About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

Livia · 03-12-2015, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merry Kizzmas

Let me explain... if if it's not all or nothing it must be something?

'These things are not just random, they are thoroughly planned. I had to provide some detail as its clear from this thread many just don't understand what goes on.'

What detail of military strategy is bots privvy to?...

Maybe take your blinkers off and read some stuff that isn't fundamentally left wing. You could have your eyes opened. Then once you have a more balanced view we can have a conversation that's about the actual subject and not about who on the forum knows what.

Jamie89 · 03-12-2015, 02:11 PM

I'm normally a bit of a hippy pacifist with war and things (peace and love man) but I actually feel quite a strong sense of relief about the air strikes going ahead. One of my friends is a Syrian migrant who came over a few years ago on a student visa (his family are all still in Syria) and honestly, as terrifying as it is to think that innocent people might get caught in the crossfire of the air strikes, it's unimaginably worse to know that your loved ones are at constant risk of being kidnapped/tortured/beheaded etc with NO end in sight. And that's the point of the airstrikes, to try and stop ISIS for good. If anyone, ANYONE was able to come up with a better solution then I'd be the first one to say 'cancel the air strikes' but I just don't see it. At least, not anything that would actually help Syrian people NOW. It's all about how it makes us look bad, or we might become a target, or they're not being sensitive and respectful enough about it, but none of this changes the fact that ordinary people like us are living in hell with no way out, and if this has a chance of providing them with one then surely it's worth the risk?

Kizzy · 03-12-2015, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livia

Maybe take your blinkers off and read some stuff that isn't fundamentally left wing. You could have your eyes opened. Then once you have a more balanced view we can have a conversation that's about the actual subject and not about who on the forum knows what.

You can patronise me if you like but it does not detract from the point that bots has no 'fact' on any strategy used to determine whether the UK should commit to airstrikes in Syria.
Maybe you should take your own advice?

Northern Monkey · 03-12-2015, 02:33 PM

CNN saying that British Tornados set off from Cyprus soon after the vote was passed and hit 7 targets in an oil field which is quite close to the Iraqi border.
It is an important target which makes IS alot of money.
We have wanted to take this oil field out for a while but were never allowed to previously because we could'nt cross the Syrian border.
It is good that the RAF can now get on with the job in hand without the border restriction which was ridiculous.
The fact that we went straight for this oil field as soon as authorised shows just how important it was.

bots · 03-12-2015, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merry Kizzmas

You can patronise me if you like but it does not detract from the point that bots has no 'fact' on any strategy used to determine whether the UK should commit to airstrikes in Syria.
Maybe you should take your own advice?

All I did was outline standard military strategy for identifying and targeting enemy assets.

Given that many on this thread seem to be unaware that such a strategy exists, i felt it was useful information. If you would like to think I am the latest 007 feel free

Livia · 03-12-2015, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merry Kizzmas

You can patronise me if you like but it does not detract from the point that bots has no 'fact' on any strategy used to determine whether the UK should commit to airstrikes in Syria.
Maybe you should take your own advice?

BOTS has no "facts" but is aware roughly what goes on, enough to form an valid opinion, like most people in the country. And you have no "facts" to counter him.

And yes, I would willingly take my own advice always, it's good advice after all.

Livia · 03-12-2015, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elf On Strike

All I did was outline standard military strategy for identifying and targeting enemy assets.

Given that many on this thread seem to be unaware that such a strategy exists, i felt it was useful information. If you would like to think I am the latest 007 feel free

We've been expecting you Mr Bots....

Tom4784 · 03-12-2015, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ~HO~HO~HO~

This still affects the innocent syrian people in a bad way, they need oil to heat their homes and run vehicles in their day to day lives, so imo it's a very bad idea, as well as further provoking ISIS to retaliate with a revenge attack it's going to cause more resentment towards us from syrian people escalating the chance of creating more extremists in the future.

I agree, air strikes are a shortsighted solution. We might take out an asset or two but we give IS ammunition to recruit the disilusioned victims to their cause.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livia

When the allies bombed Dresden in WW2, Jewish slaves cheered the allied bombers while knowing they could be killed at any moment. Military actions are much more precise now, but in any case I think Syrian people who are currently living with the threat of IS will welcome the fact that the world is trying to rid them of the scum that is Islamic State.

I think that's a very idealisitic thought process.

I imagine that for the average Syrian citizen it'll feel like being stuck inbetween a rock and a hard place. On one side you have the brutal regime of IS and on the other side you have a bunch of people who fancy themselves saviors bombing the hell out of you. I imagine they see the conflict between us and IS in a similar way that we look at the IS-Assad conflict, it's a battle of two evils of which no one will win, least of all the civilians.

Either way the Syrian citizens are going to be killed so I doubt they prefer one reaper any more than the other.

Livia · 03-12-2015, 03:08 PM

Well, if they've got it so bad they're leaving their homeland with nothing, I'd hazard a guess that they want something to be done... anything... that might give them a chance to get back to some kind of normality in the country they were born. No diplomatic plan was ever going to work, I think everyone's agreed on that; IS will not negotiate. I'm firmly for the bombing, I believe that it will help. But it still breaks my heart we have to do it and the sooner we can stop the better.

Jamie89 · 03-12-2015, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ~HO~HO~HO~

This still affects the innocent syrian people in a bad way, they need oil to heat their homes and run vehicles in their day to day lives, so imo it's a very bad idea, as well as further provoking ISIS to retaliate with a revenge attack it's going to cause more resentment towards us from syrian people escalating the chance of creating more extremists in the future.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I agree, air strikes are a shortsighted solution. We might take out an asset or two but we give IS ammunition to recruit the disilusioned victims to their cause.

But this sounds to me like your saying that we shouldn't go ahead with the bombings because Syrian civilians might, at some point join ISIS as a result. But whilst it may be true that some extremists do come out of situations like this, I think on the whole, they're normal people like us at the end of the day who want an end to the regime. And I don't see what the alternative is. A lot of the 'against' arguments seem to be based on what may happen in the future as a result of our involvement but doing nothing at all and leaving ISIS to run as they currently are will leave ordinary Syrian people without a future imo - and at the very least, will prolong their current suffering

Tom4784 · 03-12-2015, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleighmie

But this sounds to me like your saying that we shouldn't go ahead with the bombings because Syrian civilians might, at some point join ISIS as a result. But whilst it may be true that some extremists do come out of situations like this, I think on the whole, they're normal people like us at the end of the day who want an end to the regime. And I don't see what the alternative is. A lot of the 'against' arguments seem to be based on what may happen in the future as a result of our involvement but doing nothing at all and leaving ISIS to run as they currently are will leave ordinary Syrian people without a future imo - and at the very least, will prolong their current suffering

I'm saying more than that. We shouldn't get involved just yet because we're apparently broke to the point that the tories are willing to completely destroy quality of life for the working class yet we can afford to go through with costly air strikes that won't achieve much? We shouldn't get involved yet because we're not needed, there's three currently superpowers on the IS issue at the moment. What can we honestly do that they can't do already?

Most of the arguments that are based on nothing but possbilities tend to come from the 'For' camp tbh.

The truth is, we aren't needed yet. We aren't going to change a single thing as the situation stands. I'm all for joining the conflict when we're needed and can contribute in a meaningful way but as it stands it just feels like we're pissing money up the wall so Cameron can pretend to be a hero.

arista · 03-12-2015, 04:07 PM

"The truth is, we aren't needed yet. We aren't going to change a single thing as the situation stands"

Fair Point Dezzy

But do you agree
that Labour MP's that voted for it
should get threats?

Glenn. · 03-12-2015, 05:11 PM

Twitter was ****ing ridiculous last night. So many idiots bleating ****

Vicky. · 03-12-2015, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arista

"The truth is, we aren't needed yet. We aren't going to change a single thing as the situation stands"

Fair Point Dezzy

But do you agree
that Labour MP's that voted for it
should get threats?

Kevan Jones

I have spoke to him before a few times too. I have now voted for him twice in the locals...never again.

Kazanne · 03-12-2015, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arista

"The truth is, we aren't needed yet. We aren't going to change a single thing as the situation stands"

Fair Point Dezzy

But do you agree
that Labour MP's that voted for it
should get threats?

Ridiculous comments by people who protest they are peaceful

Drew. · 03-12-2015, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livia

I don't believe you actually think that, Drew. All the politicians who voted, all the military top brass putting our servicemen in harms way, the pilots themselves... only doing it because they are desperate to get in on the act? Bombing the oilfields so that funding to IS is cut off sounds like a plan to me.

We are just one of a coalition of nations. No one wants to go war, least of all those who will be fighting it on our behalf.

Politicians yes.. military/pilots etc no. The politicians have been eager for this to happen, even today's attacks show they've had a quick short plan written up before the outcome of whether they should or shouldn't attack Syria was even decided. You could call it being prepared but Cameron and his mates have wanted this. Cameron calling the opposition terrorist sympathizers sounds like an angry man that will go to extremes to get what he wants.

There doesn't seem to be any planning in the long run, its more than likely increased the risks of attacks on our country and when that does inevitably happen the whole country will come tumbling down on Cameron and this will come back to bite him on the bollocks.

joeysteele · 03-12-2015, 05:59 PM

I have not come across any Labour MPs under threat of de-selection,I am not in 232 constituencies however so cannot say it is not going on.
If it is then the leadership of the Party have to crush this completely and get to the bottom of it rapidly too.

There has been some abuse towards some MPs who were voting for the action,that is inevitable on such a highly charged issue,however threats and worse have no place in any democratic process.
Really bad if, and I stress 'IF' any Labour activists or supporters are doing any abuse and threats but that needs to be investigated and proven before condemning anyone.

However also, there are a number of MPs who are uptight as to if the boundary changes are brought in by the govt. This will mean some seats disappear just about or have one MP rather than 2 in the same area.
Inevitably that will mean one MP gets the selection and one will be de-selected obviously.
There is no way around that one.

Johnnyuk123 · 03-12-2015, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

ISIS have advanced as much as they have because of weak opposition, but primarily because the massive revenue from those captured oil fields has paid for highly trained mercenaries and ever more sophisticated weaponry.

Is some people's in the UK's contempt for our intelligence services and military so scathing and biased that they REALLY believe that we enter into this war lightly or with no carefully formulated plan?

We have already cut off two of the three main supply routes relied on by ISIS for supplies, and bombing these oilfields is a valid strategy to deprive ISIS of the funds by which they have progressed so far so quickly.

Maybe these 'detractors' expect a daily briefing from British Military Intelligence along with an application for approval for their plans before implementing them?

A joint operation by the USA and UK covertly pinpointed the whereabouts of the hateful Jihadi John amidst the chaos and confusion of Syria, and despite one masked Jihadist killer looking identical to every other, and they covertly tracked him, then took him out with 100% precision.

We were ALL ignorant of such brilliant 'behind-the-scenes work by us and the USA until it was TIME for us to know, and the reason for this is crystal clear to anyone with a brain.

The same applies to what our country is doing now - on OUR behalf - please let them do what they do best and instead of criticising get behind your own country, because WE DID NOT START this, but ALL our lives and the way of life which we take for granted, may depend on our military FINISHING it.

Outstanding post Kirk!

joeysteele · 03-12-2015, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ~HO~HO~HO~

This still affects the innocent syrian people in a bad way, they need oil to heat their homes and run vehicles in their day to day lives, so imo it's a very bad idea, as well as further provoking ISIS to retaliate with a revenge attack it's going to cause more resentment towards us from syrian people escalating the chance of creating more extremists in the future.

Indeed and a really good post again from you.

I do fear we could well be making things worse in the long run and also heading for the same errors we have made before too as to being in the Middle east.
Each action seems to raise more and more questions and no one has any certainty as to answers no matter what they may say on this issue.

We are now on a road we hope leads to a better place but one filled with uncertainties and problems,going in as if we have the idea whatever we do will in the end help things,could well see things develop into even more chaos,especially after we claim to be,if we ever can claim,to be finished there.

GiRTh · 03-12-2015, 06:30 PM

So we finally went for the tit for tat attack. I dont see how this will solve any of the problems at all. They will strike back and we will attack again...and on and on the cycle goes.

MTVN · 03-12-2015, 07:59 PM

Our planes were already in the region and carrying out reconnaissance work over Syria so its not a surprise that they were quick to act after the vote. Of course we are not going to make the difference but we can fill a niche in that our planes possess targeting capacities that French and American jets lack. More importantly this symbols our participation in the international coalition against ISIS and I am pleased that we are correcting the anomaly of only carrying out strikes in Iraq.

DemolitionRed · 03-12-2015, 08:06 PM

News directly out of Syria

Bombing the oil sources of ISIS is not giving its results
http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=1568

Z · 03-12-2015, 08:31 PM

I'm thoroughly disappointed with the decision to bomb Syria. We should have stayed out, withdrawn from bombing Iraq and then ****ed with the economy of whatever undesirable nation emerges from the ashes of Iraq and Syria like we do with every other country in the world we don't like. Dropping bombs kills and will cause terrorist attacks to happen here. People can bleat on about how doing nothing wouldn't help but doing this isn't going to help either, it's going to make it worse.