You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So the RAF have been flying sorties for 4 days now and have now managed to find some targets worth attacking, a pick up truck and a gun emplacement. Now i fully believe those who say that we will not defeat IS by air power alone but surely at this rate we will bankrupt the country before we even degrade their capability even a little.
I have a military background and from my experience i would have thought that the military planners and the intelligence bods would have had a list of targets ready to go for when/if parliament authorised the air strikes, it almost seeems like the good men and women of the RAF are just being sent to fly around in circles above the desert to look for targets of oppurtunity, just to show political willing and a tough line.
Whilst i support the need to do something about IS, i'm starting to think that those in power really don't have a start point, let alone an end game. Thoughts?
Former SAS chappie on Radio 4 this morning said we need troops on the ground to support the unskilled and scared Iraqi army.
Yep, boots on the ground is the only way to defeat IS militarily.
However, this would be a high risk operation with masses of scope for both allied Military casualties and Iraqi/Syrian civilians being used as human shields by IS.
It isn't hard to see why no Western Government wants to commit to it...
Personally I think some Arab countries with skilled and well kitted out ground troops should be getting involved...
Didn't the Iraqie army run off leaving all the arms/weapons/tanks etc thereby leaving them ripe for IS to take?
Seems like they need more than support to me.
What is the Chinese/Russian angle on this? Do they feel as threatened by the enemy "practically knocking on our door" or not really care?
I assume they have journalists in country are they at risk of being kidnapped?
I have a military background
Surely you must understand then how much propaganda value is gained by the enemy when innocent civilians are killed by 'the evil western oppressors'
Surely you must understand then how much propaganda value is gained by the enemy when innocent civilians are killed by 'the evil western oppressors'
Of course, i wasn't suggesting that the RAF should bomb the crap out of anything that moves just because they've got a green light to carry out ops, more that we have been led to believe by the media/government that northern Iraq is over run by IS, yet the people in theatre are struggling to find any targets worthy of engagement, and that those few targets that have been destroyed would have come at the cost of £millions.
and that those few targets that have been destroyed would have come at the cost of £millions.
Yes I see your point now. It's an extremely expensive way of destroying a Toyota HiLux with a machine gun on it. Bloody politicians are clueless.
Why don't we leave it to the Saudis, they've way more planes than us and they're closer.
Also, they behead a couple of people a week so they should understand the enemy a bit better.
I agree, you would have thought they'd have identified training camps, convoys etc. Maybe satellites and drones aren't as 'all seeing' as we thought!
Maybe because the Saudis are bankrolling IS and might miss on purpose?
Seriously, good point that. Those Gulf states have all the latest kit. Maybe they can't train slaves to fly jets like they can to do everything else.
I for one admire the consistency of our politicians.
We bungled in there first time without a *ing clue what we were actually trying to achieve, based on a frankly laughable mandate, with hopeless 'intelligence' and without a *ing clue what to do when we got there, or what might actually happen when we did, alongside some very, very dubious 'allies'.
Sound familiar?
[i]"Those who do not know history's mistakes are doomed to repeat them" [/i]
George Santayana
Tony had his war. Maggie had one too. Dave wants his!
It is Wednesday today, so the start of the weekend for the RAF, so there won't be any more sorties until next Tuesday. 😉
Its pathetic really.
Possibly the finest IDS aircraft ever made reduced to bombing a ratty old Toyota Hilux.
And it all misses the point.
There is a reason that me and a bunch of mates can't declare North Lanarkshire a "Mountain Biking Caliphate" and run around beheading [s]roadies[/s] infidels. That reason is Law and Order. Law and Order doesn't arise spontaneously its a product of a stable government.
You can drop as many bombs as you like if you don't address the underlying issue of lack of functioning government then your ****ed before you have even started.
Total cost of all these Tornado sorties so far = 700 squillion pounds
Price of a battered Toyota HiLux with a couple of kalashnikovs on board = considerably less than 700 squillion pounds.
Did everyone enjoy Mr Osbournes announcements of the latest massive cuts to our 'unaffordable' public services yesterday?
Total cost of all these Tornado sorties so far = 700 squillion pounds
Don't worry these were humanitarian bombs. So it's not defense spending it's foreign aid.
I reckon next series of Top Gear will do a bit on a HiLux getting hit by a Brimstone and still being able to start afterwards.
led to believe by the media/government that northern Iraq is over run by IS, yet the people in theatre are struggling to find any targets worthy of engagement, and that those few targets that have been destroyed would have come at the cost of £millions.
I don't think anybody thinks they have sort of super bunker/base worth bombing. Problem is, there are probably a lot of people driving round the desert in pickups. You've go to work out which ones are the enemy and which ones are just going shopping?
This is one of the problems with using hi-tech, incredibly expensive weapons to fight very lo-tech enemies.
I remember reading an Apache pilot memoir from Afgan where he describes shooting up an old american car with his 30mm cannon and then using a Hellfire missile just to make sure! I'm pretty sure the cannon would of totally wrecked the car.
A Hellfire costs $60k, never mind the cost of operating the Apache.
This is one of reasons the UK and US have spent way more operating in Afghan than the USSR did in the 80's.
jonba - Member
Problem is, there are probably a lot of people driving round the desert in pickups. You've go to work out which ones are the enemy and which ones are just going shopping?
Anyone who runs is ISIS.
Anyone who stands still, is well-disciplined ISIS.
Aren't ISIS all driving around in nice shiny new Humvees, and tanks that the Iraqi 'army' left behind when they ran away?
So surely you just blow up all the Humvees and tanks in Iraq
Oh wait.... hang on a minute..... I think I may have spotted another potential problem with this whole air strikes business
As the US found out in Vietnam, all those years ago, trying to fight a "war" when your enemy's army IS the population of the country you are bombing is really rather hard..........
( iirc, that particular conflict didn't end well either. )
RaveyDavey - MemberIt's an extremely expensive way of destroying a Toyota HiLux
I dunno, they [i]are[/i] pretty durable.
Its all about O.I.L. and I.S.R.A.E.L.
Funny that the heat is now off Iran now they've started to come around to the idea of letting the Saudi's build that pipeline to Europe, bypassing Putin...........
Brimstone missile: £175k
Tornado Aircraft: £10.9M
Tornado flight cost: £35k/hr
Pilot & Navigator training: £6M
Paveway bomb cost: £22k
Total, not including sundries such as fuel, spares, or support services:
£17,130,000.
Because [s]you're[/s] ISIS are worth it.....
It only costs that much if you fly the plane into the ground after every mission.
Fair point Northwind. But with every Brimstone missile costing £175k, and they used 4 of them on the Hylux, then on those alone, you'd be looking at about £15 - 20 million to take out the car park of your nearest Tesco Express
That is how all missions ended for me on F-16 Combat Pilot on my Amstrad. Never could land the bloody thing!It only costs that much if you fly the plane into the ground after every mission.
@binners, my local tesco express is just beside an army barracks, ISIS are going to get a nasty surprise if they come between 3 rifles and the crisps
[i]Yes I see your point now. It's an extremely expensive way of destroying a Toyota HiLux with a machine gun on it. Bloody politicians are clueless. [/i]
Expensive compared to what? Sending in our soldiers? You do realize that if we do that, some will come back in body bags. How expensive is that then?
[i]Total cost of all these Tornado sorties so far = 700 squillion pounds
Price of a battered Toyota HiLux with a couple of kalashnikovs on board = considerably less than 700 squillion pounds.
Did everyone enjoy Mr Osbournes announcements of the latest massive cuts to our 'unaffordable' public services yesterday? [/i]
I hadn't realized just how hypocrytical Binners can be.
Yeah, what a terrible, rotten old Conservative party, trying to do something about IS and the horrors being committed in Iraq / Syria. The UK taking action as part of a coallition of countries who are equally concerned about what's happening. Oh, hang on, wasn't there a vote in parliment, on taking this action...
Fine Binners, lets turn our backs on whats happening there and flush all our money into your public services, for us.
Nice one.
[i]That is how all missions ended for me on F-16 Combat Pilot on my Amstrad. Never could land the bloody thing! [/i]
I actually managed to land my F16, on the runway. Nothing happened, fuel ran out, end of game. Spectrum 48K.
good men and women of the RAF are just being sent to fly around in circles above the desert to look for targets of opportunity,
That's exactly what they are doing. Remember the Yanks, French and even UAE started bombing before the UK did, so I assume they took out the most obvious targets, plus the Yanks can operate over Syria as well. We are only using 2 planes to bomb so it can't be costing that much, as presumably they'd be flying training sorties anyway.
I think the reason the West knows this will be a long campaign is that ISIS are not stupid, they are not going to sit around in vehicles presenting an easy target. The air strikes will disable ISIS and prevent them being able to move around freely. The ground troops will then be better able to re-take positions. Once we have better positions on the ground and more SAS spotters we will be able to target the buildings in which ISIS are hiding. There was a piece on the news where ISIS are hiding in a town amongst local civilians on one side of a bridge whilst the Kurds remain on the other. This won't persist and sooner or later the ISIS fighters are going to be taken out.
Yes all of this equipment costs a lot of money but we quite rightly regard that price as a better one to pay than lost lives.
"Those who do not know history's mistakes are doomed to repeat them"
The one thing we should learn from history is that history is not learnt from.
oh, and the 'minimalist strikes' that we are hearing/ reading about? you are not hearing about the important stuff that's bound to be going on.
Bazz - Member
So the RAF have been flying sorties for 4 days now and have now managed to find some targets worth attacking, a pick up truck and a gun emplacement. Now i fully believe those who say that we will not defeat IS by air power alone but surely at this rate we will bankrupt the country before we even degrade their capability even a little.I have a military background and from my experience i would have thought that the military planners and the intelligence bods would have had a list of targets ready to go for when/if parliament authorised the air strikes, it almost seeems like the good men and women of the RAF are just being sent to fly around in circles above the desert to look for targets of oppurtunity, just to show political willing and a tough line.
You clearly missed the bit on the news where it was pointed out that the Americans have attacked 300 targets, but have flown 3000 missions. I make that a 10% success rate.
And your criticism of the RAF's much smaller mission so far is?
BTW, you haven't actually said what your 'military background' is, perhaps you could enlighten us with your experience in operational planning?
Or possibly you just cleaned the trucks when they came back from ops?
People criticising the RAF seem to forget that IS are spread all over a very large area containing an awful lot of bugger-all, and clearly identifying actual enemy targets from a fast jet when the enemy are using pilfered equipment isn't one I'd like to be responsible for; the possibility of a blue-on-blue is pretty high, with the subsequent propaganda advantage for IS.
Strikes me that the perfect aircraft for this operation are ground attack planes; A-10's, Harriers, and Skyraiders, dive-bombing IS vehicles and strongholds from a height and speed where such things are more clearly identified makes more sense, but they are no longer either available to us, (Harrier) or have been taken out of front-line service, (A-10, Skyraider).
Its all about O.I.L. and I.S.R.A.E.L.Funny that the heat is now off Iran now they've started to come around to the idea of letting the Saudi's build that pipeline to Europe, bypassing Putin...........
How come ?
It about ISIS murdering people and establishing a state that would be a major threat to Western security
The heat isn't off Iran and We can move oil very efficiently without a pipeline.
The future is fracking anyway, you must have seen than that is what the West (US, and UK in particular) is banking on.
Can you run us through exactly what specific threat ISIS poses to western society exactly? I'm struggling with it. I'm not very bright, to be honest. But I just think it all sounds like the same load of old bollocks that we heard in the dodgy dossier last time around. And what a lot of horse-shit that turned out to be.
Go on though. Does it involve panicking when I see a Toyota hylux? Should I be hiding under the bed at night, fearing for my imminent destruction. Enlighten me....
What is scary is that we have just 6 aircraft deployed with 2 in action at a time, the number of squadrons have been drastically cut in the last few years the RAF isn't what it used to be by a long shot.Fortunately the USAF is still capable.
Not sure A10 etc would be much good as there has been plenty of info about how vulnerable they are to modern manpads . The harrier had quite a limited range and low loiter time which isn't good for ground attack.
A modern ground attack/support aircraft or drone would be desirable in a 21st century Royal Air Force but I doubt they will get one
Solo - Member
Yes I see your point now. It's an extremely expensive way of destroying a Toyota HiLux with a machine gun on it. Bloody politicians are clueless.
Expensive compared to what? Sending in our soldiers? You do realize that if we do that, some will come back in body bags. How expensive is that then?
I don't recall mentioning sending in troops. I know the value of life on all sides of conflicts. I have lost good friends and a family member and have been on a tour in belfast. You can't win this war from the air but these idiots as yet pose no threat to the uk. Let the arabs fight them. They are the ones with the most to lose. The have your cake and eat it saudis make me sick to my stomach. Let's see how true to their faith they really are.
Solo - Member
Yes I see your point now. It's an extremely expensive way of destroying a Toyota HiLux with a machine gun on it. Bloody politicians are clueless.
Expensive compared to what? Sending in our soldiers? You do realize that if we do that, some will come back in body bags. How expensive is that then?
I don't recall mentioning sending in troops. I know the value of life on all sides of conflicts. I have lost good friends and a family member and have been on a tour in belfast. You can't win this war from the air but these idiots as yet pose no threat to the uk. Let the arabs fight them. They are the ones with the most to lose. The have your cake and eat it saudis make me sick to my stomach. Let's see how true to their faith they really are.
Count zero - wind your bloody neck in! I never, not once criticised the RAF and would not ever criticise any of our armed forces, and for the record, army, infantry for 6 years.
My post was just musing at the politicians on all sides who made a big deal of the re-call of parliament for a vote that appears to have made very very little difference to to IS capabilities seeing as we are hitting in military terms, sod all at a large expense to every one, and in addition that the same politicians seem to very little will to commit to a real solution to this, at least not the solutions that most advisors on the region seem to think are necessary.
Looks like the septics might be unpacking these again which might restore the balance of relative costs of weaponry vs Hi-Luxes.
[img] 
[/img]
Reading the article it looks like USAF suffers the same mentality as RAF only wanting shiny new stuff - ref. the retirement of RAF Harriers and them being picked up at bargain prices by USMC. Commentators in the article above reference an interest by USMC in getting some A-10's.
[i]binners - Member
I'm not very bright, to be honest.
[/i]
And goodness, don't we know it now.
😕
apart from the oil installations that they have captured and are apparently using to fund their war what infrastructure do they have that we can really bomb?
beyond mobile phones and laptops what more do they need to coordinate their insurgency
In a part of the world awash with weapons whos to know who the actual targets are, theyve dug in in places that were sympathetic to saddam and saw the creation of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, they must be quite close to many of the locals, I imagine that civillian casualties must be quite high (unlike gaza though the place isnt so closely monitored by the media)
Ultimately I just dont see much point to this, western interventions only seems to come back and bite us in the arse
Last time it was enough to motivate a load of guys from leeds and bradford to blow themselves up on the tube
If the Uk efforts are only a small % of the bombing, why provoke more terrorist reaction
and propping up the current failed iraqi government doesnt seem like a smart idea, excluding sunis and tribal minorities in favour of Al Malikis own chums has been a disaster for the country
The beheading videos were obviously designed to get a rise out of us, it seems that our government and military are only too happy to dance to IS's tune
Solo - None of the clever boys in the class have answered the question though, have you? do you need someone as thick as me to run it past you again? Ok then....
[i]Can you tell the class (even the fick ones) exactly what specific threat ISIS poses to western society?[/i]
Be warned though, I'm both impressed and confused by big words, so if you could try and keep the syllable count down, that would be great. Fanks
Fire away (so to speak).....
Two things suprise me about all this.
1) how do the bombs know where they are pointed at, are they Lazer guided or summmat?
2) a better success rate might be achieved by two blokes, a large gargo net and a couple of morters or a huge piece of rope, one bloke one end, one the other then just walk along a high st in one of the main towns and hoard them up.
@binners, have been away form the site hence the non-response.
One of the major developments with Al-Q was the funding they had (from Bin Laden personally and his contacts) which allowed them to run sophisticated training camps and have resourses to buy explosives/weapons and fund international operations. ISIS is at another level in terms of finance and training. They pay their recruits and provide board and lodging and are recruiting "wives" now. All of this will be directed towards attacks on the West in due course if it's not eradicated now. Radicalised individuals with training and money will try and return to the West and stage attacks. We have sen one individuals return to France and murder 4 people in Belgium. It will be much more of the same on a much bigger scale if we don't do something about it.
@kimbers - I think the be-heading videos are aimed at ISIS supporters (to show impotent the west is), to discourage aid workers (ISIS want to be seen to be the only organisation that can help muslims, its a bit inconvenient if the westerners start looking like the good guys) and to western civilians who put pressure on their governments to say intervention is not worth it. The videos also encourage some governments to pay ransoms (US and UK will not but many do), so they are a fund raiser. Also its a big "revenge" message for Gunatanamo, mocking the orange suits used there. In the Iraq war Al-Q stopped the videos as they decided they where counterproductive but ISIS are putting a lot of effort into producing them.
Jambalaya - I understand we face a terrorist threat. What I'm disputing is whether the most effective way to address this threat is with missiles launched from aircraft. Didn't work in Afghanistan, did it? And it won't work in Iraq either. Its stupidity. We're fighting the wars that we thought we were going to have 30 years ago. Are we seriously saying we're going to eradicate terrorism by bombing them one Toyota at a time?
The only outcome that I can see is further radicalisation when the inevitable 'collateral damage' happens, which will actually have the opposite effect and actually only the terrorist threat.
We simply can't bomb our way out of this one. We need to be far cleverer than that. Fat chance....
If this is true (which I'm sure it is) then IMO the ridiculous sums of money we have spent and are spending on overseas operations would be much better used giving our police and intelligence services/border controls more resources.All of this will be directed towards attacks on the West in due course if it's not eradicated now. Radicalised individuals with training and money will try and return to the West and stage attacks. We have sen one individuals return to France and murder 4 people in Belgium. It will be much more of the same on a much bigger scale if we don't do something about it.
jambalaya - MemberAll of this will be directed towards attacks on the West in due course if it's not eradicated now.
Which is an argument for eradicating it now. But that's not what we're doing. Instead, we're poking it with expensive sticks.
@Northwind/@binners I do agree but that's all we can do politically, boots on the ground isn't a realistic option for the US under Obhama and no other countries are going to consider it without the US taking the lead. IMO doing nothing is not an option. We in the West have made the correct choice that a £100k spent on a missile is better than a dead soldier.
I think where we do agree is that the original invasion of Iraq was a mistake (obvious at the time IMO) and that the operation was poorly managed (once we had gone in we should have mad more troops there and done a better job of planning our successor) but now we are where we are. We have to deal with what's in front of us today.
scuttler - MemberLooks like the septics might be unpacking these again which might restore the balance of relative costs of weaponry vs Hi-Luxes.
Excellent! Finally Warthogs are out again as predicted.
A-10 Warthogs are brilliantly designed/adopted just for this kind of mission and are far cost effective then using missiles. Those bullets are far cheaper to buy ...
Now let's see the Warthogs cut the IS members into pieces.
In this sort of fight there is no need for fast moving planes just need plenty of these: Apache, Warthog A-10, B-52s, F-14, F-18, Tornado (even Jaguar would do) or Harriers ...
edit: F-22 will be a very expensive failure ...
jambalaya - Member
We in the West have made the correct choice that a £100k spent on a missile is better than a dead soldier.
There are more than those two options.
chewkw - Member
Excellent! Finally Warthogs are out again as predicted.
And the hardware fetishists' trousers start twitching. 🙄
Lifer - Memberchewkw - Member
Excellent! Finally Warthogs are out again as predicted.And the hardware fetishists' trousers start twitching.
Hi-Five! 😆
Now let's see the Warthogs cut the IS members into pieces
You do know this is real life and not a film right? Your lack of empathy is frightening to be honest. I'm no fan of ISIS or any pre or off shoots but they are still people. Kill or be killed fair enough but don't gloat about taking a life.
Excellent! Finally Warthogs are out again as predicted.
Very sad that you feel so triumphant at putting other peoples life in danger and the need to kill. Such things may be deemed neccessary at times but there is no need to celebrate it. Western society struggles to prove that it is above "Revenge Justice" and no wonder when armchair generals like you make statements like that.
Cummon! Cummon! It's A-10 Warthog! 🙄
chewkw - Member
[s]
Cummon! Cummon! It's A-10 Warthog![/s] fapp fapp fapp fapp
Cummon! Cummon! It's A-10 Warthog!
Yes I remember them well. They killed 9 British soldiers in a 'friendly fire' attack in the Gulf war. War is filthy, disgusting, sometimes necessary but never fun mate!
Strikes me that the perfect aircraft for this operation are ground attack planes; A-10's, Harriers, and Skyraiders,
Skyraiders? I know they talk about bombing people back into the last century but I didn't realise that when we'd done that we got planes out of service for 40 years to bomb them back into the century before that!
There are more than those two options.
Indeed there are. The do nothing option cost less right now (but sees many 100,000's of people killed be they Muslims of the "wrong" sect, Yazardi's or Christians) but potentially very big costs down the road in defending attacks fro ISIS in our country. Also Turkey is a NATO member so if they are attacked are legally obliged to defend them. Surely better to fight ISIS now than later when they are larger/stronger ?
As an aside I have been a fan of the A10 ever since I saw one at Farnborough airshow a long long time ago. Great aircraft and revolutionary in it's time. I appreciate getting excited about a killing machine can be seen a wierd but many of us appreciate the Spitfire for its design and effectiveness and the fact that its a symbol of resistance and freedom.
For the chickenhawks !
Lifer - Memberchewkw - Member
[s] Cummon! Cummon! It's A-10 Warthog![/s] fapp fapp fapp fapp
That sounds like A-10 unleashing 30 mm GAU-8 Avenger rotary cannon. 😆
[i]What I'm disputing is whether the most effective way to address this threat is with missiles launched from aircraft.[/i]
Funny that, on page one you were ranting about the cost, IIRC...
[i]Total cost of all these Tornado sorties so far = 700 squillion pounds
Price of a battered Toyota HiLux with a couple of kalashnikovs on board = considerably less than 700 squillion pounds.
Did everyone enjoy Mr Osbournes announcements of the latest massive cuts to our 'unaffordable' public services yesterday? [/i]
[i]Lifer - Member [/i]
jambalaya - Member
We in the West have made the correct choice that a £100k spent on a missile is better than a dead soldier.
[i]There are more than those two options.[/i]
But you never seem to offer any answers, instead you tip-in just enough to moan and critisize. Thing is, if you have such disdain for people here and their views, why bother, yeah!
😉
[i]You do know this is real life and not a film right? Your lack of empathy is frightening to be honest[/i]
As is the comments asking why we're doing what we are and can't we just turn our backs on the victims of IS.
[i]johnners - Member
Why don't we leave it to the Saudis, they've way more planes than us and they're closer.[/i]
As is the comments asking why we're doing what we are and can't we just turn our backs on the victims of IS.
Why not???...... we have done jackshit for the people of Northern Nigeria for quite a long time now ! and I really cannot understand why !
Everyone with half a brain knows we'll achieve nothing at all by bombing
Ignoring the fact we already have, as bombing in support of the fighters on the ground has pushed ISIS back from the dam and allowed the people to come down from the mountain top.
Sure now we probably need to change tack as ISIS have been forced to change tactics, but around end of August there was a real problem in Iraq. The RAF were very late to the game (hence lack of targets), presumably because Westminster wanted to avoid problems sending in the military in the run up to the Scotland Yes/No vote.
So sure their are problems with tactics and how to resolve the situation, but don't pretend something didn't need doing to prevent things in Iraq spiraling out of control.
Interesting and obviously very good that the Taxi Driver is still alive. I reckon there must a lot going on that we are unaware of, as it seems he was found not guilty in a Sharia Court of spying, which leads me to think there is some kind of power struggle, between those who want him killed and those who don't.
In answer to your earlier question Binners, I believe that we need to stop this IS mob creating the Caliphate they desire, which would effectively provide them a huge Islamist power base in its own right.....which would of course lead to an even worse situation.
[i]Everyone with half a brain knows we'll achieve nothing at all by bombing[/i]
Well, there's at least one Hi-Lux that won't leave tyre tracks in the blood drenched sands of Iraq, anymore.
IS are completely out there and can't be allowed to continue. It's a decision they made for us, imo, we can't just look away from what IS are doing there and pretend it's not happening.
[i]Solo. Can you tell me how what I've said is inconsistent? I think this whole thing is absolute bloody insanity.[/i]
You've critisized bombing, on the basis that it's robbing vaulable funds for your public services, here at home (look after No1 first eh).
In reply to you, folk have suggested that bombing is likely cheaper than having more of our dearest blood, spilt in Iraq and Syria, by sending our soldiers there to fight IS.
In reply, you appear not to be able to distinguish between the cost of ordinance and the value of Human life, namely, the victims of IS and our soldiers.
Then you use the word "insanity"....
Perhaps you've spread yourself so thinly, across so many threads on here lately. That even your awesome levels of wisdom are failing to keep up. Might you consider a break from the keyboard, perhaps even a lay-down in a quiet, darkened room?
Calm down.
Interesting and obviously very good that the Taxi Driver is still alive. I reckon there must a lot going on that we are unaware of, as it seems he was found not guilty in a Sharia Court of spying, which leads me to think there is some kind of power struggle, between those who want him killed and those who don't.
@Rockape, yes agreed. I hope he will be spared. There was an interview with a UK Muslim who was captured at the same time who had to tell the ISIS fighters he wasn't a spy just because he had a chip in his passport, he showed them that all UK passports where like that. The Muslim guy was released thankfully. I have read on Al-Monitor.com a story from a Turkish hostage who was to be killed and who went through many mock executions who was eventually released when his captors where killed in fighting. Things are quite chaotic and in that there is some hope. There are many hostages including two young Italian women aid workers.
Are they developing long-range missiles then? Equipping themselves with an air force?
@binners, the cost of increased levels of policing and military, more intelligence resources dedicated to anti-terrorism plus the potential very significant economic impact in terms of lost business if there is an attack or fears of an attack. Look at the economic cost of 9/11 or 7/7, that's without even considering the loss of life.
Well, there's at least one Hi-Lux that won't leave tyre tracks in the blood drenched sands of Iraq, anymore.
Yay for us, eh?!!! We're great aren't we? Our brave boys and girls are doings proud. Peace within the entire region is only 7,689,694,043 missiles away 🙄
You've critisized bombing, on the basis that it's robbing vaulable funds for your public services, here at home (look after No1 first eh).
I'm criticising it as its a completely pointless exercise, that going to cost us an absolute fortune in cash that we apparently haven't got to pay for schools, hospitals or a welfare state, and will ultimately achieve absolutely nothing
Which bit of that are you having the problem comprehending?
Jambalaya... again... I know theres terrorist threat. We all do. Nobody is disputing this. What I'm asking you, and which you have again failed to answer, is how blowing up the odd pick up truck, at enormous expense, is going to keep us all safer from terrorism back here. Because I can't see how it conceivably can, at all. In fact, quite the reverse
Feel free to enlighten me though
I'm criticising it as its a completely pointless exercise, that going to cost us an absolute fortune in cash that we apparently haven't got to pay for schools, hospitals or a welfare state, and will ultimately achieve absolutely nothing
I refer you back to my previous posts, that it isn't that expensive (we've not dropped many bombs so far) and it was necessary as there was a chance of Iraq falling to ISIS.
Where we go from now is the big question? ISIS are boxed in to an extent but are we happy to keep them there or go in harder after them?
Solo - MemberIS are completely out there and can't be allowed to continue.
So it's kind of a shame that they are- because none of the forces opposing them is willing to do what it takes to actually stop them- only to inconvenience them and encourage them to find other ways to attack.
This is the basic problem. We've settled on the near-pointless inbetween, faced with there not being the political will to do the job right we've decided to do it wrong, instead of not doing it at all. We'll waste some money and (re)paint the target on our heads and really not achieve very much at all, and unless we're pretty lucky we'll blow up a bus full of nuns and children's faces and pour fuel on the fire. It's the 650b of war, this.
[quote=binners said]Jambalaya... again... I know theres terrorist threat. We all do. Nobody is disputing this. What I'm asking you, and which you have again failed to answer, is how blowing up the odd pick up truck, at enormous expense, is going to keep us all safer from terrorism back here. Because I can't see how it conceivably can, at all. In fact, quite the reverse
Feel free to enlighten me though
Is the RAF's remit to only target pickup trucks ?
Because if so then a pilot and his/her navigator must be getting a right rollicking about now as yesterday they targetted "20-30 jihadists " in a half built hospital.
Perhaps there was a truck nearby and they missed it ?
They targetted "20-30 jihadists? Blimey! Thats me told eh? Up to 30 beardy blokes AND a Toyota?
Do we know if they hit any of the baddies? If so, I bet thats changed the balance of power in the region pretty significantly, eh? And we can all sleep safely in our beds tonight.
it'll all be over by Christmas, eh? 🙄
Ref the costs....The other thing to consider is that the jets need flying, the Pilots need to be flying and bombs have shelf lives.
In other words, we would still be spending shed loads on flying, training and decommissioning out of date bombs that cost huge sums to make.
So...we may as well have an air war and it costs us very little.
[quote=binners said]
it'll all be over by Christmas, eh?
Not heard anyone say that, quite the opposite infact. You should keep more abreast with current affairs old bean 🙂