Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Islamic state

CIA terror was effective in the south, just as Stalinist formulations from the north weren't.

Why do you think the US lost then? Stab-in-the-back from the home front?

(This is a serious question, I'm not being sarcastic. Personally I do think they lost because of a stab-in-the-back).
 
Why do you think the US lost then? Stab-in-the-back from the home front?

(This is a serious question, I'm not being sarcastic. Personally I do think they lost because of a stab-in-the-back).

The northerners or the southerners?

Did they lose in the long term? Had the Stalinists by the balls in the 1980s, didn't they?
 
Would you like to be in Blair's shoes now? I wouldn't.

He's printing money and has been since the day he left office. Not my idea of a fun existence, peddling one's soul on the corporate consultancy/lecture circuit, but he seems to be fine with it.

One effect of Blair's military misadventures is that Cameron is more concerned about taking military action that's unlikely to bite him on the arse politically than about doing something that might actually have the desired effect. Hence air strikes but no troop deployments, a kind of middle ground where he can't be accused of inaction or overkill. When it all goes wrong, his arse is covered. And every time British bombers knock a wing mirror off the side of an ISIS land cruiser his mates in the arms industry get another £800,000 or whatever.
 
Can't see it, too much risk of capture and subsequent propaganda.

If it was some sort of sneaky beaky commando raid you would be right. If they turn up with all their toys
Why do you think the US lost then? Stab-in-the-back from the home front?

(This is a serious question, I'm not being sarcastic. Personally I do think they lost because of a stab-in-the-back).
Drafting students was the beginning of the end. No one cared about blacks or white trash being thrown away. That and they couldn't turn the south into a viable state or stop the North from wanting to unite the entire country.
 
The only relevant questions are what is happening in Kobane right now? How can i help?

What do you think the/an answer to the latter question is? I notice that the Danish Socialist Group Left Unity has donated money to the PYD, which seems to be a real act of practical solidarity:

http://www.europe-solidaire.org/spip.php?article33208

This is not something I have looked into, but I understand that the PYD has links to the PKK which is designated a terrorist organisation under UK law which makes it an offense to provide material assistance to such groups. Could individuals be prosecuted for donating to it? Are there alternative sources to donate your money to?
 
True enough. Makes the entire war seem kinda pointless doesn't it?

Hindsight is great.

Earlier I was referring to the VWP's errors in judging southern society.

I'm reminded of the earlier stages of the insurgency and civil war, the 'destruction of the oppression.' A response to terror, however many peasants only learned to fear the revolutionaries.

Why didn't an uprising in the south materialise in 1968?
 
What do you think the/an answer to the latter question is? I notice that the Danish Socialist Group Left Unity has donated money to the PYD, which seems to be a real act of practical solidarity:

http://www.europe-solidaire.org/spip.php?article33208

This is not something I have looked into, but I understand that the PYD has links to the PKK which is designated a terrorist organisation under UK law which makes it an offense to provide material assistance to such groups. Could individuals be prosecuted for donating to it? Are there alternative sources to donate your money to?
Links is putting it mildly - they are the political formation of the PKK in Syria.

The answer to the latter question is not much individually. Not unless we have access to quickly transportable heavy weaponry. But the question of what we can do collectively do to help in such situations is surely worth more than page after page of the stuff we've had recently.
 
This is not something I have looked into, but I understand that the PYD has links to the PKK which is designated a terrorist organisation under UK law which makes it an offense to provide material assistance to such groups. Could individuals be prosecuted for donating to it?

Probably not, unfortunately.

If anyone is thinking of giving money to the PKK, they should first familiarize themselves with that organization's long history of terror attacks on civilian targets. If they still feel like giving them money after that, the PKK are welcome to it.
 
I'm not exactly enthusiastic about it, but it's the least bad option. It's not our problem, unless we choose to make it so. That's one problem we don't need.

So, just let them run riot,murdering at will, enslaving women and children, and the odd bit of ethnic cleansing of those who won't convert?
 
I'm not exactly enthusiastic about it, but it's the least bad option. It's not our problem, unless we choose to make it so. That's one problem we don't need.

I'm not sure which 'we' you're referring to here, but IS is a problem whose creation Western powers such as the UK had a great deal to do with. I'm inclined to agree that the best thing the UK military can do is to stay the fuck away, in order that they don't do any further damage, but is that the 'we' you had in mind?
 
Probably not, unfortunately.

If anyone is thinking of giving money to the PKK, they should first familiarize themselves with that organization's long history of terror attacks on civilian targets. If they still feel like giving them money after that, the PKK are welcome to it.
I don't know how true this is, but can you tell us how many civilians the Turkish military have killed in this time?
 
So, just let them run riot,murdering at will, enslaving women and children, and the odd bit of ethnic cleansing of those who won't convert?
That is an interesting question, but of course we are not the only nation in the world with military capabilities, there are nations a lot closer to the conflict than we are that have forces they could deploy.
 
That is an interesting question, but of course we are not the only nation in the world with military capabilities, there are nations a lot closer to the conflict than we are that have forces they could deploy.
Is that the answer, then? Bombs from someone - if not the UK, someone else?

Was that the answer to the Taliban in Afghanistan?
 
Back
Top Bottom