The Herod Of Today

Archbishop of Canterbury warns that ISIS wants to bring 'apocalypse' to Christianity in its birthplace, labelling the jihadist group 'the Herod of today'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3373735/Archbishop-Canterbury-warn-Isis-want-bring-end-days-apocalypse-Christianity-birthplace.html#ixzz3vMpdSk4V
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

I have been saying this for years on forums.

Tis time to do summut about it.

Join the army then.
Then you can shoot as many as you want.

Handy Andy wrote:Join the army then.
Then you can shoot as many as you want.

You say that as though it's wrong to shoot members of Isis.

Handy Andy wrote:Join the army then.
Then you can shoot as many as you want.

Bin there, done that.

Don't be so rude especially on a holy day..

Except at the moment joining the army wouldn't enable you to shoot ISIS. Because our government (and a substantial number of the British public), don't have the stomach to put boots on the ground.

Seems a bit pointless when just today Russia killed a load of the top bods who are fighting it on the ground.

Eilzel wrote:Except at the moment joining the army wouldn't enable you to shoot ISIS. Because our government (and a substantial number of the British public), don't have the stomach to put boots on the ground.

True enough
Not sure I want boots on ground either though tbf

I see why. Iraq and Afghanistan have hardly been successful in any meaningful sense. But ISIS are not as large, or experienced or entrenched as the Taliban or the Republican Guard. Bombing alone, as we all know, is not going to destroy them alone. I would hope that opinion eventually shifts but it seems unlikely.

Eilzel wrote:I see why. Iraq and Afghanistan have hardly been successful in any meaningful sense. But ISIS are not as large, or experienced or entrenched as the Taliban or the Republican Guard. Bombing alone, as we all know, is not going to destroy them alone. I would hope that opinion eventually shifts but it seems unlikely.

I don't think many people want a war at all. They all seem to want something changed but they don't know what or how, I'm sorry to say I think I fit in that category....not useful I know, but I hate the thought of war.

There is only one way to defeat ISIS and that is to fight them on their own ground.

street by street, and house by house, our lads are the best in the world in that form of fighting.

The only other way is, and this seems overkill , is a small "nuke" over where they are most concentrated , and that is unthinkable to most people.

What it comes down to, is do we want to destroy ISIS, or do we want to let them go on and on murdering and raping?

Because what we are doing at the moment is just "nibbling" at the edges

Do we want to win or not? Witch ever way we go there will be civilian deaths, it's unavoidable.

I see your point Nicko, bit do you really think that you'll kill them all?
It's an ever-growing idea and ideal. They'll just keep on gaining in numbers.

I think we can stop them by killing - it's more a way of stopping the idea of Isis spreading to others....

I would like to see suggestions from other forum members, someone may have a better idea. I'm sure Quill has one.

nicko wrote:I would like to see suggestions from other forum members,    someone may have a better idea.     I'm sure Quill has one.

Bomb the shi** out of them, use USA A10 Warthogs & C130s types.

nicko wrote:I would like to see suggestions from other forum members,    someone may have a better idea.     I'm sure Quill has one.

Well, you and I have always been in agreement that 'boots on the ground' is the only way to defeat anybody.

But we might differ: (1) why do we need to defeat ISIL, is it any of our business? and (2) ISIL may be smaller in numbers than any given country (Afghanistan or Iraq), but all we have to do is make the wrong moves and their ranks will swell, as we saw with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and al Qaeda in Iraq.

We don't need holy war or the crusades all over again. We don't need to be there. Let them sort it out among themselves.

Quill, it's a big temptation to sit back and let them "sort it out among themselves", but it's my opinion that will give them the idea that "no one will stop us, lets go on" didn't Hitler think the same thing, and look what happened there? I don't think we can sit on our hands and hope that it will sort it's self out without any intervention from outside sources.While we "nibble at the edges" hundreds of innocents are being raped and murdered. It is in my nature to fight and stop them. I can't help that!

I'm with nicko, people are dying and as long as IS exist they will inspire or carry out attacks on the west at any oppprtunity.

From a strategic standpoint, if Russia, Assad and Iran manage to beat IS without us, we can kiss our influence in all affected countries goodbye.

I agree we should have boots on the ground, becuase fundementally where there is an inkustice of which we can actually do something about, should outweigh any of the ridiculous stance on fearing this may offend the insensitivities of some Muslims, who seem to feel aggreived at any western nation coming into a land which is Muslim majority. The answer should be to those idiots that feel aggrieved, that they are a part of the problem also and no mthyical based belief that views such intervention as transgressions should be a reason to not fundementally help people suffering under ISIS. Thje utter stupdiity of those who do this are the one who spread and sow discord about the west. What is wrong on every aspect of this, is that thr western help is being seen as far worse than the group ISIS itself. They also have to learn that there will be civillian casulties in conflicts, something the left seem to fail to grasp as well. Nobody wants civillian deaths, but the highest priority is the removal of such a group. If more idiots rise up off the back of the Muslim naraative blaming thje west, then we destroy that group. Our resolve  should be far greater than some daft insensitivities that places the ooccupation by ISIS as a lesser evil.
We either stand for standing up to an imjustice to the world or we bow down to terror and insensitivities.

I agree with the last three posts from Nicko, Les and didge.

@Quill, I'm not sure how you can say "why do we need to defeat ISIL and is it any of our business"
Can you explain that further?

The arguiemnt  Quill makes is based off selfish racial or over distance reasons  or a fear over possible consequences for providing help end the injustice. If we seek to help bring about an end to an injustice that is say 1 mile down the road from where you live. Then the only reason not to helpend another injustice being carried out over a 1000 miles away, would have to be at least one if not all 3 why other humans. If the view is based on America should look after its own people, this then renders all other humans of a lesser significance. Based only on the invented social constructs that divide humans into seperate races. That is fundementally flawed as a reason, because it opens up to any then in America further seperating and deeming others within the land of being of lesser significance. Whether this be based on wealth, race, sex, disabilities etc. Thus the methodology to help your own, is flawed based on how people then define who is their own people.Fundementally we are all humans and should seek to end all injusticies, as ignoring them or pushing them to one side will not make that problem go away.

That is then not a valid reason not to help people, when we can help them. Distance is certainly not an issue which then only leaves fear that could be driving people to not want to assist. If it is a fear this may lead to more people turing to extremism or more attacks. It fails to grasp that whether we are involved or not such groups will not cease their extremism or violence against these nations.Half of the extremist problem needs to be dealt with within the Islamic world by Muslims, challenging the naratives of hate, being also then behind western help and render the extremist doctrines redenundent. This though is only half the battle and you will always need boots on the ground to defeat the likes of ISIS. So if a fear prevents us from freeing people from persecution and injustice, where we can do something about this, is condemning many people to a fate I would not wish on anyone. It also goes against our bery principles and values to not help and allows instead fear to control. The very weapon terrorism is designed to do, control people through fear.

nicko wrote:I don't think we can sit on our hands and hope that it will sort it's self out without any intervention from outside sources.

So, what is your plan?  Is it to just go in with lots of gunpowder and kill lots of children, while raping their older sisters, kidnapping some, torturing a bunch others, and sending the rest on a ‘rendition’ vacation, all while spending too much money and taking too much time…eventually just quitting, like we did in Korea, Vietnam, Kosovar, Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq?

If that’s what you have in mind, count me and my tax dollars out.  I’ll watch from my deck chair, my Mai Tai in hand. Cheers!

Original Quill wrote:

nicko wrote:I don't think we can sit on our hands and hope that it will sort it's self out without any intervention from outside sources.

So, what is your plan?  Is it to just go in with lots of gunpowder and kill lots of children, while raping their older sisters, kidnapping some, torturing a bunch others, and sending the rest on a ‘rendition’ vacation, all while spending too much money and taking too much time…eventually just quitting, like we did in Korea, Vietnam, Kosovar, Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq?

If that’s what you have in mind, count me and my tax dollars out.  I’ll watch from my deck chair, my Mai Tai in hand.

You always know when a lefty knows their reasoning is poor,
Its followed up with the plain ridiculous that goes off nothinhg anyone has even suggested,
Where such absurd claims are made as if people who want to defeat ISIS wangt to kill lots of children also. Again utterly absurd.
The fact that seems to escape quill is lots of children have already been killed and continue to be killed as the conflict continues. Young girls are taken into slavery and raped daily. So you go off making daft accusations which nobody has made, using as your reasoning actual crimes that are happening daily committed by ISIS


I rest my case

Richard The Lionheart wrote:I agree we should have boots on the ground, becuase fundementally where there is an inkustice of which we can actually do something about, should outweigh any of the ridiculous stance on fearing this may offend the insensitivities of some Muslims, who seem to feel aggreived at any western nation coming into a land which is Muslim majority. The answer should be to those idiots that feel aggrieved, that they are a part of the problem also and no mthyical based belief that views such intervention as transgressions should be a reason to not fundementally help people suffering under ISIS. Thje utter stupdiity of those who do this are the one who spread and sow discord about the west. What is wrong on every aspect of this, is that thr western help is being seen as far worse than the group ISIS itself. They also have to learn that there will be civillian casulties in conflicts, something the left seem to fail to grasp as well. Nobody wants civillian deaths, but the highest priority is the removal of such a group. If more idiots rise up off the back of the Muslim naraative blaming thje west, then we destroy that group. Our resolve  should be far greater than some daft insensitivities that places the ooccupation by ISIS as a lesser evil.
We either stand for standing up to an imjustice to the world or we bow down to terror and insensitivities.

Civilian casualties and nothing accomplished??? Quite a plan there, sport.

You say: "the highest priority is the removal of such a group." But all you propose is a plan that has been proven to enlarge such a group. The highest form of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

All you are doing is waving the flag and tooting the horn. All those war advocates have lost all credibly and, yet, still have no plan. They just keep bangin' their head against the wall, hoping the hurt stops.

Original Quill wrote:

Richard The Lionheart wrote:I agree we should have boots on the ground, becuase fundementally where there is an inkustice of which we can actually do something about, should outweigh any of the ridiculous stance on fearing this may offend the insensitivities of some Muslims, who seem to feel aggreived at any western nation coming into a land which is Muslim majority. The answer should be to those idiots that feel aggrieved, that they are a part of the problem also and no mthyical based belief that views such intervention as transgressions should be a reason to not fundementally help people suffering under ISIS. Thje utter stupdiity of those who do this are the one who spread and sow discord about the west. What is wrong on every aspect of this, is that thr western help is being seen as far worse than the group ISIS itself. They also have to learn that there will be civillian casulties in conflicts, something the left seem to fail to grasp as well. Nobody wants civillian deaths, but the highest priority is the removal of such a group. If more idiots rise up off the back of the Muslim naraative blaming thje west, then we destroy that group. Our resolve  should be far greater than some daft insensitivities that places the ooccupation by ISIS as a lesser evil.
We either stand for standing up to an imjustice to the world or we bow down to terror and insensitivities.

Civilian casualties and nothing accomplished???  Quite a plan there, sport.

You say: "the highest priority is the removal of such a group."  But all you propose is a plan that has been proven to enlarge such a group.  The highest form of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

All you are doing is waving the flag and tooting the horn.  All those war advocates have lost all credibly and, yet, still have no plan.  They just keep bangin' their head against the wall, hoping the hurt stops.

Over 200,000  have died already.
So your point is weak
As the conflict continues, this total gets bigger and worse daily
So to do noithing does nothing to stop the civilain casulties getting worse
So your point has no reason  or merit.
To act when we can act can help bring about an end to the conflict, so whilst some more civillians might become casulties, you have by committing to defeat this group not only stopped far more worse casulties as the conflict had no chance of ending. Not only that you would also free the many being enslaved, raped etc

Next

eddie wrote:@Quill, I'm not sure how you can say "why do we need to defeat ISIL and is it any of our business"
Can you explain that further?

Simply put, we have no reason or purpose to defeat ISIL.  They may do bad things to their own kind, but we've lived perfectly content with that in the past.  That's what happened in Burma for decades and it didn't bother us.

The fact of the matter is they have an itch in their belief system that keeps causing them to scratch.  The Islamic civil war keeps gurgling and bubbling up, and we treat the symptoms.  Iran?  Saddam?  Assad?  Al Qaeda?  The Mujahideen/Taliban?  ISIL?  

Y'all have absolutely no idea what is going on, and yet you still want to create circumstances that have proven to kill a lot of babies.  Anything...as long as we can make life miserable for them.  Why?  Why do you want to do that?  Why, especially, when it costs so much money and lives to ourselves?

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:@Quill, I'm not sure how you can say "why do we need to defeat ISIL and is it any of our business"
Can you explain that further?

Simply put, we have no reason or purpose to defeat ISIL.  They may do bad things to their own kind, but we've lived perfectly content with that in the past.  That's what happened in Burma for decades and it didn't bother us.

The fact of the matter is they have an itch in their belief system that keeps causing them to scratch.  The Islamic civil war keeps gurgling and bubbling up, and we treat the symptoms.  Iran?  Saddam?  Assad?  Al Qaeda?  The Mujahideen/Taliban?  ISIL?  

Y'all have absolutely no idea what is going on, and yet you still want to create circumstances that have proven to kill a lot of babies.  Anything...as long as we can make life miserable for them.  Why?  Why do you want to do that?  Why, especially, when it costs so much money and lives to ourselves?

You have no idea either and to sit back and do nothing when people are suffereing and we can help, is fundementally condemning them to suffering.
If we can change and we can, then we should.
Your reasons of fear and selfisness are simply poor
IF you do not come down on such a group, then it will spread further a fiekld and become stronger and larger.
They will be seen as so mighty in the eyes of so many Muslins by your views, and they will believe that the west was frieghteded and retreated from them. You would give them so much of a propaganda boost, it could lead to countless joining them.

Richard The Lionheart wrote:The arguiemnt  Quill makes is based off selfish racial or over distance reasons  or a fear over possible consequences for providing help end the injustice. If we seek to help bring about an end to an injustice that is say 1 mile down the road from where you live. Then the only reason not to helpend another injustice being carried out over a 1000 miles away, would have to be at least one if not all 3 why other humans. If the view is based on America should look after its own people, this then renders all other humans of a lesser significance. Based only on the invented social constructs that divide humans into seperate races. That is fundementally flawed as a reason, because it opens up to any then in America further seperating and deeming others within the land of being of lesser significance. Whether this be based on wealth, race, sex, disabilities etc. Thus the methodology to help your own, is flawed based on how people then define who is their own people.Fundementally we are all humans and should seek to end all injusticies, as ignoring them or pushing them to one side will not make that problem go away.

That is then not a valid reason not to help people, when we can help them. Distance is certainly not an issue which then only leaves fear that could be driving people to not want to assist. If it is a fear this may lead to more people turing to extremism or more attacks. It fails to grasp that whether we are involved or not such groups will not cease their extremism or violence against these nations.Half of the extremist problem needs to be dealt with within the Islamic world by Muslims, challenging the naratives of hate, being also then behind western help and render the extremist doctrines redenundent. This though is only half the battle and you will always need boots on the ground to defeat the likes of ISIS. So if a fear prevents us from freeing people from persecution and injustice, where we can do something about this, is condemning many people to a fate I would not wish on anyone. It also goes against our bery principles and values to not help and allows instead fear to control. The very weapon terrorism is designed to do, control people through fear.

What is your plan? We have been at war with the Muslim religion continually since August 2, 1990. That's a straight 25-years, and accomplished nothing. In one conflict alone, we have spent over $17-trillion and endured the longest conflict ever for the US.

Now i see people in paper hats marching around banging pie tins, but I don't see any plan. What is your plan?

Richard The Lionheart wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

So, what is your plan?  Is it to just go in with lots of gunpowder and kill lots of children, while raping their older sisters, kidnapping some, torturing a bunch others, and sending the rest on a ‘rendition’ vacation, all while spending too much money and taking too much time…eventually just quitting, like we did in Korea, Vietnam, Kosovar, Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq?

If that’s what you have in mind, count me and my tax dollars out.  I’ll watch from my deck chair, my Mai Tai in hand.

You always know when a lefty knows their reasoning is poor,
Its followed up with the plain ridiculous that goes off nothinhg anyone has even suggested,
Where such absurd claims are made as if people who want to defeat ISIS wangt to kill lots of children also. Again utterly absurd.
The fact that seems to escape quill is lots of children have already been killed and continue to be killed as the conflict continues. Young girls are taken into slavery and raped daily. So you go off making daft accusations which nobody has made, using as your reasoning actual crimes that are happening daily committed by ISIS

I rest my case

What is your plan?

Original Quill wrote:

Richard The Lionheart wrote:The arguiemnt  Quill makes is based off selfish racial or over distance reasons  or a fear over possible consequences for providing help end the injustice. If we seek to help bring about an end to an injustice that is say 1 mile down the road from where you live. Then the only reason not to helpend another injustice being carried out over a 1000 miles away, would have to be at least one if not all 3 why other humans. If the view is based on America should look after its own people, this then renders all other humans of a lesser significance. Based only on the invented social constructs that divide humans into seperate races. That is fundementally flawed as a reason, because it opens up to any then in America further seperating and deeming others within the land of being of lesser significance. Whether this be based on wealth, race, sex, disabilities etc. Thus the methodology to help your own, is flawed based on how people then define who is their own people.Fundementally we are all humans and should seek to end all injusticies, as ignoring them or pushing them to one side will not make that problem go away.

That is then not a valid reason not to help people, when we can help them. Distance is certainly not an issue which then only leaves fear that could be driving people to not want to assist. If it is a fear this may lead to more people turing to extremism or more attacks. It fails to grasp that whether we are involved or not such groups will not cease their extremism or violence against these nations.Half of the extremist problem needs to be dealt with within the Islamic world by Muslims, challenging the naratives of hate, being also then behind western help and render the extremist doctrines redenundent. This though is only half the battle and you will always need boots on the ground to defeat the likes of ISIS. So if a fear prevents us from freeing people from persecution and injustice, where we can do something about this, is condemning many people to a fate I would not wish on anyone. It also goes against our bery principles and values to not help and allows instead fear to control. The very weapon terrorism is designed to do, control people through fear.

What is your plan?  We have been at war with the Muslim religion continually since August 2, 1990.  That's a straight 25-years, and accomplished nothing.  In one conflict alone, we have spent over $17-trillion and endured the longest conflict ever for the US.

Now i see people in paper hats marching around banging pie tins, but I don't see any plan.  What is your plan?

Absurd again, we are not at war with Islam and it is because of such idiotic beliefs, that some Muslims also think the same and hence turn to extremism. Again the naratives played out by some Muslims and some of the left is why there is co9ntinued problems.
My plan is to put boots on the groun, in  other words, sent ina  colaition of nations troops

Didge wrote:Over 200,000 have died already.
So your point is weak
As the conflict continues, this total gets bigger and worse daily
So to do noithing does nothing to stop the civilain casulties getting worse
So your point has no reason or merit.

Finally, we agree. When a plan "has no reason or merit" it is futile to pursue it. What is your plan?

Didge wrote:To act when we can act can help bring about an end to the conflict, so whilst some more civillians might become casulties, you have by committing to defeat this group not only stopped far more worse casulties as the conflict had no chance of ending. Not only that you would also free the many being enslaved, raped etc

I didn't catch that. What is your plan?? How are we going to act? How are we going to end a conflict that has gone on with no discernible purpose, since August, 1990? How are we going to save all those children? What is your plan?

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:Over 200,000  have died already.
So your point is weak
As the conflict continues, this total gets bigger and worse daily
So to do noithing does nothing to stop the civilain casulties getting worse
So your point has no reason  or merit.

Finally, we agree.  When a plan "has no reason or merit" it is futile to pursue it.  What is your plan?

Didge wrote:To act when we can act can help bring about an end to the conflict, so whilst some more civillians might become casulties, you have by committing to defeat this group not only stopped far more worse casulties as the conflict had no chance of ending. Not only that you would also free the many being enslaved, raped etc

I didn't catch that.  What is your plan??  How are we going to act?  How are we going to end a conflict that has gone on with no discernible purpose, since August, 1990?  How are we going to save all those children?  What is your plan?

We do not agree on anything on this
How you end any conflicy by defeating the enmy, which is now a different debate
There are many ways possible open to defeat ISIS, wheere we need to copoerate with Russia
Which is all irrelevant to the previous debate which you have now changed

So by going off tangent, you concede we do need to help those suffering an injustice, when we can do something about it

Didge wrote:Absurd again, we are not at war with Islam and it is because of such idiotic beliefs, that some Muslims also think the same and hence turn to extremism. Again the naratives played out by some Muslims and some of the left is why there is co9ntinued problems.

Perhaps you should ask nicko or Vic exactly who we are at war with, if not Muslims. Iraq? Egypt? Libya? Now Syria? Don't you recognize that the battlefields are incidental. It's Islam.

Didge wrote:My plan is to put boots on the groun, in other words, sent ina colaition of nations troops

That's it? Boots with guns attached, I presume. Tanks, bombs, gunpowder, knives, spears and grenades...things that go bang. Now...I'll ask once again, what's your plan?

You are going to kill all of ISIL? There are some some 1.6-billion Muslims in the world, some 22% of the world population. They seem to be flocking to groups like ISIL in droves. Could that have something to do with us? What do you think is motivating them?

Do you see an end in sight? Cause I don't. And so far you have done a poor job of convincing me otherwise.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:Absurd again, we are not at war with Islam and it is because of such idiotic beliefs, that some Muslims also think the same and hence turn to extremism. Again the naratives played out by some Muslims and some of the left is why there is co9ntinued problems.

Perhaps you should ask nicko or Vic exactly who we are at war with, if not Muslims.  Iraq?  Egypt?  Libya?  Now Syria?  Don't you recognize that the battlefields are incidental.  It's Islam.

Didge wrote:My plan is to put boots on the groun, in  other words, sent ina  colaition of nations troops

That's it?  Boots with guns attached, I presume.  Tanks, bombs, gunpowder, knives, spears and grenades...things that go bang.  Now...I'll ask once again, what's your plan?

You are going to kill all of ISIL?  There are some some 1.6-billion Muslims in the world, some 22% of the world population.  They seem to be flocking to groups like ISIL in droves.  Could that have something to do with us?  What do you think is motivating them?

Do you see an end in sight?  Cause I don't.  And so far you have done a poor job of convincing me otherwise.

I do not need to ask them anything, and is again you deflecting off the views of two other posters

Again the views made were whether we should intervene or not where there is an injustice, of which you are not debating no

Your points were abusrd based off fear a fear this will lead to a war with all Muslims

Remember I said there could only be 3 reasons and weaks one you could uyse to not intervene, and yous is based on an unfounded fear. Not only we should not be prevented from helping orgers when people issue threats, as our resolve should be greater then theirs.

Anyway as you are not debating the points I made early, no point continuing, aas you seem to be done

Didge wrote:We do not agree on anything on this
How you end any conflicy by defeating the enmy, which is now a different debate

Since WWII we have ended all conflicts by just leaving.  That's it.  Sayonara, goodbye, see ya, adios, toodaloo...Korea, Vietnam, Kosovar, Somalia, Iraq...chao. Lost a lot of children. Cost us too much.

All I am suggesting is, this time let's just send an RSVP and leave it at that!  We won't be coming.  Regrets.  Soz.  Kiss-kiss, have fun without us.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:We do not agree on anything on this
How you end any conflicy by defeating the enmy, which is now a different debate

Since WWII we have ended all conflicts by just leaving.  That's it.  Sayonara, goodbye, see ya, adios, toodaloo...Korea, Vietnam, Kosovar, Somalia, Iraq...chao.   Lost a lot of children.  Cost us too much.

All I am suggesting is, this time let's just send an RSVP and leave it at that!  We won't be coming.  Regrets.  Soz.  Kiss-kiss, have fun without us.

Incorrect again and you are arguing off other conflicts which have no relevance to this current situation as each will be different.
I think its time we just ignored people who would rather allow people to suffer under so much injustice.

Didge wrote:I do not need to ask them anything, and is again you deflecting off the views of two other posters

So you're a majority of one, eh? The opinions of others don't matter. Ok, so I don't need to take you as seriously.

But I think there are a lot of people out there, like nicko and Vic, who will agree with me that the perceived enemy is Islam. Christ, without the religious dress I couldn't even recognize 'em...except I find them a handsome people.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:I do not need to ask them anything, and is again you deflecting off the views of two other posters

So you're a majority of one, eh?  The opinions of others don't matter.  Ok, so I don't need to take you as seriously.

But I think there are a lot of people out there, like nicko and Vic, who will agree with me that the perceived enemy is Islam.  Christ, without the religious dress I couldn't even recognize 'em...except I find them a handsome people.

In your case where they have been based on the most absurd claism, then yes in this instance your opinions count for very little.

Richard The Lionheart wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Since WWII we have ended all conflicts by just leaving.  That's it.  Sayonara, goodbye, see ya, adios, toodaloo...Korea, Vietnam, Kosovar, Somalia, Iraq...chao.   Lost a lot of children.  Cost us too much.

All I am suggesting is, this time let's just send an RSVP and leave it at that!  We won't be coming.  Regrets.  Soz.  Kiss-kiss, have fun without us.

Incorrect again and you are arguing off other conflicts which have no relevance to this current situation as each will be different.
I think its time we just ignored people who would rather allow people to suffer under so much injustice.

What is this current situation of which you speak? You don't know the target. You don't know the purpose. Friends with Russia...pshaw, you don't even know who our friends are! Russia is Iran, the terrorist Muslim group that you claim we just gave $505-billion to.

I need to hear a plan, you haven't even got the players straight.

Original Quill wrote:

Richard The Lionheart wrote:
Incorrect again and you are arguing off other conflicts which have no relevance to this current situation as each will be different.
I think its time we just ignored people who would rather allow people to suffer under so much injustice.

What is this current situation of which you speak?  You don't know the target.  You don't know the purpose.  Friends with Russia...pshaw, you don't even know who our friends are!  Russia is Iran, the terrorist Muslim group that you claim we just gave $505-billion to.

I need to hear a plan, you haven't even got the players straight.

You need to hear a plan?
Get over yourself, you failed to reason your point, which was to be selfish and allow people rto continue to suffer who are enslaved by ISIS
You could only go off a racial look after your own, which is flawed, distance again flawed and fear and even more flawed.
So I do not need to give you any plan, when the bases was on whether we should get involved or not, no matter how desperate you are to debate that.

Didge wrote:You need to hear a plan?
Get over yourself, you failed to reason your point, which was to be selfish and allow people rto continue to suffer who are enslaved by ISIS
You could only go off a racial look after your own, which is flawed, distance again flawed and fear and even more flawed.
So I do not need to give you any plan, when the bases was on whether we should get involved or not, no matter how desperate you are to debate that.

And with that...off you go to defeat ISIL?

Good luck.

Quill is a" conche"

nicko wrote:Quill is a" conche"

But a 'winning' one. Join me at the pub! Lol...

You won something alright Quill.
The award for worst reasoned argument on this debate

So congratulations on  winning

Western Boots on the ground is not the answer... the enemy will just melt into the local population and become an extremely effective guerrilla tactic style force against it... inflicting heaven losses and damage against troops as well as being able to easily claim to be civilians when they themselves are hit... this will inevitably see majority of locals taking their side against perceived invading foreign forces.


What is needed is for the locals to side against isis and drive them out... and for us to keep picking them off from the air when they move...

Tommy Monk wrote:Western Boots on the ground is not the answer... the enemy will just melt into the local population and become an extremely effective guerrilla tactic style force against it... inflicting heaven losses and damage against troops as well as being able to easily claim to be civilians when they themselves are hit... this will inevitably see majority of locals taking their side against perceived invading foreign forces.


What is needed is for the locals to side against isis and drive them out... and for us to keep picking them off from the air when they move...

Yes it is the answer and if they melt away and form again, then we come and defeat them again.
We have to remain defiant and doing nothing is not going to change the situation.
The locals have fail to break any deadlock in the conflict, which might give you a clue to why outsude intervention is needed.

And like I said earlier, is of this problem spreading to more countries





Isis men are now fighting in their thousands in the country we arrived to “liberate” 14 years ago, quite apart from tens of thousands of Taliban “pushing” in to their “heartland” around Sangin

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/you-wont-hear-it-but-news-from-afghanistan-is-bad-a6787546.html

What is needed is that ISIS suffer conventional military defeats in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. If this continues to spread, where they then control or hold footholds in other Muslim majority countries, then more Muslims could rise up in support of ISIS.

They will melt into local population but not melt away from fighting guerrilla tactics style war against troops.

They will also then be able to portray themselves as a legitimate resistance force against 'the evil foreign western invaders' etc to the locals...

You are very wrong as many have been fighting back, where again you fail to grasp they seek what is to them a glourious death through martydom. This is ISIS, they have so much rhetocic and doctrime based around predictions of battles to come,
Now the problem as extended to Afghanistance, so to sit back now would be brainless, with a further risk of them gaining more territroies

Richard The Lionheart wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Western Boots on the ground is not the answer... the enemy will just melt into the local population and become an extremely effective guerrilla tactic style force against it... inflicting heaven losses and damage against troops as well as being able to easily claim to be civilians when they themselves are hit... this will inevitably see majority of locals taking their side against perceived invading foreign forces.


What is needed is for the locals to side against isis and drive them out... and for us to keep picking them off from the air when they move...

Yes it is the answer and if they melt away and form again, then we come and defeat them again.
We have to remain defiant and doing nothing is not going to change the situation.

How do you want it to change?  Are you proposing endless war? You think that will sell?

Didge wrote:The locals have fail to break any deadlock in the conflict, which might give you a clue to why outsude intervention is needed.

It will not succeed.  Didge, I've left you the whole day and you still have not come up with a plan.  Now either give us a plan or stop the noise! Endless conflict is not going to convince the mothers among us, even if the guys all want it. You can't raise a family on a perpetual battlefield.