Air strikes on ISIS
Discussion
Just to clarify the Old Testament / New Testament issue regarding Leviticus and other controversial passages, IMO, the teachings of Jesus do supersede quite a few of the Jewish traditions. Matthew 5:38 directly contradicts the 'eye for an eye' principle for example.
Jesus taught a message of forgiveness, compassion and mercy, he stopped the stoning of a woman accused of adultery in John 8:7, 'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her'.
When Jesus talked about fulfilling the law, I think He was referring to the 10 Commandments, all of which still stand.
Jesus taught a message of forgiveness, compassion and mercy, he stopped the stoning of a woman accused of adultery in John 8:7, 'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her'.
When Jesus talked about fulfilling the law, I think He was referring to the 10 Commandments, all of which still stand.
pc.iow said:
Digga said:
Purity14 said:
I have played many strategy warfare games(Which makes me a professional military strategist now 
)
If I was to just create an army based on land, then I would be wiped out eventually by sea and air.
If they had fighter jets, and the ability to pilot them, id be worried.
ISIS wont be able to sustain what they are doing for long, let alone the 5 year goal that they have published.
As soon as they rattle Israel, it will be all over for ISIS, if it isn't already.
Okay, so that deals with military action, but in a way that is the easy part when you begin to ponder what is to be done about the 'homegrown' fundamentalist and terrorist element?) If I was to just create an army based on land, then I would be wiped out eventually by sea and air.
If they had fighter jets, and the ability to pilot them, id be worried.
ISIS wont be able to sustain what they are doing for long, let alone the 5 year goal that they have published.
As soon as they rattle Israel, it will be all over for ISIS, if it isn't already.
It will make things a lot easier as we can merge the two threads together.
NRS said:
That will massively kick off things. The entire middle east would explode, any attacks on IS would probably be viewed by many countries as an attack on Islam and involve a jihad against Israel. Then depending on how many/ who got involved it may push Israel close to the possibilities of using nukes...
If ISIS had a go at Israel, they would get pasted.Let us not forget that Israel would not use "proportionate force". If ISIS rocked up to the Israeli border, they would have hell unleashed on them.
If I was an ISIS commander, I would be more scared of Israel than the US. Israel is effectively the same firepower as the US in the region, with the added motivation of actually living there and wanting to protect their homeland.
Israel would be merciless, as they would feel they are fighting for survival. ISIS would be annihilated IMO. Israel has the kit they need and they ain't afraid to use it.
irocfan said:
Luftgekuhlt said:
Well they're already at the door- ISIS have been allegedly responsible for car and suicide bombings against Hezbollah areas in Lebanon, having been fighting them in Syria.
and Hezbollah have been taking out IS peeps as wellWho'd have thunk it?
Bonkers.
Whatever else Islamic State is, they're not completely daft - at least those at the top calling the shots aren't.
So that they (IS) are having something of a unifying effect in that previously sworn enemies are ostensibly on the same side, cannot be lost on them.
Someone on Reddit put it quite well last week - "When you get Al Qaeda, Iran, and the US all on the same side, you have ROYALLY f
ked up."
While not strictly true, the Redditor DOES have a point
So that they (IS) are having something of a unifying effect in that previously sworn enemies are ostensibly on the same side, cannot be lost on them.
Someone on Reddit put it quite well last week - "When you get Al Qaeda, Iran, and the US all on the same side, you have ROYALLY f
ked up."While not strictly true, the Redditor DOES have a point
Transmitter Man said:
Will,
If you'd do a little research on Assad & his father before him you'll find out that they're every bit as bad as IS and their prisons are notorious for torture leading in many cases to an appalling death.
Indeed I'm aware of the Assad regime and let's face it most of the middle east dictators/regimes are/were awful, but the point was more about "our" best interests and that we were naïve in thinking that once they were gone all would be well. If you'd do a little research on Assad & his father before him you'll find out that they're every bit as bad as IS and their prisons are notorious for torture leading in many cases to an appalling death.
As lets face it we backed them (the regimes) as it was felt it was better than the alternative, I just wonder what changed to make the West think the alternative would better suit their aims.
(I'm not saying it was a good thing to back murderous regimes either from a moral POV, hopefully my point comes across)
Guam said:
Jimbeaux said:
That's because they are treating Gaza with kid gloves.
Glad you are back on Jim, how is this playing in the US, are any Dem politicians baying for blood yet, Given Mr O's appalling approval ratings and many Dems in close seats viewing him as Toxic, would a mass Strike over this issue not be beneficial to the Dems in the upcoming elections? Not being callous here just trying to get a take on the probability of a major action against IS?NRS said:
That will massively kick off things. The entire middle east would explode, any attacks on IS would probably be viewed by many countries as an attack on Islam and involve a jihad against Israel. Then depending on how many/ who got involved it may push Israel close to the possibilities of using nukes...
I'm not so sure, I cannot see Jordan/Egypt/Iran/Iraq etc.... rising up to help IS no matter what. Remember the Arabs tried to engage Israel a few times and well not to put too finer point on it....
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff