Air strikes on Syria

[Highbury Hillbilly]

This 'we should attack them before they attack us' argument is such a laughably shallow pretext for subsidizing the arms industry, I don't even know what to think anymore.

The Paris attacks, like the London attacks in 2005 and the Charlie Hebdo attacks, were planned by European born and bred jihadists. Just because they identify with IS doesn't mean their funding, coordination and logistics will suddenly collapse with further bombing of a country thousands of km away.

Syria is already undergoing bombing from NATO, Assad and Russia. Any future attacks are not going to be organized from within Syria, but by jihadists living in Europe.

In the mean time, let's play politics with the lives if thousands of refugees by blaming them for being born in the middle of a geopolitical dick waving contest.

IS has legibility because it has land for an Islamic state. Once that land is taken, they will have no legibility left. Our bombing, unlike Assad and Russia's will be at ISIS and not at the forces opposing ISIS. Assad supports IS and even buys oil from them. Our bombing is a lot more accurate than NATO's, not a single civilian casualty in two years of bombing

It's not politics at all. It's standing up against fascism, which this country did 76 years ago as well. People nowadays are too enchanted by Russian propaganda and believe that the UK has no power to do anything which is not true

I think you mean 'legitimacy' , not 'legibility' [emoji28] . IS will have more to worry about than their handwriting if they lose territory. And even then, it's not going to make a lick of difference to people in the UK who may be planning attacks.

Please post some sources about 'no civilian casualties from UK bombing'. Airstrikes are jointly coordinated with friendly forces, the UK cannot act with 100% autonomy in an active warzone.

By the way, I think you'll find that the USSR did much of the heavy lifting in defeating fascism in WW2. Liberating Europe was not a cause the UK nobly took alone; and even then, Churchill went ahead and starved 3 million Indians to feed Allied soldiers.

This is not to say I supported the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe, or deny that Stalin was a mass murdering monster, but rather to point out that wars are never simple as jingoistic politicians would have us believe. There are costs, sacrifices and unforeseen consequences that are always understated in order to make the desired action seem more palatable.

[GoonerAlexandre]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mi ... ro-6922729
"This is actually why the coalition and why the French would like the RAF involved. Because we have the precision strike fighters that can take out very particular targets - the command posts, the key personnel, the training camps, the people who are plotting against this country and outrages elsewhere in Europe.



Fallon said there have been ZERO civilian deaths. Straight from the source.

Yeah, legitimacy, spell check

[UFGN]

Also, if London were attacked, instead of Paris, and France refused to help us, how would you feel?

Wouldn't care.

My opinion would be the same. London has been attacked before and probably will be again. As a Londoner who works in Central London and is probably at a bigger risk of terrorist attack than anyone else on this forum in the UK, I still say airstrikes are wrong.

[Va-Va-Voom]

Also, if London were attacked, instead of Paris, and France refused to help us, how would you feel?

Wouldn't care.

[GoonerAlexandre]

You wouldn't, but some of us know the honour of standing by our allies in times of need. Abandoning them would be despicable, that too for a cowardly reason as fearing an attack

[GoonerAlexandre]

TO clarify again, not a SINGLE civilian has died in UK air strikes as confirmed by Fallon. If NO ONE HAS died yet in Iraq in almost 2 years, why in the world should it be different in Syria? And if no civilian is dying, is the only reason not to bomb because ISIS might attack us?

If that's the only thing, then we should have surrendered to the Nazis in the second world war. After all, most of us weren't Jews, gypsies or gay, so we'd be safe, right?

You can not negotiate with fascists like ISIS, as Benn said. We have to take it down and if the UK intelligence is good enough to not kill a single civilian in two years, then it's good enough for Syria too!

There is no reason not to bomb ISIS and end the threat

[UFGN]

You wouldn't, but some of us know the honour of standing by our allies in times of need. Abandoning them would be despicable, that too for a cowardly reason as fearing an attack

You conveniently ignored my post I see

[GoonerAlexandre]

You don't clarify why strikes are wrong though. Fallon said, and I quote, "No civilians have died since the Iraq campaign restarted"

[UFGN]

You don't clarify why strikes are wrong though. Fallon said, and I quote, "No civilians have died since the Iraq campaign restarted"

Good luck bombing a city like Raqqa and that remaining the case.

The only comparable situation in Iraq is Mosal, and they have largely avoided hitting there specifically because of the threat to civilians.

Hitting Syria means hitting Raqqa which means killing civilians.

[GoonerAlexandre]

Any civilian death will be answerable to Parliament, as Cameron confirmed

[UFGN]

Any civilian death will be answerable to Parliament, as Cameron confirmed

Ah well that makes it OK then

[GoonerAlexandre]

Any civilian death will be answerable to Parliament, as Cameron confirmed

Ah well that makes it OK then

It's a measure of how confident Cameron and the government is that there will be no civilian deaths

What is disgusting is the death threats by the left to MP's who voted in favour, and also threats of deselection, especially ganging up on poor Stella. Typical though

[GoonerAlexandre]

Overnight, RAF Tornado GR4s, supported by a Voyager air refuelling tanker and a Reaper, and operating in conjunction with other coalition aircraft, employed Paveway IV guided bombs to conduct strikes against six targets within the extensive oilfield at Omar, 35 miles inside Syria’s eastern border with Iraq. The Omar oilfield is one of the largest and most important to Daesh’s financial operations, and represents over 10% of their potential income from oil. Carefully selected elements of the oilfield infrastructure were targeted, ensuring the strikes will have a significant impact on Daesh’s ability to extract the oil to fund their terrorism.

Coalition air operations have already degraded Daesh’s frontline military capabilities and have assisted the Iraqi ground forces in liberating some 30% of the territory that the terrorists initially seized in that country during the summer of 2014. By extending RAF offensive operations into Syria, our aircraft are now able to help dismantle the means by which Daesh plan, direct and sustain their campaign of terror.

Before our aircrew conducted their attacks, as is normal they used the aircraft’s advanced sensors to confirm that no civilians were in the proximity of the targets, who might be placed at risk. Our initial analysis of the operation indicates that the strikes were successful.

This is how carefully we strike!

COME ON RAF!

[UFGN]

Any civilian death will be answerable to Parliament, as Cameron confirmed

Ah well that makes it OK then

It's a measure of how confident Cameron and the government is that there will be no civilian deaths

What is disgusting is the death threats by the left to MP's who voted in favour, and also threats of deselection, especially ganging up on poor Stella. Typical though

As usual with you, not sure if serious

[GoonerAlexandre]

Bombing Germany in the 2nd World War would have led to more Nazis. It would have been better if we had decided to ignore the threat and not do anything as most people here are suggesting. Discuss