Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Russia, well quit acting like its not even happening and supply arms to the Ukrainians.Iran, offer support to help with ISIS if they willing to back off with the nuclear progression. If not, bomb the hell outa the nuke sites.
ISIS massive coalition with Great Britain, French, Italy, Saudi, Libya, Syria, Jordan.
In the first case, arming Ukraine is a dangerous gambit. I'm not totally against it, but it's certain that if we arm the Ukrainians Russia will likely double down and pour more equipment and soldiers into Eastern Ukraine. They're a lot closer to Ukraine than we are, and even if we gave the Ukrainians massive amounts of weapons Ukraine would probably still lose if Russia went all in.
In the second case, Iran is not going to back off from their nuclear ambitions just because we help them with ISIS. That needs substantive negotiations that offer real incentives to Iran (like removing their pariah status and ending sanctions). And "bombing the hell outa the nuke sites" will at most be a temporary fix that will only harden Iran's resolve to continue work.
In the third case, that's a ridiculous assortment of nations, a lot of whom have competing goals and would never work together. Especially Syria. People need to wake up to the fact that Syria is not an effective or motivated opponent against ISIS. And what would this coalition do? Send ground troops in?
Iran is currently doing more than most to combat ISIS both directly from the east and via Hezbollah in the west. Iranian commanders are in direct control of Iraqi forces. This resulted in one of the strangest team efforts in the war at the seige of Amerli where US war planes aided Hezbollah fighters against ISIS.
ISIS is getting stronger and stronger day by day.
They're successfully recruiting foreign Muslims with a wide array of skills and specializations, and forming new alliances from different international jihadist groups.
UN/NATO still has/have not found a way to stop funding from neighboring countries and wealthy individuals supporting the Islamic State.
In short, no one is doing a damn thing about this so-called "war on ISIS."
Eh, nobody is invading Qatar any time soon. They are investing huge amounts of money in Europe for starters.
Killing off their royalty would be easier to do anyways.
ISIS is self-financing by the way. Thanks to selling works of ancient art, selling drugs and oil, smuggling weapons etc., they don't need any particular sponsor. Or more like, the free market is their sponsor. Go capitalism!
Originally posted by Bentley
Eh, nobody is invading Qatar any time soon. They are investing huge amounts of money in Europe for starters.Killing off their royalty would be easier to do anyways.
ISIS is self-financing by the way. Thanks to selling works of ancient art, selling drugs and oil, smuggling weapons etc., they don't need any particular sponsor. Or more like, the free market is their sponsor. Go capitalism!
Originally posted by Omega Vision
There was a point in time not long ago when Saudi Arabia was considering it. Really it probably would have been a good thing. Qatar wouldn't have put up much of a fight and we would have ended up with one big, hypocritical sponsor of terrorism instead of two with competing goals.
It would've certainly changed the regional struggle for power, interesting splitting point for an uchronia.
http://www.businessinsider.com/why-us-veterans-are-signing-up-with-militias-to-fight-isis-2015-3
American veterans are acting as freelance soldiers for militias fighting ISIS.
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Ukraine has terrorists now?
No, but Lestovs concern is valid, how are you going to ensure that the weapons you provide to the Ukrainians doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists, which there is plenty off on both sides of the conflict. You don't have to have Al Quada or ISIS associated with you in order to be a terrorist.
Originally posted by Utrigita
No, but Lestovs concern is valid, how are you going to ensure that the weapons you provide to the Ukrainians doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists, which there is plenty off on both sides of the conflict. You don't have to have Al Quada or ISIS associated with you in order to be a terrorist.
Originally posted by Lestov16
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/tikrit-brutality-of-iraqi-forces-against-islamic-state-exposed/story-fnb64oi6-1227261078250Not good
Phuck dat.
Originally posted by Lestov16
SumabytchHere we go:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/shocking-pictures-show-isis-prisoners-5328723
I've seen numerous videos of Iraqi/Kurdish soldiers beheading alleged ISIS members.
Some of them deliberately just cutting off half of the neck (pretty obvious with their facial expressions and manner of laughing), or stabbing the neck repeatedly with a blunt knife.
The middle-east has been in a state of constant warfare for longer than records can tell. The 'War on Terror' did nothing more than unify the worst extremists in the region. ISIS is now a credible force that if ignored long enough will only develop in to a small religious super-power.
If China and Russia aren't helping that organisation in some form then I'd be very surprised. Perfect bait and switch for Uncle Sam to sink his blunted teeth into and get very large chunks of food stuck inbetween them.