Iraq crisis: Baghdad requests US air strikes against Sunni militants – live updates

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I agree with you, but would the government of your country see it that way?

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: DarknStormy
a reply to: crazyewok

They couldn't defeat Hezbollah who are also now fighting against the likes of ISIS in Syria. How the hell are they going to survive against groups who are successfully romping governments in larger countries? USA will be going to war if Israel is attacked, there is no doubt about it.

Again why should I care about Israel?

I don't care when African country fall and rise every other year so why should I be itching to fight for Israel?

Again, I agree with you, but would your government?

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

The answer is to refrain from arming them but also to counteract the threat they are to civilization in general and prevent them from gaining any more oil fields, finances and political power.

Drones will probably be used instead of direct deployment of personnel.

We have already armed them, and if ISIS has taken all these cities, now THEY have more weapons we gave to the Iraqis for their military......

Let that country do what it wants........if the people want Islamic overloards let them have it.....

You cannot force democracy on people who dont want it and dont understand it.

Bombing that place to a pile of ash again isnt going to change that........

Let the middle east fend for themselves........

If we want our people safe, if we want our country safe, then bring the people home who MAKE it safe....

Spend the money HERE.......take care of your own house before you try to take care of someone elses.....

originally posted by: DarknStormy
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I agree with you, but would the government of your country see it that way?

Thats the problem its apparent they dont , and that needs to change, they need to be brought back under the yolk....

We need to stop being the world police, and we need to stop throwing money into other countries like this and spending our resources and lives of our people in places we dont need to be in......

Its a sad state.........

We went in, we shouldnt have , but since we did, we should have done it the right way.........we didnt, we failed , and we failed our soldiers families as well......

This mistake shouldnt be repeated......

originally posted by: DarknStormy

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: DarknStormy
a reply to: crazyewok

They couldn't defeat Hezbollah who are also now fighting against the likes of ISIS in Syria. How the hell are they going to survive against groups who are successfully romping governments in larger countries? USA will be going to war if Israel is attacked, there is no doubt about it.

Again why should I care about Israel?

I don't care when African country fall and rise every other year so why should I be itching to fight for Israel?

Again, I agree with you, but would your government?

Well we stopped the UK government from jumping into Syria.

I feel like saying the hell with McCain and all the other hawks (including Hilary Clinton) who supported this neocon catastrophe for years.

So we go in with air strikes and then what? That's not going to be enough to drive ISIS out of holding a lot of territory or prevent them from financing and training jihadists to target the west. So that much at least is scaremongering BS IMO.

Even if we went in full blown with troops to fight these guys and completely conquer the territory they hold in Syria and Iraq we'd be right back to the unsustainable position we were in before only no doubt worse.

We should have done our best to get this stooge Maliki out of power long ago. We should have put our foot down about our Arab "allies" funding extremists in Syria, Iraq and Africa. We should have done a lot of things.

We need to look for a negotiated resolution of some kind. Sunnis, Shia, Christians, Arabs and Kurds all live in peace in Iraqi Kurdistan so we know this is somehow possible.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I truly wish just letting them destroy themselves would be the easy way.

The thing is it's about politics, they aren't just trashing each other they are gaining political power and vast finances by gaining control of oil fields and next it will be control of Iraq's, Iran's (and wherever else they can get their hands on) military and trained personnel. For the purpose of using them against their old adversary, the west, Christianity and Judaism, anywhere that isn't muslim.

They are jihadi they want world control, they don't give a damn about international politics, they are all fired up on jihad juice, they don't care for human rights or the consequences of bombing anywhere else in the world, they only want the chance to do so and given the chance that would be their action.

They bombed innocents on a tube train in London, committed daily atrocities around the globe in the name of their jihad. They are on a global rampage and the Levant is just the start.

Imagine having control of around 46% of the world's oil reserves (www.mapsofworld.com...)and the political power that comes with that.

Political power + jihad agenda = !!!!!

It has to be contained, now.

I don't want any personnel from the west sent there, nor spending any money on them, but it has to be dealt with, that fact has to be realised.

originally posted by: roadgravel
McCain has become the poster boy for hawks. His answer seem to always be blow it up.

why does anyone listen to him....these same republicans are back again, the ones that failed to protect us from 9/11, lied about the war in Iraq, failed to end that war on their own watch....and somehow we have to listen to these yahoos?....I know, for every republican and conservative that wants us to go "kick some ass"....get a gun, get you kids a gun, get your grandkids a gun, and go over there and do it yourselves. the American people are getting tired of having their own children blown up and shot, put you money where your mouth is or shut the hell up....geez, friggin' armchair warhawks

a reply to: DelMarvel
Peace between these people is only possible in gumdrop fairy land. We've been going at this game for many centuries already. If peace hasn't happened yet, it never will.

a reply to: jimmyx

Take away their stock in the MIC and make them put it in Home Depot, etc. See how fast policy changes and money is spent in the US so they can keep making money

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Thats just it tho, you cant bomb these people there and stop it..........

They are going to get funded either way, through other countries in the ME who are sympathetic to the extremist cause or through other avenues.......

The extremist arent just in Iraq right now, thats a small small contingent of them........

We have already proven that going to war on the ground and killing thousands upon thousands of them at the expense of our men and women in uniform DOESNT WORK......weve been bombing them in 2 other countries as well, has THAT worked?

Weve spent 12 years on this war on terror and they are stronger now then they have ever been.........

The lives of my brothers and sister in arms , fighting Religious ideology with weapons, proves that this method doesnt work.......

Did destroying baghdad to "liberate" them, work the first time? Did it stop terrorist? What makes anyone think its going to work this time?

a reply to: roadgravel

If there is some non military way of solving this then all the politicians of the world should be working on it, right now.

The thing is they are in a vast desert, the majority of the people there don't even have bank accounts let alone ways of defending themselves.

The military there has to act now, first and foremost but from reports it isn't equipped or able to offer any real answers.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

As I have said previously I think going into Iraq the way they did before wasn't constructive.

I don't recommend putting troops on the ground, as I said air strikes is probably the only way it can be dealt with in a military sense, at least as an immediate containment, then the whole issue can be dealt with.

Preventing any immediate further advancement and gain of strategic oil fields and military bases is crucial for the long term stability of the Middle East.

As I said I would prefer that the west didn't need to intervene but it looks like it will happen and because something has to be done.

The entire Middle East being under the control of jihadis isn't in the interest of the US or anywhere, especially in the long term. They would be declaring war on the US and all non muslim lands as soon as they could and gaining land, cities, military and oil is the way they plan on having the means to.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

as I said air strikes is probably the only way it can be dealt with in a military sense

Where has this worked so far? In every place we have bombed to stop this extremist uprising its gotten WORSE......

Im a military guy , I GET IT.........I understand what you are saying but it simply doesnt work.......

The American people are tired of this, this fighting for oil reserves is ridiculous........

If we were energy independent like weve been trying to push for so long to be able to tap into our OWN oil here in the US we wouldnt have this issue.......

I dont want anymore of my fellow Americans or brothers in arms dying over those oil fields.......I dont want any more of our American dollars going to them either.

Why don't the super-rich gulf states intervene? Or Iran? Or Russia? Or Turkeys military? Or Europe? Why does it always have to be US?

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I don't want the west losing anyone or anything either but the fact is the price might be far greater in the long run unless it is contained now.

Here are some possibilites:

Scenario a.
It is contained now, then the long term picture is either something is done that maintains stability or it is a messy ongoing exercise.

Scenario b.
It was ignored, uncontained, they gained power over the entire Middle East then waged global jihad, declaring war on the US and everywhere else.

As for air strikes, maybe there is a more effective way than that being deployed previously. I say it is a preferable option and that which the guys making the tough decisions on action might well see as the most viable.

a reply to: Skyfloating

The US shouldn't need to but most of the countries you mentioned are funding ISIS or part of it somehow, and I guess Iraq asked the US as it has been involved before and vowed to sort it.

The Middle East is complex and a lot of oil money is behind ISIS.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I don't want the west losing anyone or anything either but the fact is the price might be far greater in the long run unless it is contained now.

Here are some possibilites:

Scenario a.
It is contained now, then the long term picture is either something is done that maintains stability or it is a messy ongoing exercise.

Scenario b.
It was ignored, uncontained, they gained power over the entire Middle East then waged global jihad, declaring war on the US and everywhere else.

As for air strikes, maybe there is a more effective way than that being deployed previously. I say it is a preferable option and that which the guys making the tough decisions on action might well see as the most viable.

Scenario B is already happening now, it has been happening for a long time.........extremist have infiltrated so many governments in the middle east, and run so much of the countries its not even funny.......

This isnt a new thing, its BEEN this way, thats a big reason why its been a losing battle....

Scenario A. is impossible, again........weve tried this , it doesnt work.......we tried this the first go round, weve tried it in pakistan and afghanistan........it doesnt.........work........

You cannot bomb and shoot a Religious ideology into submission.........

The only way for this to stop is for Islam itself to fix this within its own ranks.......and for the countries to take care of themselves and police themselves.......

For their governments to make sure that these take overs dont happen........

If they are unwilling to do so, then our bombing them to bits isnt going to fix it.........they will just bring in anther wave......and so on and so fourth..........FOREVER......we cannot stop this w out completely taking over the country, and keeping our own huge standing Military there .......FOREVER.......

And we are not wanted there.........no, enough......let them deal with this on their own

a reply to: jimmyx

Ahhh the old blame game as usual I see.

McCain is part of the Republican Left Wing.

And of course we have many Democrats (especially at the highest levels of the central committee) wanting to attack Syria.

And we have Democrats involved in many attacks worldwide since 2009 don't we?

True Conservatives want nothing to do with "attacking".

a reply to: Skyfloating

Why don't the super-rich gulf states intervene? Or Iran? Or Russia? Or Turkeys military? Or Europe? Why does it always have to be US?

You make a valid point....why should the US get involved all the time?

Probably because in the past they've been the one's stirring the pot behind the scenes.

And if we are being honest 'we' in the UK have been equally to blame and have got ourselves involved for the same reasons.

Its very easy to bury our heads in the sand and turn our backs on the #storm that is occurring.
But we have to admit that this is partly due to 'our' failings - do we have at least some moral responsibility to assist those who are suffering as a result of these failings?
Can we sit idly by and watch thousands of people die when we have the resources to at least stop the advances of ISIS?

I agree 100% that not one single British or American Serviceman or woman should be directly involved in any military operation - but surely there are other alternatives available?

Of some things I am absolutely certain; if ISIS prove successful in gaining control of large tracts of land in Iraq then sooner or later we will find ourselves in direct confrontation with them.
And it will also be inevitable that there will be conflict between ISIS and Iran - Iran can not allow ISIS to prosper.

There are no easy, simplistic answers and I'm pleased I'm not one of the people who has to decide on the course of action our country's will take.
If ever there was a case of damned if we do, damned if we don't it's this.