaliation and goading. They want more fuel for their rampage.
David had been held hostage for 18 months. I dread to think what he and his family endured before this atrocity. Now the next British man is lined up.
I've just watched a press conference with the aid agency David worked for. They have been forced to move out of areas where they are desperately needed for the survival of so many.
twitter. they posted the video and using the hashtag something to do with 'the last night of the proms'
Probably through video sharing sites that allow violence to be shown. LiveLeak is known to have graphic videos.