Air strikes on ISIS

[Jimbeaux]

Obama authorized air strikes on ISIS this evening to open routes for humanitarian airlifts to various ethnic groups trapped on a mountain range. Christians, Kurds, and other religious minorities but mainly about 40,000 Yazidis (sp)'are starving in place or facing death if they came down from the mountains. Obama sees as this as a form of genocide. Air strikes will also offer protection to diplomatic personnel in the area if a threat to them materializes. Air strike are authorized but have not occurred yet; they will if needed to carry out the humanitarian mission. No link as this is being reported live.

Edited by Jimbeaux on Friday 8th August 02:45

[200bhp]

Here's a link to the BBC:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28699832

I guess most of PH is currently asleep!

Personally I think drone strikes will happen quite fast now it's authorised but traditional aircraft may be further off. Is there even a need for piloted aircraft when it comes to ground attacks in an area where there are no airborn hostiles?

[McWigglebum4th]

A mistake

We should stay out of it

Any move against a Muslim state angers the world


Let the religion of peace sort it out

[BlackLabel]

Things were getting so bad over there I don't think America had a choice. ISIS only number a few thousand men - it should not take much to severely dent their capabilities via a few air strikes.

Iraq should not have been invaded in 2003 however just because we got it wrong back then it should not mean military intervention of some sorts is wrong here.

Edited by BlackLabel on Friday 8th August 06:27

[McWigglebum4th]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

No the middle east has made it abundantly clear our help is not welcome


Let the middle east sort it out

Unless the middle east asks for our help then frankly let them carry on

Am i heartless?

100%

[iphonedyou]

BlackLabel said:

Iraq should not have been invaded in 2003 however just because we got it wrong back then it should not mean military intervention of some sorts is wrong here.

I think that's a key point.

[V8 Fettler]

Has Obama issued any long term political objectives?

The invasion of 2003 was indeed a mistake, Iraq should have been generally subdued in 1991.

[s1962a]

Good points on this thread.

I am a muslim and I find these ISIS nutjobs extreme to the highest level. Apparently they are following some Saudi inspired extreme ideology.

As for air strikes.. it's a tough one - I think the better approach would be to go for the countries that fund these guys - Saudi's etc. Likely to happen?

[CrutyRammers]

iphonedyou said:

BlackLabel said:

Iraq should not have been invaded in 2003 however just because we got it wrong back then it should not mean military intervention of some sorts is wrong here.

I think that's a key point.

It is, the counter argument is that every intervention made over the last decade or so appears in hindsight to have made things worse.

[Puggit]

s1962a said:

As for air strikes.. it's a tough one - I think the better approach would be to go for the countries that fund these guys - Saudi's etc. Likely to happen?

Unfortunately ISIS is almost self-funding at the moment due to the rather slack security Iraq put on its arms and banks. I appreciate your point though that Saudi Arabia certainly plays a part in this.

[MrBrightSi]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsCZzpmbEcs&li...

I think this is one of the clearer cut fights in the middle east. The islamic state represent a really dangerous turn for the entire region.

It's a shame the iraqis and kurds didn't work with each other in the beginning. If the kurds didn't watch, become opportunistic and instead fought for the lesser of the two evils, the region would be a lot more stable.

[Four Litre]

iphonedyou said:

BlackLabel said:

Iraq should not have been invaded in 2003 however just because we got it wrong back then it should not mean military intervention of some sorts is wrong here.

I think that's a key point.

Totally right - We (west) have caused this problem and have a moral right to sort it now. Also use it as an oppertunity to wipe ISIS out. Afterally where are they going to go once they have mission accomplished in Iraq....

[s1962a]

Puggit said:

s1962a said:

As for air strikes.. it's a tough one - I think the better approach would be to go for the countries that fund these guys - Saudi's etc. Likely to happen?

Unfortunately ISIS is almost self-funding at the moment due to the rather slack security Iraq put on its arms and banks. I appreciate your point though that Saudi Arabia certainly plays a part in this.

That is crazy.

Is it also true that ISIS are comprised of the same rebels we were supporting and arming in Syria?

[MrBrightSi]

s1962a said:

Puggit said:

s1962a said:

As for air strikes.. it's a tough one - I think the better approach would be to go for the countries that fund these guys - Saudi's etc. Likely to happen?

Unfortunately ISIS is almost self-funding at the moment due to the rather slack security Iraq put on its arms and banks. I appreciate your point though that Saudi Arabia certainly plays a part in this.

That is crazy.

Is it also true that ISIS are comprised of the same rebels we were supporting and arming in Syria?

We never supported them, there was support for a lot of the Syrian people led elements, but once thousands of fighters from many countries decended on the place, with differing views of what syria should look like after, it all went crazy.

The islamic state captured ex american army bases and the millions of dollars worth of equipment to be found in them, im sure i saw a video where they'd just burnt most of it however.

[Jimbeaux]

McWigglebum4th said:

A mistake

We should stay out of it

Any move against a Muslim state angers the world


Let the religion of peace sort it out

Cynicism at 0500, that is the type dedication PH is looking for.

[Jimbeaux]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

It appears that is what we are going to do. We shall see.

[Jimbeaux]

s1962a said:

Good points on this thread.

I am a muslim and I find these ISIS nutjobs extreme to the highest level. Apparently they are following some Saudi inspired extreme ideology.

As for air strikes.. it's a tough one - I think the better approach would be to go for the countries that fund these guys - Saudi's etc. Likely to happen?

They are good at funding themselves. Capturing banks and some oil fields have netted them huge funding.

Edited by Jimbeaux on Friday 8th August 11:43

[Jimbeaux]

Four Litre said:

iphonedyou said:

BlackLabel said:

Iraq should not have been invaded in 2003 however just because we got it wrong back then it should not mean military intervention of some sorts is wrong here.

I think that's a key point.

Totally right - We (west) have caused this problem and have a moral right to sort it now. Also use it as an oppertunity to wipe ISIS out. Afterally where are they going to go once they have mission accomplished in Iraq....

Some say they will try to cross into Saudi. The Saudis have deployed 30,000 troops on their border to deter them. This is a good sign the Saudis are not their supporters.....unless this is for optics.

[Puggit]

MrBrightSi said:

It's a shame the iraqis and kurds didn't work with each other in the beginning.

They still don't - all arms to Iraq (including anything attempting to reach the Kurds) has to go through the Iraqi government. One of the key reasons the nutters just made some big gains is the Peshmerga had to retreat due to running out of ammunition. They have mainly only small arms anyway.

[Elroy Blue]

Jimbeaux said:

Some say they will try to cross into Saudi. The Saudis have deployed 30,000 troops on their border to deter them. This is a good sign the Saudis are not their supporters.....unless this is for optics.

ISIS also attacked a town in Northern Lebanon. The Saudis have just given £3 billion pounds weapons to Lebanon in response.