Just what do you expect a bombing campaign to achieve?

Weaken ISIS and almost certainly kill innocent people

I don't think alone it will destroy ISIS but will show we are standing together in the West. To be honest we are probably waiting for a worst attack in the west which is inevitable whether we attack or not. Then we can get away from this ridiculous moralizing.

The long term plan if we aren't going to go back to old fashioned imperialism (a definite option) or genocide is basically keep the middle east is a permanent state of civil war with us controlling our puppets until they can't be controlled and then removing them when they can't. The Iran- Iraq war would be a good example of how we have done this in the past. When it looks like once side if going to win we give the opposition a bit of support. Basically keep the blood bath in the Middle East not at home

That's been tried, and the blood spreads, and your fix is actually a cause.

GrahamH wrote:That's been tried, and the blood spreads, and your fix is actually a cause.

Worked incredibly well until we started getting some silly idea about actually helping people in the middle east and removing friendly dictators

mrjonno wrote:

Just what do you expect a bombing campaign to achieve?

Weaken ISIS and almost certainly kill innocent people

I don't think alone it will destroy ISIS but will show we are standing together in the West. To be honest we are probably waiting for a worst attack in the west which is inevitable whether we attack or not. Then we can get away from this ridiculous moralizing.

It's not just moralising, whether you consider empathy for innocent humans to be ridiculous or not. It's pragmatism.
You don't think it will destroy ISIS and you think further violence towards the west will happen regardless. So why perpetrate the same action? To stand united? To wave the collective western cock at the callous bastards who would kill our innocent people like that? To do unto them as they would to us? An eye for an eye? Guess what bronze age tribal shit that sounds like?

The long term plan if we aren't going to go back to old fashioned imperialism (a definite option) or genocide is basically keep the middle east is a permanent state of civil war with us controlling our puppets until they can't be controlled and then removing them when they can't. The Iran- Iraq war would be a good example of how we have done this in the past. When it looks like once side if going to win we give the opposition a bit of support. Basically keep the blood bath in the Middle East not at home

Except as you have already admitted above, if further attacks against the west are inevitable, it isn't keeping the bloodbath in the Middle East is it? Sympathetic home grown Muslims getting to watch the overseas bloodbath, getting pissed off seeing people they identify with getting repeatedly killed, including those delicious images of dead civilians and babies, being killed by the nations they live in. Sounds like a recipe for sod all changing.

But go on, support maintaining the status quo. The twats selling arms (funnily enough, governments mostly) will get to keep milking the money machine. No wonder they're not into the idea of something new. What about trying to think a bit differently. I don't profess to have all the solutions but carrying on maintaining this cycle of violence is not the answer.

The cycle of violence is the normal state of human affairs, human history is war and the gaps where we are preparing for war. So no I don't expect that to ever change this is about managing it to the our best advantage

mrjonno wrote:The cycle of violence is the normal state of human affairs, human history is war and the gaps where we are preparing for war. So no I don't expect that to ever change this is about managing it to the our best advantage

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein


Or is the same result acceptable?

Pebble wrote:

mrjonno wrote:The cycle of violence is the normal state of human affairs, human history is war and the gaps where we are preparing for war. So no I don't expect that to ever change this is about managing it to the our best advantage

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein


Or is the same result acceptable?

The results we are survive, others don't. Nothing insane about that. Certainly not as insane a tryng to change fundamental human nature

mrjonno wrote:

Pebble wrote:

mrjonno wrote:The cycle of violence is the normal state of human affairs, human history is war and the gaps where we are preparing for war. So no I don't expect that to ever change this is about managing it to the our best advantage

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein


Or is the same result acceptable?

The results we are survive, others don't. Nothing insane about that. Certainly not as insane a tryng to change fundamental human nature

So yet another western power with an imperialist past bombing Syria will improve our chances of survival - how?

mrjonno wrote:

Pebble wrote:

mrjonno wrote:The cycle of violence is the normal state of human affairs, human history is war and the gaps where we are preparing for war. So no I don't expect that to ever change this is about managing it to the our best advantage

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein


Or is the same result acceptable?

The results we are survive, others don't. Nothing insane about that. Certainly not as insane a tryng to change fundamental human nature

That's right. The slave trade from Africa to the Caribbean never ended as a result of someone non African empathising with those people previously seen as property from another country as fellow humans. Fucking insane how he thought he could sell that idea. Batshit fucking crazy. Loco!! Didn't happen overnight, bit of resistance to changing those attitudes but finally thinking won out. I'm not without hope that the trend might kick back in one day.

mcgruff wrote:

Arjan Dirkse wrote:It's what war does.

No it's what WE do. We have a choice. You can't just kill innocent people because they're in the way. Everyone who thinks we should deserves to be thrown in jail - the same jail as the terrorists - for conspiracy to commit murder.

Arjan Dirkse wrote:However on the other hand there are the videos of ISIS and Assad doing the same to civilians. All you can hope for really is that our bombs cause fewer civilian casulaties.

Mimicry is a hugely important factor in making us what we are. It's not always a bad thing. It can be an important way to learn stuff - provided the group is right, of course. However, when the groupthink is wrong, it's a big problem. The idea that bombs will stop IS or save lives is a prime example of a group meme. Bombing will help IS and increase the number of civilian deaths.

With enough bombs in the right places, you win the war. It's just the question wether fighting this war is appropriate or not, for now.

You can't really win a war without firepower.

edit: But bombing alone obviously isnt the answer, you would probably need an invasion of a sufficiently large contingent of ground troops, and the willingness to stay for as long as is necessary to stabilize the situation, to win a war. I think for now, the best thing to do is trying to target the ISIS leadership with limited, targeted strikes and supporting any truly moderate faction that might be willing to fight ISIS, like the YPG.

But with ISIS I think all bets are off. If they'd get in control of Iraq and Syria and manage to keep the country under their control despite the ongoing strikes by the US and allies - something which seems unlikely but I don't think impossible - then it could eventually turn into something like WW3.

Arjan Dirkse wrote:

mcgruff wrote:

Arjan Dirkse wrote:It's what war does.

No it's what WE do. We have a choice. You can't just kill innocent people because they're in the way. Everyone who thinks we should deserves to be thrown in jail - the same jail as the terrorists - for conspiracy to commit murder.

Arjan Dirkse wrote:However on the other hand there are the videos of ISIS and Assad doing the same to civilians. All you can hope for really is that our bombs cause fewer civilian casulaties.

Mimicry is a hugely important factor in making us what we are. It's not always a bad thing. It can be an important way to learn stuff - provided the group is right, of course. However, when the groupthink is wrong, it's a big problem. The idea that bombs will stop IS or save lives is a prime example of a group meme. Bombing will help IS and increase the number of civilian deaths.

With enough bombs in the right places, you win the war. It's just the question wether fighting this war is appropriate or not, for now.

You can't really win a war without firepower.

Wars are kind of over when the use of firepower ends. As to who won/wins.... let's leave that for the historians.

I can tell you on thing if British or American soldiers occupy Syria while there may be the occassional non-policy war crime due to angry troops but it will be nothingcompared if a 3rd world or middle eastern countries sends in troops. They wlll not just kill isis but anyone who has spoken to isis or just lives in the area as a matter of policy.

Now that may well be acceptable to protect western lives but there are a lot worse people out there than us including potential allies

mrjonno wrote:I can tell you on thing if British or American soldiers occupy Syria while there may be the occassional non-policy war crime due to angry troops but it will be nothingcompared if a 3rd world or middle eastern countries sends in troops. They wlll not just kill isis but anyone who has spoken to isis or just lives in the area as a matter of policy.

Now that may well be acceptable to protect western lives but there are a lot worse people out there than us including potential allies

Not many worse than you though, if you're referring to unconcern about mass loss of life.

Pretty good summary of Cameron's case for bombing

from those rabid lefty peaceniks, the Financial Times.

We need a new series of Blackadder set in Syria.

Beatsong wrote:Pretty good summary of Cameron's case for bombing

from those rabid lefty peaceniks, the Financial Times.

Can't see it without subscribing.

It's interesting to wander round the internet at the moment. There are tons of armchair warriors, advocating fierce amounts of violence. As my dad used to say, 'standing at the back, shouting forwards!'

nunnington wrote:It's interesting to wander round the internet at the moment. There are tons of armchair warriors, advocating fierce amounts of violence. As my dad used to say, 'standing at the back, shouting forwards!'

I'm have an advantage over Isis in that I can leave it to the professionals to do the killing, don't intend giving that up

mrjonno wrote:

nunnington wrote:It's interesting to wander round the internet at the moment. There are tons of armchair warriors, advocating fierce amounts of violence. As my dad used to say, 'standing at the back, shouting forwards!'

I'm have an advantage over Isis in that I can leave it to the professionals to do the killing, don't intend giving that up

The other weird thing about the armchair warriors, some of them sound like Al Qaeda.

I don't actually care what sound like or stupid concepts like right or wrong only that our enemies are dealt with in any method needed.

We can moralise after they are all dead