The Islamic state

[elbows]

Please don't use the spy in the bag in this context - even if we take for granted that he was bumped off, there are other states & groups that could easily be responsible for that.

 

[elbows]

No the genie is out of the bottle, where will it all end

Badly if this thread is anything to go by. Think I need to take a break from u75, many positions here are shameful compared to where we were at a decade+ ago. Tragedy.

 

[LDC]

No the genie is out of the bottle, where will it all end

What? As has been pointed out, what on earth do you think the State/s gets up to? This isn't something completely left field.

 

[LDC]

Badly if this thread is anything to go by. Think I need to take a break from u75, many positions here are shameful compared to where we were at a decade+ ago. Tragedy.

I'll ignore the connotations of using 'shameful', but what do you mean about the difference in positions from ten years ago?

 

[elbows]

No, not now, I'm out of here.

 

[frogwoman]

Sorry to hear that - i dont always agree with you but you'll be missed round here

 

[killer b]

Apparently this is the second time the same guy has been killed by drone strike.

 

[LDC]

Let's not get all conspiracy theory... I've seen that claim discussed and explained, although I can't find the link now.

I saw a comment that I liked and thought was pithy on this event earlier... "tactically astute, strategically stupid."

 

[Pickman's model]

Apparently this is the second time the same guy has been killed by drone strike.

the messiah

 

[Pickman's model]

No, not now, I'm out of here.

 

[not-bono-ever]

mebbies aye, mebbies nah

I hate to be in a position where reading between the lines is the default position given thr absence of most of the background thst could shut up wingers like me.
the value of this action is propagandist primarily.

im sure these couple of fuckpigs were awful wankers but not convinved by cunts like fallon preempting questions on breakfast telly saying he cant tell us more but the attorney general approved the case for a strike.

like that means anything

 

[Pickman's model]

mebbies aye, mebbies nah

I hate to be in a position where reading between the lines is the default position given thr absence of most of the background thst could shut up wingers like me.
the value of this action is propagandist primarily.

im sure these couple of fuckpigs were awful wankers but not convinved by cunts like fallon preempting questions on breakfast telly saying he cant tell us more but the attorney general approved the case for a strike.

like that means anything

the thing is that if the government / police believed these people were planning some vile atrocity, they should have used the good offices of interpol (of which syria is a member) to alert the syrian police. not taken the law into their own hands. now the government look like twats because the intelligence supporting their case is er secret, so they can't show everyone how right they were. it rather looks like the loyalist death squads of yesteryear have been replaced by raf death squads.

 

[Pickman's model]

from the evening standard website:

 

[teqniq]

In the absence of any real explanation for why they had to die, them finding out something potentially embarrassing to the British state goes on the list for me along with good old propaganda. The state and trust are two words that are mutually exclusive to me.

 

[frogwoman]

www.airwars.org is a good resource to find out numbers of civilians killed by coalition drone strikes btw.

I am not convinced that some of the government's recent actions won't lead to an increase in support for daesh especially since france and russia are now going to be bombing too. What a mess

 

[kebabking]

In the absence of any real explanation for why they had to die...

see, i don't get this - firstly the reason given my the government was both entirely reasonable and entirely beliveable (targets acting as co-ordinators of IS supporters in the UK, and there being no way to either exradite or apprehend), and secondly i don't understand why there appears to be any kind of difference in the morality between the death of some unknown and unknowable jihadi in a random toyota pick-up on the outskits of Kobane and the death of a known, nameable jihadi in Raqqa.

when they don't have a name they are just targets, but when they have a name they have the same legal rights as some random walking down Croydon high street?

 

[frogwoman]

As said before im not really bothered by it, they were almost certainly war criminals. But i'd still like to know more info and in particular what the threat was and if they were communicating w people here, and why it was so important to get them at that moment?

 

[likesfish]

Were these people guilty of anything? No, they did not have a trial, no given the right to defend themselves, which is usually what happens under British Law.
Oh, sorry, this was not in Britain. So we have the right to go killing individuals in one off attacks in other countries?
Do I feel safer because of those killings? If anything, I now feel less safe and fear repriasals.

NOT IN MY NAME

fuck off they joined daesh you know the murderous sex slaving taking torturing scum who love putting out video nastys of their latest atrocity
as I said Hostis humani generis an enemy of mankind .
its not killing its vermin eradication joining daesh is like putting on that nifty hugo boss designed uniform with the skulls and the jack boots
absolutely no reason to keep them alive at all.

 

[LDC]

<Warning, only vaguely related coffee fueled thread drift>

I think there's something funny about lots of our reactions to events like this. People seem to think that they personally are owed some kind of explanation about why it happened, like they deserve a quick email from the PM letting them in on the intelligence that lead to the strike.

What with that and how people are so quick to mention how it made them feel I think there's something going on here with the elevation of the importance of the individual and egos among politicos. I think it's important to remember that in all our discussing this, that it actually has no impact on the event itself, or whether it happens again.

 

[frogwoman]

see, i don't get this - firstly the reason given my the government was both entirely reasonable and entirely beliveable (targets acting as co-ordinators of IS supporters in the UK, and there being no way to either exradite or apprehend), and secondly i don't understand why there appears to be any kind of difference in the morality between the death of some unknown and unknowable jihadi in a random toyota pick-up on the outskits of Kobane and the death of a known, nameable jihadi in Raqqa.

when they don't have a name they are just targets, but when they have a name they have the same legal rights as some random walking down Croydon high street?

Thats a good point but without in any way wanting to come across like an IS apologist, maybe people are sceptical because the govt has a history of lying about stuff?

 

[Spymaster]

the thing is that if the government / police believed these people were planning some vile atrocity ...

Is that what they're saying now? The way I read it yesterday was that they had been involved with planning attacks on the UK, specifically the VJ day celebrations.

, they should have used the good offices of interpol (of which syria is a member) to alert the syrian police.

"Hello is that Syrian Interpol? Yes? Good. Listen, MI6 here. We know you've got a bit on your plate at the moment but there are a couple of our chaps holed-up with ISIS in territory no longer under your control. We think they might be misbehaving a bit. Could you send a couple of lads round to pick 'em up?"

 

[LDC]

the thing is that if the government / police believed these people were planning some vile atrocity, they should have used the good offices of interpol (of which syria is a member) to alert the syrian police.

I think you're living in fantasy land if you think that would have been a viable option for dealing with them in an area which Syria doesn't control, let alone the issues of whether they would have had the inclination or ability to do something.

 

[kebabking]

As said before im not really bothered by it, they were almost certainly war criminals. But i'd still like to know more info and in particular what the threat was and if they were communicating w people here, and why it was so important to get them at that moment?

the timing is probably a mix of asset availability, target availability, and the target meeting ROE - like being with other IS types, and not on a jolly in Raqqa marketplace haggling over the price of watermellons.

the int is very unlikely to ever be disclosed, firstly because a lot of it will be US sourced, and they get to decide whether its published or not, and secondly because disclosing both what we know he was up to, and how we know, would compromise int gathering methods that they may not know we have, as well as - conversely - letting them know what we can't do.

 

[Spymaster]

In the absence of any real explanation for why they had to die, them finding out something potentially embarrassing to the British state goes on the list for me along with good old propaganda. The state and trust are two words that are mutually exclusive to me.

Except in this case "the state" could very easily have kept completely quiet about it and nobody would be any the wiser. It's a clear message to would be jihadi's.

These cunts were fighting for ISIS, ffs. There seems to be little ambiguity about it. I'm saving my outrage for when I find out that the RAF could have dropped a bomb on some Daesh heads and didn't.

 

[kebabking]

...I'm saving my outrage for when I find out that the RAF could have dropped a bomb on some Daesh heads and didn't.

anytime after lunch on Fridays, and Wednesday afternoons. sports you see...

 

[Pickman's model]

Is that what they're saying now? The way I read it yesterday was that they had been involved with planning attacks on the UK, specifically the VJ day celebrations.


"Hello is that Syrian Interpol? Yes? Good. Listen, MI6 here. We know you've got a bit on your plates at the moment but there are a couple of our chaps holed-up with ISIS in territory no longer under your control. We think they might be misbehaving a bit. Could you send a couple of lads round to pick 'em up?"

it would be better to try the syrian police before going round assassinating people and god knows who else who merely had the bad luck to be standing near them.

 

[Pickman's model]

Except in this case "the state" could very easily have kept completely quiet about it and nobody would be any the wiser. It's a clear message to would be jihadi's.

These cunts were fighting for ISIS, ffs. There seems to be little ambiguity about it. I'm saving my outrage for when I find out that the RAF could have dropped a bomb on some Daesh heads and didn't.

i am surprised to find you have such a small supply of outrage.

 

[Pickman's model]

I think you're living in fantasy land if you think that would have been a viable option for dealing with them in an area which Syria doesn't control, let alone the issues of whether they would have had the inclination or ability to do something.

i think you're living in lalaland if you think i expected anyone to take it wholly seriously. my point was that some other actions could have been followed rather than whacking two probably utterly ineffectual people for something which may well have been a brief conversation on jihadi boards without any genuine intent to pursue the notion.

 

[not-bono-ever]

the principle here is worrying. the attitudes of some more worrying still.

 

[Spymaster]

it would be better to try the syrian police ...

Are you really being serious???